RIP Twitter

#351
#351
n_huffhines said:
I don't think you're going to ever understand my position but it's very simple...we don't know what the actual circumstances are. You think you have a smoking gun because you merely have allegations and a broad legal definition. I'm glad that our judicial system requires more than that and I would hope society does too.
Click to expand...
Like I said, the court will review it. But the umbrella of the law behind it and their own broad policy works against Twitter not for it, especially in a civil suit. If DHS got involved and then they removed it, I'd wager its not a lie or a video of a kid throwing up the shocker.

But your attempts to justify or dismiss it depending on the 'kind' of child porn is a little weird given those details.

By the way, it's been a criticism of twitter since at least 2012. This isn't random. Even The Guardian has an article about a different situation.

Anyways, we will, of course, wait to see if it goes through court. It'll probably settle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kristy*
#352
#352
n_huffhines said:
That's not enough information. As 88 himself said, there is an extremely broad net we're casting with "child porn"
Click to expand...
If there are indeed 'sexual acts' by two minors as alleged in the suit, then Twitter should have removed the video, regardless of the type of acts. PERIOD. So the question is not about how broad the net is regarding child porn; it is if the suit allegations are true. Like 88 said, for DHS to get involved and in turn get the video removed, shows me that the claims are at least somewhat substantiated.
 
#353
#353
utvols88 said:
Like I said, the court will review it. But the umbrella of the law behind it and their own broad policy works against Twitter not for it, especially in a civil suit. If DHS got involved and then they removed it, I'd wager its not a lie or a video of a kid throwing up the shocker.

But your attempts to justify or dismiss it depending on the 'kind' of child porn is a little weird given those details.

By the way, it's been a criticism of twitter since at least 2012. This isn't random. Even The Guardian has an article about a different situation.

Anyways, we will, of course, wait to see if it goes through court. It'll probably settle.
Click to expand...

I haven't justified or dismissed it at all. The problem is you still don't understand me and that's apparently not going to change.
 
#354
#354
Kristy* said:
If there are indeed 'sexual acts' by two minors as alleged in the suit, then Twitter should have removed the video, regardless of the type of acts. PERIOD. So the question is not about how broad the net is regarding child porn; it is if the suit allegations are true. Like 88 said, for DHS to get involved and in turn get the video removed, shows me that the claims are at least somewhat substantiated.
Click to expand...

Yes, IF
 
#363
#363
VolStrom said:
If there is one thing I've read in the news lately that made my year, it was that Elon Musk bought almost 10% of Twitter. Hopefully he has bought even more since he had to report his initial purchase and can have some influence over the liberal hack propaganda machine.
Click to expand...

I would say that's his ultimate plan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeadVol77, norrislakevol and Bassmaster_Vol
#369
#369
n_huffhines said:
Good luck with your white knight, guys.

View attachment 445098
Click to expand...
I think his goal is simply to give people that have been silenced for their view points the ability to not be censored. When the Ayahtollah is allowed to keep his account but a sitting US President has his taken away, you know there’s something seriously wrong with a company.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1, Rasputin_Vol, Tnslim1 and 7 others
#370
#370
davethevol said:
I think his goal is simply to give people that have been silenced for their view points the ability to not be censored. When the Ayahtollah is allowed to keep his account but a sitting US President has his taken away, you know there’s something seriously wrong with a company.
Click to expand...

He's a liberal that claims to love the free market, but gets all butt-hurt when the free market does something he doesn't like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, HeadVol77, NorthDallas40 and 1 other person
#372
#372
davethevol said:
I think his goal is simply to give people that have been silenced for their view points the ability to not be censored. When the Ayahtollah is allowed to keep his account but a sitting US President has his taken away, you know there’s something seriously wrong with a company.
Click to expand...

I think his goal is to simply make money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deezvols, tntar heel, HeadVol77 and 5 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top