Mike Parrish Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 16 minutes ago, jross said: The leftists are getting my flack because they are not condemning the behavior. Anyone on the right doing this is equally dangerous and awful. Why do you care if anyone else condemns this behavior? How does that affect you? You seem to be looking for a reason to be angry and scared at these mythical "leftists". I've asked you, repeatedly, to: Explain what you think it was that Twitter did that was actionable Explain what you want done. <crickets.wav> has been the answer so far. Step up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Parrish Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 Just now, jross said: Seriously? Your brain may refuse to consume what the Twitter files show. It happens to me all the time when first looking at content that I'm not ready to listen to. You are making the assertion that *something is terribly wrong*. The burden of making that case is borne by the person making the assertion. You have failed to do so. You make lots and lots of unsupported assertions. Then you get frustrated when everybody doesn't immediately agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mspart Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 If it is not a big deal to censor, why was there such a hue and a cry when Musk put reporters and journalists on temporary ban? If the feds colluding with Twitter to ban or censor certain speech, why was this a big deal? Perhaps no one here cared but there were plenty who did. mspart 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Parrish Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 Just now, mspart said: If it is not a big deal to censor, why was there such a hue and a cry when Musk put reporters and journalists on temporary ban? If the feds colluding with Twitter to ban or censor certain speech, why was this a big deal? Perhaps no one here cared but there were plenty who did. mspart Post your evidence. There's lots of outrage and thrashing so far, but not much in the way of convincing arguments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ban Basketball Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 29 minutes ago, jross said: The leftists are getting my flack because they are not condemning the behavior. Anyone on the right doing this is equally dangerous and awful. "It's not illegal, right?"- The 30 percenters from 2015- present. Those are the new standards. I'm ok with it. Owner of over two decades of the most dangerous words on the internet! In fact, during the short life of this forum, me's culture has been cancelled three times on this very site! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mspart Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 Hi Mike, First - No response. I could have guessed based on the tone going on here. Second - Have you not been following the news? I thought I was speaking of something that everyone was aware of. You feign ignorance by requested evidence. Well, here is some. Simple google search. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63996061 https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/15/media/twitter-musk-journalists-hnk-intl/index.html https://www.theverge.com/2022/12/15/23512004/elon-musk-starts-banning-critical-journalists-from-twitter https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2022/12/15/twitter-journalists-suspended-musk/ https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/15/technology/twitter-suspends-journalist-accounts-elon-musk.html https://www.foxnews.com/media/olbermann-mocked-by-twitter-users-after-being-reduced-posting-from-his-dogs-account-he-has-snapped https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/16/business/dealbook/twitter-musk-suspends-journalists-sanctions.html So there are a few points of evidence. Apparently you were unaware this happened. It was all the rage in the past week. The items jross has complained about have been revealed, not just in words, but in the posts and emails as they were being actively discussed. Yet you discount this. You say it is not real. But from what I have read, you still believe the Steele dossier is actual evidence that Trump should have been impeached and voted out by the Senate, even though all parties have shown it to be nothing but lies. Hillary and the DNC had their hands all over it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clinton-campaign-dnc-paid-for-research-that-led-to-russia-dossier/2017/10/24/226fabf0-b8e4-11e7-a908-a3470754bbb9_story.html That is why it is called the disgraced or debunked Steele Dossier. The FBI knew it was fake but used it anyway to obtain FISA warrants. https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/18/politics/steele-dossier-reckoning/index.html Why accept one but not the other? If I have this wrong, I apologize. mspart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Parrish Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 (edited) I didn't say "it's not real". Quote The items jross has complained about have been revealed, not just in words, but in the posts and emails as they were being actively discussed. Yet you discount this. You say it is not real. I said there doesn't appear to be anything illegal. This seems to be a sticking point for you guys here. You're *OUTRAGED* but you guys can't point to any illegal behavior and you don't have an answer for what you want done. I suspect most social media companies operate in much the same manner. I've posted here before (or at the other place) that social media is brain poison. Expecting social media companies to behave differently is a fool's errand, especially if you can't point to illegality and you can't come up with proposed changes... Quote But from what I have read, you still believe the Steele dossier is actual evidence that Trump should have been impeached and voted out by the Senate, even though all parties have shown it to be nothing but lies. Hillary and the DNC had their hands all over it. Well, then you need to reread what I wrote, because you seem to be constructing a strawman here. You do realize that neither of Trump's impeachments were based on the Steele work product? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_impeachment_of_Donald_Trump https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_impeachment_of_Donald_Trump Edited December 21, 2022 by Mike Parrish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jross Posted December 21, 2022 Author Share Posted December 21, 2022 The behavior of Twitter and the Government was dangerous and wrong! Legal or not, it is outrageous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbrog Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 Why is this so hard for one person to understand...it can absolutely be wrong to influence people to hold certain believes on social media, especially when it can persuade ones thinking and voting behaviors...and yet it can be completely "legal". Does anyone on here not agree that social media absolutely influences people one way or the other and it isn't a good thing...period?? No mention of legality. The other part is, people are clearly biased in what "bothers" them in terms of Twitter, et. al....when the old CEO was censoring and blocking a certain political group, the D's loved it and the R's hated it, now that a new CEO is in place, the D's hate it and attack him and the R's love it...when each CEO was doing the EXACT SAME THING as the other!!! It's fascinating that certain people can't see that this is the hypocrisy of the two-party system, and that they think their side is right and the other side are complete idiots, and vice versa...guess what, both sides are right in both cases. I'll never understand the blind allegiance to one political party or the other...to me people that do that are completely weak minded. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jross Posted December 21, 2022 Author Share Posted December 21, 2022 1 hour ago, Mike Parrish said: Explain what you think it was that Twitter did that was actionable Citing sources of lies, censorship, and manipulation to amplify social views of Democratic views while suppressing those on the right. I believe this was part of the plan to win the presidency because it was admitted as much. https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/ Core of complaint. I share the concern of Twitter Chinese employee that said Censorship destroys public conversation. The First Amendment in the U.S.A. exists specifically to prevent the government from silencing the people. Evidence https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1602365655595962368 Here we had a publicly owned company running a digital town square that connects millions of people. Evidence https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/18/tech/what-if-twitter-dies/index.html Jack's opening discussion https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41P9cbaWiBc It's been proven repeatedly that people conform to the people around them. "You are who you hang out with" is a well-known saying. Evidence Asch Conformity Experiment - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyDDyT1lDhA People will deny what they see and conform See also: Milgram Experiment The company lies to the public. They lie in court. They say they are not doing the things they are accused of doing around censorship. Evidence Claims: We don't shadow ban - https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2018/Setting-the-record-straight-on-shadow-banning Misc. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41P9cbaWiBc We do not censor conservatives We believe it is dangerous to regulate speech Mr. Doyle - Are you censoring people? Jack - "No" Mr. Doyle - You are shadow-banning prominent Republicans? Is that true? Jack - "No" Evidence Blocking content from trending - https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FjfvHVFVsAAydKR.jpg Blocking from search results - https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FjfvoMhVQAE6ho5.jpg Do not amplify - https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FjfwWDEVEAAqIBA.jpg The Twitter files: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1598822959866683394.html The Twitter files supp: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1600243405841666048.html Secret exclusion lists: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1601007575633305600.html Removing Trump Jan6: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1601352083617505281.html Removing Trump Jan7: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1601720455005511680.html Removing Trump Jan8: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1602364197194432515.html The FBI Subsidiary: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1603857534737072128 The FBI & the Hunter Biden Laptop: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1604871630613753856.html Later it comes out that not only was this company censoring information, the government was paying them to do so. Evidence https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/1604908670063906817/photo/1 Beyond foreign, this was domestic psychological warfare. Evidence https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1605292454261182464.html I believe millions of people, myself included, were influenced to think a certain way because of censorship. Censorship to silence people with certain speech, to gaslight them, and to amplify other social views is anti-American. The Twitter files are remarkable. It exposes unacceptable behavior that many people were unaware of and that smart people cannot believe is true. It does not matter who is breaking the story because the screenshots of emails are stand-alone evidence of facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jross Posted December 21, 2022 Author Share Posted December 21, 2022 3 hours ago, Mike Parrish said: Explain what you want done. The first action has already occurred. The swamp was cast out of Twitter. There should be a bipartisan proposal to regulate big tech. This censorship must stop occurring now and future. Transparency. Audits. Laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mspart Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 2 hours ago, Mike Parrish said: I didn't say "it's not real". Oh, then I must have misunderstood you below. He asks why you don't believe the Twitter files are real. You said, "Goes to the credibility of the author(s)." So I'm thinking I understood and you are deflecting by saying you weren't saying "it's not real", when in fact, that is what you were saying. See below screenshot. mspart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mspart Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 2 hours ago, Mike Parrish said: You're *OUTRAGED* but you guys can't point to any illegal behavior and you don't have an answer for what you want done. The fact that the FBI asked for the censoring and then it happened should not be a cause of concern for anyone, is that what you think? I disagree. It should be a cause of concern for everyone. It was true information that the FBI asked to be squelched and Twitter obliged with no good reason as they admit in the Twitter files. They did it based on no real criteria. They did it because FBI said to and then they tried to justify it. If this does not concern you, I'm wondering what would? mspart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Parrish Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, jross said: The first action has already occurred. The swamp was cast out of Twitter. There should be a bipartisan proposal to regulate big tech. This censorship must stop occurring now and future. Transparency. Audits. Laws. No, dude. A newer, more crazy swamp creature moved in. I give Twitter about 6 months before it makes the current MySpace look good. Edited December 21, 2022 by Mike Parrish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Parrish Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 37 minutes ago, mspart said: Oh, then I must have misunderstood you below. He asks why you don't believe the Twitter files are real. You said, "Goes to the credibility of the author(s)." So I'm thinking I understood and you are deflecting by saying you weren't saying "it's not real", when in fact, that is what you were saying. See below screenshot. mspart If the national inquirer said aliens were running the post office, you would discount that because NI has a less than casual relationship with the truth. Just like Project Veritas. I have seen ZERO law enforcement actions that would lend credence to the naked assertion that Twitter perjured themselves in court. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Parrish Posted December 21, 2022 Share Posted December 21, 2022 Lots and lots of typing, yet still nothing actionable. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/actionable If these are the silver bullets/smoking guns, then where are the lawsuits and indictments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jross Posted December 21, 2022 Author Share Posted December 21, 2022 1 minute ago, Mike Parrish said: If the national inquirer said aliens were running the post office, you would discount that because NI has a less than casual relationship with the truth. Just like Project Veritas. I have seen ZERO law enforcement actions that would lend credence to the naked assertion that Twitter perjured themselves in court. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. True at first about the NI! But when I see the aliens take their human mask off on video and run away when confronted... I'm going to look past the NI being NI and pay attention to what the aliens did on video. PV takes underhanded action to expose terrible behavior. I wish they targeted the right as much as they do the left. I care a great deal more that censorship stops than I do whether there are consequences of possible perjury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jross Posted December 21, 2022 Author Share Posted December 21, 2022 Lawsuits are the not the point. They are already out there BTW -- well before this recent disclosure of direct evidence of behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Parrish Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 (edited) 48 minutes ago, jross said: Lawsuits are the not the point. They are already out there BTW -- well before this recent disclosure of direct evidence of behavior. The only lawsuits regarding Twitter are for failure to abide by California employment law. Post links to the lawsuits, please. Edited December 22, 2022 by Mike Parrish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jross Posted December 22, 2022 Author Share Posted December 22, 2022 Here are a few. https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/lbpggnrqqpq/trump-twitter-opening-brief-2022-11-14.pdf https://libertycenter.org/cases/ohandley-v-padilla/ https://vashiva.com/first-amendment-twitter-galvin-lawsuit/#Ayyadurai-v-Twitter-Et-Al https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/9/22661626/texas-social-media-law-hb-20-signed-greg-abbott There are more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Parrish Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 13 minutes ago, jross said: Here are a few. https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/lbpggnrqqpq/trump-twitter-opening-brief-2022-11-14.pdf https://libertycenter.org/cases/ohandley-v-padilla/ https://vashiva.com/first-amendment-twitter-galvin-lawsuit/#Ayyadurai-v-Twitter-Et-Al https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/9/22661626/texas-social-media-law-hb-20-signed-greg-abbott There are more. Trump (his track record for litigation is embarrassing) Liberty Center with a single person lawsuit on the books since 2020 and going nowhere fast according to Pacer This weirdo(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva_Ayyadurai) That's not a lawsuit. That's a law that is almost certainly going to be ruled unconstitutional when it reaches the Fifth Circuit If that's all you've got, then I don't see any danger to Big Tech and/or Social Media... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jross Posted December 22, 2022 Author Share Posted December 22, 2022 (edited) I don't see these lawsuits going anywhere under the current law. The law will change. Edited December 22, 2022 by jross Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Parrish Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 3 minutes ago, jross said: I don't see these lawsuits going anywhere under the current law. The law will change. No, it won't. Under what premise do you see legislation making it through a divided congress and then being approved by Joe Biden? And if the law changes, these causes of action won't be able to be litigated under the newly revised law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law It's like you're just making shit up here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Parrish Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 lol https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/technology/musk-twitter-bans.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobDole Posted December 22, 2022 Share Posted December 22, 2022 17 hours ago, mspart said: The fact that the FBI asked for the censoring and then it happened should not be a cause of concern for anyone, is that what you think? I disagree. It should be a cause of concern for everyone. It was true information that the FBI asked to be squelched and Twitter obliged with no good reason as they admit in the Twitter files. They did it based on no real criteria. They did it because FBI said to and then they tried to justify it. If this does not concern you, I'm wondering what would? mspart So if someone is releasing highly secret information the FBI shouldn't ask for it to be removed? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now