Crime Mark Zuckerberg admits censorship and vows to curb election donations Zuckerberg: Biden-Harris ‘Repeatedly Pressured’ Us To Censor Free Speech

[Your Salad]

The most visible ones do.

I cant speak for those people.

 

[Nizam al-Mulk]

I cant speak for those people.

You do not have to. It is what it is.

 

[Soggust]

lol wut......

RCP Average	Date	Trump (R)	Harris (D)	Spread
Top Battlegrounds	8/27	47.4	47.3	Trump+0.1
Arizona	August 27th	47.3	46.8	Trump+0.5
Nevada	August 27th	47.4	46.0	Trump+1.4
Wisconsin	August 27th	47.6	48.6	Harris+1.0
Michigan	August 27th	46.5	48.5	Harris+2.0
Pennsylvania	August 27th	47.7	47.5	Trump+0.2
North Carolina	August 27th	47.2	46.3	Trump+0.9
Georgia	August 27th	48.1	47.1	Trump+1.0

I am not directing this at you personally, whatsoever, but god damn seeing the right fact check shit brings a tear of joy to my eye.

Bravo homie

 

[Helden]

I am not directing this at you personally, whatsoever, but god damn seeing the right fact check shit brings a tear of joy to my eye.

Bravo homie

Too bad he's wrong:

ABC News – Breaking News, Latest News and Videos

ABC News is your trusted source on political news stories and videos. Get the latest coverage and analysis on everything from the Trump presidency, Senate, House and Supreme Court.

projects.fivethirtyeight.com

Michigan and Wisconsin are comfortable Harris lead

Wipe those tears of joy away, and make room for tears of copium

 

[Soggust]

Too bad he's wrong:

ABC News – Breaking News, Latest News and Videos

ABC News is your trusted source on political news stories and videos. Get the latest coverage and analysis on everything from the Trump presidency, Senate, House and Supreme Court.

projects.fivethirtyeight.com

Michigan and Wisconsin are comfortable Harris lead

Wipe those tears of joy away, and make room for tears of copium

Well hold on - he's not necessarily wrong, these are just different polls, right?

538 weights theirs, RCP does not (just a raw average), iirc.

If you want to argue 538 is more historically accurate, that's cool, but it's the method, not necessarily the result, that I was complimenting.

But you deserve a bravo too, nbd lol.

 

[PhitePhan]

Obviously that comment was facetious but idk that I'd say its trolling nor do I think I have been trolling over the past few months just because I disagree with Trump supporters.

You don’t know if calling Zuckerberg a drugged up MAGA is trolling? In a thread specifically about First amendment issues?

At the end of the day even Zuckerberg himself says that the ultimate decision of whether or not to remove content came down to Facebook, not the government. If the government can't make you remove something I don't consider that censorship. If I report something on Facebook and Facebook decides to remove that content that's not censorship.

What a shit take- so you’d argue that if I’m at an ATM and somebody puts a gun to my head, it’s still MY decision to actually give them the money?

BTW, I DO think Trump is a theat to democracy, mostly in that he is being used by the left to destroy democracy… the ideas and policies put forth by Dems in order to “own the chuds” are embarrassing.

 

[Deleted member 592570]

What a shit take- so you’d argue that if I’m at an ATM and somebody puts a gun to my head, it’s still MY decision to actually give them the money?

Why are you even bothering with that guy? Honestly. You're wasting your breath.

 

[Islam Imamate]

You don’t know if calling Zuckerberg a drugged up MAGA is trolling? In a thread specifically about First amendment issues?

Did you read what I wrote there? Yes of course that part was facetious but making a facetious comment is not the same as trolling. We're allowed to make jokes on this forum whereas trolling is against the rules.

What a shit take- so you’d argue that if I’m at an ATM and somebody puts a gun to my head, it’s still MY decision to actually give them the money?

What on earth about that post would make you believe that? This is much closer to trolling than anything I post, try and actually read my posts here

At the end of the day even Zuckerberg himself says that the ultimate decision of whether or not to remove content came down to Facebook, not the government. If the government can't make you remove something I don't consider that censorship. If I report something on Facebook and Facebook decides to remove that content that's not censorship.

Nowhere does Zuckerberg say he was threatened with violence or legal action or anything of the like, the decision to take something down was up to Facebook. No reasonable person would say that about someone being mugged(but of course you're not reasonable).

BTW, I DO think Trump is a theat to democracy, mostly in that he is being used by the left to destroy democracy… the ideas and policies put forth by Dems in order to “own the chuds” are embarrassing.

What a retarded take.

 

[PurpleDrank]

Obviously that comment was facetious but idk that I'd say its trolling nor do I think I have been trolling over the past few months just because I disagree with Trump supporters.

You don't agree he's a unique threat to democracy? Is it odd for me to think that based off the fact that he tried to prevent the peaceful transfer of power and overturn a free and fair election?

At the end of the day even Zuckerberg himself says that the ultimate decision of whether or not to remove content came down to Facebook, not the government. If the government can't make you remove something I don't consider that censorship. If I report something on Facebook and Facebook decides to remove that content that's not censorship.

I disagree with your last paragraph. The ask itself is an issue especially from the government. The assymetry of power there likely influences a platforms decision making in a way thats different then someone with a similar level of power making an ask would. To where a perceived consequence even if not stated explicitly holds a different kind of weight coming from them.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I disagree with your last paragraph. The ask itself is an issue especially from the government. The assymetry of power there likely influences a platforms decision making in a way thats different then someone with a similar level of power making an ask would. To where a perceived consequence even if not stated explicitly holds a different kind of weight coming from them.

What is the perceived consequence here? Is there an example where the government retaliated after a request of theirs was not agreed to?

 

[PurpleDrank]

What is the perceived consequence here? Is there an example where the government retaliated after a request of theirs was not agreed to?

There may be an example of that but mostly my point is undue influence. The assymetry of power here raises concerns. Like the govenment has the power to make life for Meta difficult if they dont comply. That doesnt mean the government would, but if your Zuck the idea they could because of the power imbalance means its not a straightforward decision and could by itself have a chilling effect.

Like you start thinking about the government asking you to do shit, because they do it somewhat consistently. Your decision making autonomy is comrpomised just from the ask.

Theres also second and third order effects of what the landscape looks like when stuff like this is normalised. So again its an ethical question even before Zuck does or doesnt comply.

 

[Islam Imamate]

There may be an example of that but mostly my point is undue influence. The assymetry of power here raises concerns. Like the govenment has the power to make life for Meta difficult if they dont comply. That doesnt mean the government would, but if your Zuck the idea they could because of the power imbalance means its not a straightforward decision and could by itself have a chilling effect.

Like you start thinking about the government asking you to do shit, because they do it somewhat consistently. Your decision making autonomy is comrpomised just from the ask.

Theres also second and third order effects of what the landscape looks like when stuff like this is normalised. So again its an ethical question even before Zuck does or doesnt comply.

I can be convinced of this argument but I wouldn't take it for granted, I'd have to see examples of the government's communications and their pattern of behavior to see if a reasonable person would infer that there was an implied consequence for not complying with the government's requests.

 

[MMA IAN]

I'd have to see examples of the government's communications and their pattern of behavior to see if a reasonable person would infer that there was an implied consequence for not complying with the government's requests.

Hunters emails would be a good example I imagine.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Hunters emails would be a good example I imagine.

What emails? The ones where the Biden campaign asked Twitter to take down pictures of Hunter's cock?

 

[PurpleDrank]

I dont think you are grasping the argument at all actually.

Is there a power imbalance between the government and meta? Yes

Without direct threats, could the possibility of retaliation effect Metas decision making autonomy, creating a chilling effect? Yes

Do regular asks by the governent to meta continually, further erode decsion making abilities to the point of normalization? Yes

So yes prior to Zucks decision the ask itself raises ethical concerns.

@Islam Imamate

 

[Islam Imamate]

I dont think you are grasping the argument at all actually.

Is there a power imbalance between the government and meta? Yes

Without direct threats, could the possibility of retaliation effect Metas decision making autonomy, creating a chilling effect? Yes

Do regular asks by the governent to meta continually, further erode decsion making abilities to the point of normalization? Yes

So yes prior to Zucks decision the ask itself raises ethical concerns.

@Islam Imamate

I don't agree, I don't think that the government merely asking is in and of itself inappropriate. Again I could be convinced if I was shown the communications in question and especially if there was a pattern of behavior that a reasonable person would infer suggests an implied threat. But I don't think we get enough info from Zuck's post to assume that nor would I assume Zuck is a neutral observer here, he could very well be advancing his own interests here.

 

[MMA IAN]

What emails? The ones where the Biden campaign asked Twitter to take down pictures of Hunter's cock?

No, the one where his communications show a pattern of behaviour a reasonable person would infer implied a consequence for not complying with the Bidens demands


Like

 

[PhitePhan]

I don't agree, I don't think that the government merely asking is in and of itself inappropriate. Again I could be convinced if I was shown the communications in question and especially if there was a pattern of behavior that a reasonable person would infer suggests an implied threat. But I don't think we get enough info from Zuck's post to assume that nor would I assume Zuck is a neutral observer here, he could very well be advancing his own interests here.

You think it’s appropriate for the government to try and stifle free speech? Seriously?

You are literally making my point that Trump has fricken broken some of y’all’s brains, and you’re advocating in favor of some reprehensible shit.

 

[PhitePhan]

We're allowed to make jokes on this forum whereas trolling is against the rules.

Yeah, I too am confused about why mods are trolling… yet here we are.

Nowhere does Zuckerberg say he was threatened with violence or legal action or anything of the like

See, these are the types of shit arguments you’ve been making lately, and they are increasingly illogical (eg that the government is PHYSICALLY threatening Zuckerberg FFS).

You’re usually better than this… SAD.

 

[PhitePhan]

Why are you even bothering with that guy? Honestly. You're wasting your breath.

Meh, I’ve often disagreed with @Islam Imamate , but he’s generally offered logical reason-based arguments in our discussions in the past. He’s certainly taken a turn and comes off more and more as a establishment shill offering generic talking points and covering for dem shenanigans, even ACTUAL threats to democracy.