|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Nov 5, 2022 11:09:42 GMT
Because you mentioned asperger FFS Indeed i did. But nothing to do with what you directly replied to me about. Therefore, logically speaking, as you were not replying to me directly nor referring to anything i actually said, it would not make sense to then quote me, bearing in mind the exact reason one quotes another on a forum when adding their own comments is because one is directly replying to what the other person said. That is how quoting works That's the biggest load of gobbledygook I've read, I don't need a lecture on quoting, feel free to quote anything I say, even if it's one word like Asperger, I didn't realize you were so sensitive and protective of your posts lol  |
|
|
|
Post by jeg er on Nov 5, 2022 11:27:25 GMT
Indeed i did. But nothing to do with what you directly replied to me about. Therefore, logically speaking, as you were not replying to me directly nor referring to anything i actually said, it would not make sense to then quote me, bearing in mind the exact reason one quotes another on a forum when adding their own comments is because one is directly replying to what the other person said. That is how quoting works That's the biggest load of gobbledygook I've read, I don't need a lecture on quoting, feel free to quote anything I say, even if it's one word like Asperger, I didn't realize you were so sensitive and protective of your posts lol You just do not seem to understand how quoting works. Quite simply if you quote someone, you are directly replying to what they wrote. That is just the case. So if you werent replying to me directly, as you claim, why didn't you just make your own post by yourself, then? It was quite natural for me to correct you about attributing something to me I never said, many people would have done the same |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Nov 5, 2022 11:33:14 GMT
That's the biggest load of gobbledygook I've read, I don't need a lecture on quoting, feel free to quote anything I say, even if it's one word like Asperger, I didn't realize you were so sensitive and protective of your posts lol You just do not seem to understand how quoting works. Quite simply if you quote someone, you are directly replying to what they wrote. That is just the case. So if you werent replying to me directly, as you claim, why didn't you just make your own post by yourself, then? It was quite natural for me to correct you about attributing something to me I never said, many people would have done the same Good grief!, get a life.  |
|
|
|
Post by jeg er on Nov 5, 2022 11:37:18 GMT
You just do not seem to understand how quoting works. Quite simply if you quote someone, you are directly replying to what they wrote. That is just the case. So if you werent replying to me directly, as you claim, why didn't you just make your own post by yourself, then? It was quite natural for me to correct you about attributing something to me I never said, many people would have done the same Good grief!, get a life. Of course, you would say that  |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 5, 2022 12:09:17 GMT
Oh my word, it looks like Musk has many companies held to ransom, some of the emails will DESTROY some companies who have engaged in blatant misconduct, lol ... Musk the Blackmailer or Musk the defender of FREEDOM of speech, either way if it all comes out these Twitter Twats are Fucked lol whats the big deal? why does any of this matter? it is only about a numbnut social media site designed for morons I think you may be underestimating the influence of social media. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 5, 2022 12:17:37 GMT
I'm starting to wonder about Elon. At first I was pretty sure this was just a blank financial transaction for him, but now I'm not so sure. His actions seem calculated to illustrate the democratic issue with such platforms presently - ie that, if we can't have a public discussion without banks and hedge fund managers assenting to the contents of our speech, then we do not have a democracy. It's pretty stark stuff and is starting to become quite visible. A problem is that (unlike with email or forums) Twitter has become a monopoly supplier. As such they have to be regulated so as to to not deny access on political grounds but they also have to be regulated not to be a vehicle for illegal material incl promoting illegal action. Somewhere in the middle of that is promoting fake information likely to either be libel or to cause illegal action. And then there's the issue of suspending v permanent banning. I'd say a monopoly permanent banning individuals has to be wrong. Worth looking through this list of notable Twitter suspensions Doesn't look to me like they get it wrong many times. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 5, 2022 12:35:51 GMT
So Musk says he had to fire half the staff because he says Twitter was losing ~ $30M a week Did he not do due diligence? And as owner of a major car manufacturer did he really not realise the likes of VW might as least pause their advertising revenue. And now he has to service at increasing interest rates all that debt he used to buy Twitter. He'd better hope people keep buying those Teslas now Ford etc are gearing up to be serious all electric suppliers. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2022 12:44:22 GMT
So Musk says he had to fire half the staff because he says Twitter was losing ~ $30M a week Did he not do due diligence? And as owner of a major car manufacturer did he really not realise the likes of VW might as least pause their advertising revenue. And now he has to service at increasing interest rates all that debt he used to buy Twitter. He'd better hope people keep buying those Teslas now Ford etc are gearing up to be serious all electric suppliers. He's seems to have exposed the corporate leftism and corruption on the platform. Of course he's aware. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 5, 2022 12:51:23 GMT
Once Twitter allows views that lefties dont like , we will hear a lot more about social media monopoly suppliers and how much they need to be regulated …
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 5, 2022 12:56:59 GMT
A problem is that (unlike with email or forums) Twitter has become a monopoly supplier. As such they have to be regulated so as to to not deny access on political grounds but they also have to be regulated not to be a vehicle for illegal material incl promoting illegal action. You seem to be conflating two different things here. Twitter's 'monopoly status' (which seems to only recently have become an issue for you) has no bearing on the issue of them carrying illegal material, which i believe they must act against anyway. The only issue you list for which it has pertinence is that of carrying, or censoring, political speech. I suspect you are likely listing things a bit haphazardly in the desperation find a reason why an entity like Twitter should be now politically regulated when before it 'should not'. Somewhere in the middle of that is promoting fake information likely to either be libel or to cause illegal action. Social media have special legal protections against such claims. I have long argued that this special privilege should come at the price of them being 'hands off' in terms of content in all respects but legality and pornography. However, this has nothing to do with Twitter in particular, or Twitter's monopoly status in particular and arguing my case was uphill struggle against people like yourself who quite enjoyed their political opposition being silenced without process. Elon has already signaled that permaban is likely to become a thing of the past. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 5, 2022 13:01:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 5, 2022 13:04:05 GMT
A problem is that (unlike with email or forums) Twitter has become a monopoly supplier. As such they have to be regulated so as to to not deny access on political grounds but they also have to be regulated not to be a vehicle for illegal material incl promoting illegal action. You seem to be conflating two different things here. Twitter's 'monopoly status' (which seems to only recently have become an issue for you) has no bearing on the issue of them carrying illegal material, which i believe they must act against anyway. The only issue you list for which it has pertinence is that of carrying, or censoring, political speech. I suspect you are likely listing things a bit haphazardly in the desperation find a reason why an entity like Twitter should be now politically regulated when before it 'should not'. No conflation here and no haphazarding. Feel free to show some examples of Twitter censoring political speech that we can discuss on their merits. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 5, 2022 13:07:01 GMT
Oh dear! Steve us a getting his knickers in twist about an off hand remark and takes himself so seriously he has to cut and paste some of his favourite tweets.😆 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2022 13:12:14 GMT
Oh dear! Steve us a getting his knickers in twist about an off hand remark and takes himself so seriously he has to cut and paste some if his favourite tweets.😆 He is a tad reactionary.
After all: |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 5, 2022 13:15:04 GMT
. . . Somewhere in the middle of that is promoting fake information likely to either be libel or to cause illegal action. Social media have special legal protections against such claims. I have long argued that this special privilege should come at the price of them being 'hands off' in terms of content in all respects but legality and pornography. However, this has nothing to do with Twitter in particular, or Twitter's monopoly status in particular and arguing my case was uphill struggle against people like yourself who quite enjoyed their political opposition being silenced without process. Elon has already signaled that permaban is likely to become a thing of the past. So a moderator on a forum with rules about treating others with respect lapses yet again into 'people like yourself' ad hom false attacks. Do raise your game As for Twitter's supposed legal immunity for libel, that so called 'section 230' near blanket immunity only applies in the USA and is weaker in other territories and inat least one none existent. And of course there is the issue of brand contamination, Twitter has a right to protect that.. |
|
here are some very well known right wing posters on twitter