I know the rules : I'm not questioning the rules > So where exactly am I name calling or downgrading someone or being unkind . I've used terms like OH COME ON or You got to be joking to make it clear I think the comment is ridiculous . But I don't recall name calling or being mean . If I have been you need to point it out to me . In the open is fine with me
It's my way of adding expression as best I can to written words . Some are just finger errors I don't bother to correct . As I said I am not a proficient typist .
Believe me there are posts like that. Admins (and I’m a volunteer mod, BTW) generally are able to remove them early. Sharp eyed members report them. Sometimes a thread is closed because there have been repeated such posts, or posts with personal attacks. Closing a thread is a gentler way of handling this sort of thing than deleting a thread. If someone wants to continue the discussion they can start a new thread.
Excellent advice!!
You do a great job!! Everyone who is here is here by choice and if they don’t enjoy the forum they move on, methinks.
100% correct. People get the impressed amendment wrong so much it's amazing. The CEO of a company can say what they want, like that dimwit my pillow guy, and people have the right to be offended and call his retailers and say we're not going to do business with you unless you cut ties with him. People may or may not agree with that behavior but it is exactly the opposite of violating the first Amendment That behavior is an example of the first Amendment. Personally that only have the time to bother with that but there's nothing wrong with it. The first amendment is strictly about the government silencing speech and even then the government has a right to do so in certain cases like the classic yelling fire in the movie theater. However your cartoon was much more of an entertaining way of explaining it so thanks
What you offer is a strawman. That is, it argues against the weakest or even false, not against any cogent argument offered.
FOX is not granted protection. They can be sued or criminally charged for any content they publish.
I agree, I was sort of just entertaining myself a bit and hopefully a couple of others. I really don't think this site should be about politics but people can talk about what they want. Maybe after this week I'll let them irritate me less. Besides I got some stuff I got to go do so have a good day, cheers
I understand the difference So what is your point about social media companies They are not subject to the same laws as publishers and that they should be? Yes we are all familiar with that argument
Look although obviously social media platforms are making editorial decisions by banning certain things They are not going to be held live on the same way as a news company who produces and editorializes basically all of their material. There is so much content from so many people on Facebook every day that could be considered slander it'll never work the same way as it would with someone like the New York times. If I was a whining type I would argue that news organizations that I don't agree with should be sued more often for lying or for slander but I'm not. Any intelligent adult realizes that it is a murky situation when social media platforms do engage in editorialization, but it is clearly not the same as a newspaper.
Social media is a content provider . they are protected from being suexd by someone for content on their site taht may cause trouble , be hateful , or just be lies . When they start deciding what can be considered lies or hate speech they just lost their protection. because now they are editing and publishing based on their viewpoint . like Cnn and fox do
I understand the argument I just think it'll be a loser in court. Banning violent speech isn't the same as being movies provider. I get the argument though.
How do you tell from the "look" of someone if they have ever ridden a bike, or written code?
you're certainly free to share your opinions, but bashing on the forum and the mods here isn't appreciated and really makes me wonder why you are here in the first place. If you want to continue discussing it you're welcome to message me privately.I agree, and that's just what we're working on doing
we've been a lot more lenient in the past, but we've started to be more strict regarding political and religious discussion. We're closing threads because as soon as politics or religion come up in a thread, it quickly devolves to pointless arguing, name-calling, insults, and our moderators having to do a ton of extra work to respond to reports, issue warnings, and clean up the thread. It's a waste of our time and there are plenty of other places on the internet where you can have flame wars about any topic you desire.
