Big tech has a lot of money and influence so getting anyone from either side to reform 230 and hold them accountable for their bs isn’t likely. The extreme anchor (big ask) is saying he’ll veto something that is a must pass, forcing them to do something. No one in their right mind wants them to get rid of 230. FB and Twitter would love for that to happen, but saying as much will get a compromise which will lead to reform.

The dumbed down version is talking about conservatives getting censored(it’s going on with the left too, btw) but the real issue is a merger of state and big tech turning our Internet into a Chinese esk internet where dissenting opinions (see drs and Corona) aren’t allowed.

The UN is rolling out a program with 110,000 social media influencers to spread their “correct information” in regards to Corona, do you think it stops there?

Your attempt at framing things is pathetic. It’s been a national security threat for a long time. Considering we’ve had our military manipulating social media/media around the world for over a decade, I don’t think the President of the United States just now, a few days ago, figured out it could be used the same one on America. Or did he sign an executive order on it 6 months ago because someone made a joke? Go try to dunk on someone else, your obv bs is obv.

Okay, cool story, but the President hasn't talked about it like that. His very long executive order on the subject says nothing about national security. He only started tweeting about it being a "national security" issue when #DiaperDon was trending and he got very, very mad, and now you are very, very mad. Look on the bright side, your fragile ego and feelings are something you share in common with the leader of the free world (for 48 more days)! So you've got that going for you, if not much else.

I really have no context for this comment, but it made me laugh. Ragequitters who can't quit are ****ing lunatics, and make me happy.


PS. I'm a ragequitter who can't quit too, so confirm I am also a ****ing lunatic

Probably nothing to do with FB and Twitters behavior in regards to the election right? Zuck got his $350 million worth it seems! Typical, take it to the most ridiculous possible explanation and run with that.

"The most ridiculous possible explanation" that these two tweets, back to back and five minutes apart, and the first time he ever tweeted about Section 230 being a "national security" issue, might be related?





LOL

Indeed!

If only Twitter was real life and there wasn’t thousands of hours of him actually speaking. You’re a perfect example of the problem with social media. Low information dumb dumbs reading 280 or whatever characters it is now and running with it like the gospel. It’s exactly why the MSM is broken as well, considering 90% of them just regurgitate what’s tweeted without doing any sort of real journalism.

If you think a trend on Twitter is why he said it’s a national security threat there really is no helping you think differently. He only wants to ban tictoc because a bunch of morons donated $10 to him to reserve a seat too I bet huh?

(Hint he’s referring to election fraud trends like #Stopthesteal etc being essentially black balled from the list but negative things are allowed)

To be clear, you're sure SCOTUS is going to rule 5-4 that Trump won Pennsylvania but you're saying this about people who...aren't...you?

Indeed!

I never said that, I said they’d rule on Parnells case which they will. His case is what will win Trump PA. You know, the case that was tossed solely because of not being filed in time? (Yet if he filed before they’d claim no injury and toss it too). That case is solid for anyone that rules based on the constitution and not their interpretation of it. RGB coming though again!

I mean, this feels like semantic nitting, no? You're sure SCOTUS will rule 5-4 in favor of this case that will make Trump the winner of PA, don't see how that materially changes anything but okay, whatever. So surely we can also agree that in the event this doesn't happen, you'd have to admit you're pretty ignorant about American politics and your opinions should be discarded as worthless, right?

You will be happy to know that you can get a 9-1 return on your money betting that the republicans (does not even have to be Trump) will win Pennsylvania on predictit, and on most of the major betting sites you can now get about 30-1 return on your money betting on Trump to win. Here are the odds on smarkets for instance, and do not let the tag of LOSER dissuade you from putting your money where your dull posting sequel mouth is.

Joe Biden 97.09% 1.03 Winner
Donald Trump 4.00% 25 Loser

All the best.

The problem is that this alleged "conservatism" is mostly just lies with no evidence, which in regards to Covid-19 is actually killing people and in regards to the election is destabilizing the country. Which is also why it gets those nice tags, which in the grand scheme of things are far too forgiving.

It is, for the record, perfectly possible to be a conservative without believing any of this election conspiracy nonsense or Covid-19 conspiracy theories. It is not only possible, it should very much be preferable.

As for the points in 230:
1.) Making companies liable for user expression will of course not reduce the pressure on political lies like these, it will make it far worse.
2.) Big tech has the means to survive the legal fallout from this, what will happen is that small enterprise and private sites will get crushed and will have to shut down user expression.
3.) Wealthy people and companies will be able to sue for libel or do harassments suits more easily. Ordinary peons like us here on this forum will still be at the mercy of the social media eco-system, merely one even more lopsided towards those that can afford legal muscle.

Who you gonna believe, ....me ....or your lying eyes......

Wait, what? Are you suggesting that FB and Twitter gone, and if so...why?

Based on your posting history - you get pretty much everything wrong as seen above (you did not dispute the math, because you cannot). Given that your history is drenched in intentional and unintentional errors, the obvious answer to your LOLloaded question is nobody will believe you on pretty much anything, so you calling others liars means they are actually the ones telling the truth.

Now, you can believe whatever you like, and as I said earlier - people like you can be a fun source of entertainment when you share your views, so in that regard I would ask what is it in the video you posted that makes you believe it will matter moving forward. Double down on your kraken and lets see if that post (if you dare to do it, odds are you will not) ages as well as some of your past work. We all need a good laugh these days, so know your role. Thanks!

All the best.

OK, so you're certain that the US Supreme Court is going to hear this case, and then they are going to rule in favour of throwing hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of votes? First of all, your assertion that it was "tossed solely because of not being filed in time" seems to be making some kind of point that it's the only hurdle to get past. Even if they decide that can be overlooked, there's no guarantee it's heard.

If this were to somehow succeed, what a great day for democracy! Hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of voters that sent in their ballots in good faith, following all the rules they were given, and these guys just want to say "**** you, your votes don't count". Most of these people could have, and would have, voted in another manner had they known their votes wouldn't count. And that just might have something to do with why the case was "tossed solely because of not being filed in time".

And that's the reason I don't think there's any way the SC would ever rule in their favour even if it heard the case. Even if they decide to hear it, and agree that the election rules were changed improperly, I'd expect them to be extremely reluctant to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of people - and rightly so.

TBH, I find the fact that anyone wants this to happen to be sad commentary on US politics these days. If someone was able to find widespread fraud and present it to the courts, that's one thing. That's a perfectly legitimate reason to overturn results. But this bullshit, where it becomes a game of where can we find a way to disenfranchise people that benefits us, is just complete nonsense. It goes hand in hand with all the efforts made before the election to discredit and even prevent mail-in ballots - if there's a genuine concern with the security of mail-in ballots (Narrator: There wasn't.), then you fix the problem, you don't do everything you can to suppress the vote because you think it favours your party. The more I think about it, the more it astounds me. A losing candidate decides that he has a shot at winning if he can get hundreds of thousands of votes that were cast legitimately (IE by the rules as they understood them) and in good faith, thrown out - and millions of Americans are not only cool with that, they think it's a great idea. It's just win at all costs now.

Here's a news flash for you: healthy democracies do everything they can to encourage people to vote, and make sure all their votes are counted. They offer more options to vote, not less. They make sure people have time off to vote. They find ways to ID people that aren't onerous and exclusive of segments of the population. They at least attempt to have those running the elections be non-partisan and at arms-length from the government. This bullshit going on right now is tinpot dictatorship-level crap. Americans from both parties should be up in arms about this. But sadly, this kind of thing seems to have been completely normalized now. I hope you guys can find a way to fix it at some point, but I'm not optimistic right now.

What math are you referring to? And you are welcome....

The various death rates by states. You posted a few weeks ago how some states were doing very well, despite their denial based / anti-science approach toward the virus (ie: essentially ignoring it). I quoted that post of yours and you acknowledged that by quoting my comments about it. Perhaps you forgot that a few hours later as you had more youtube investigations to complete.

Anyway, at the time you posted your little state based death stats chart. Others clearly said that your data and the meaning behind it will change quite a bit due to how some of the states (ie: Dakotas) were approaching the virus. The stats changed as expected. Your past post looks quite clueless as a result. The fact I need to explain this to you is another reason why things people like you say should be dismissed without much concern. Still, you can provide comic relief, but that requires you to actually share in detail your beliefs, which I noticed you seem reluctant to do for some reason. If you ever muster the courage to give more depth of your beliefs behind your spam and run style posts (like your "kraken" video or death stat chart) then that could be amusing to read, but there is no expectation you will do that. Just not the way people like you operate in the end. Here is the sequence of posts to help you.

Mid November 2020:
A few weeks later:

Feel free to elaborate further on this discussion, and your place within it, as you see fit. Thanks!

All the best.

A very good post. By the petitioner's own account this was "not a case about fraud". That makes the timing of the suit reek even more.

But my guess is the case isn't going to be touched with a ten foot pole. I'm sure there are judges with agendas out there, but even among those there can't be many who want to be on the list of people who effectively tried to kill democracy in a US state.

I'm sure the suit is a good way to rake in that fundraiser dough, however.

Yup! $170 million and counting...

I’m not a conservative and yes, I took advantage of Trump 21-1(now 30-1) to make up for my 2.5-1 in the summer and also got a solid hedge on Biden on election night before all the bs went down.

No ****, that’s why I said no one is actually getting rid of 230 and that it would help both twitter and FB if it was completely removed.

Well, it would have been a sad day, but fortunately Trump's effort with the oily landscaper Giuliani along with his kraken and drunk associates have generated the results as expected so far. Still, they are accepting donations from their followers, so you should consider how much you want to give for them to continue their entertaining fight.



You should definitely plow a ton of money in the 30-1 bet, given how certain you are of the outcome, and your predictive ability will definitely age as well as an assumption that a South Dakota covid death statistic from a few weeks ago will remain steady.

What did you think of that other dude's kraken video by the way? Like him, do you believe it without question? Also, what are your thoughts on Trump pardoning himself, his kids, his friends etc. Also, Bill Barr - secret Democratic neverTrumper? Thanks!

All the best.

Some posts have been moved to a riggie containment thread.