Elon’s Twitter Investment

[pensacolatiger 313]

3 hours ago, Didba said:

What's really funny is that he thinks he is "getting to me" because "I sound insecure".

nah man, I am just laughing at all this while sitting in my nice 11th floor office with a view of downtown Houston admiring the bottle of Dom Peringnon my Boss gave me when I passed the Bar, chatting casually with my paralegal while we wait for the thunderstorm to pass so we can drive home.

Its been going good for the Didbster lately and ole Pensacola is just a funny diversion to pass the time when I am bored.

Well now you sound incredibly insecure

[pensacolatiger 313]

4 hours ago, Didba said:

We do get paid pretty well for that particular reason, thanks for acknowledging it.

The thing is within the non-polarized/politicized legal community it is not a highly contested topic.

Also, still waiting on that cite and for you to explain your understanding of the public forum doctrine's intent.

If you read up a little more on public forum doctrine you may see, it can be very ambiguous.  Almost like interpretation hasn’t caught up to current technology……

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/824/public-forum-doctrine

[Didba 5,256]

[homersapien 11,336]

1 hour ago, pensacolatiger said:

Maybe you are on the leading edge of covid viral load research?  Maybe you should report your findings to webmd because they don’t seem convinced of viral load affecting transmission.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/covid-viral-load

 

or maybe you’re just a dumb lib that believes everything “muh cnn” pumps into your eager little throat 🤣

Sigh.

If you actually read that article(carefully), it more or less confirms what I said:  "if everyone got vaccinated, the virus would spread less quickly than if no one got vaccinated".

Find me a epidemiologist that disproves of that as a general statement.  (And don't worry about the specific reason(s) or look for absolutes.  It's all relative, as epidemiologists understand.)

And I don't depend on CNN as a primary source of  science information.   I get it from sources that specialize and report on science.

Meanwhile, if you want to excerpt a statement from your cited article that disproves the general statement above, then quote it and I'll explain why you're wrong.

Edited October 29, 2022 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,336]

Here you go Pensacola:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31494-y

Abstract

Effective vaccines protect individuals by not only reducing the susceptibility to infection, but also reducing the infectiousness of breakthrough infections in vaccinated cases. To disentangle the vaccine effectiveness against susceptibility to infection (VE_S) and vaccine effectiveness against infectiousness (VE_I), we took advantage of Danish national data comprising 24,693 households with a primary case of SARS-CoV-2 infection (Delta Variant of Concern, 2021) including 53,584 household contacts. In this setting, we estimated VE_S as 61% (95%-CI: 59-63), when the primary case was unvaccinated, and VE_I as 31% (95%-CI: 26-36), when the household contact was unvaccinated. Furthermore, unvaccinated secondary cases with an infection exhibited a three-fold higher viral load compared to fully vaccinated secondary cases with a breakthrough infection. Our results demonstrate that vaccinations reduce susceptibility to infection as well as infectiousness, which should be considered by policy makers when seeking to understand the public health impact of vaccination against transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

(That ain't CNN. )

 

 

[TexasTiger 12,778]

[AUFAN78 3,889]

13 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Musk promises to open the floodgates to allow hatred, racism, violence to roam free

Obviously I missed him stating this. Can you repost it for us please?

[AUFAN78 3,889]

12 hours ago, AUDub said:

Yeah watch what happens to online spaces that have your idea of "free speech" in mind. 

Without some sort of moderation it will fail. 

There will be moderation. I'm betting on it.

[AUFAN78 3,889]

11 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Yeah, Conservatives can finally make death threats and spam the 'N' word all over Twitter now. Congratulations. 

Not happening.

[AUFAN78 3,889]

11 hours ago, AUDub said:

Watch how quickly it becomes untenable should Musk's plan be put in place. It will melt.

His plan is that all legal speech should be allowed. I got bad news for you, people suck, and legal is not a synonym with appropriate. 

Let's use an example here. Say I called one of our black posters something highly inappropriate,  suggest hanging every jew on earth or say homosexuals should be taken out back and shot. Titan or Tex would boot my ass out the door before I could blink because that's literally their jobs as moderators of the forum. 

But that speech is legal, and would be allowed in Musk's version of Twitter. 

Users aren't going to hang around a cesspit.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that you actually believe that will happen. I certainly expect there will be moderation. Specifically regarding racism, anti-Semitism, etc.  Now perhaps information like Biden dealings with China and the sort will be allowed, but I think that sort of info should be readily available to the populous.  JMO. We shall see.

[AUDub 11,113]

4 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

There will be moderation. I'm betting on it.

There will now that he's got money riding on it lol.

Look at Tex's post above for the logic behind it. He promised a bunch of loons the moon. If wants it to be viable he has to do it. 

[AUDub 11,113]

4 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

I find it incredibly hard to believe that you actually believe that will happen. I certainly expect there will be moderation. Specifically regarding racism, anti-Semitism, etc.  Now perhaps information like Biden dealings with China and the sort will be allowed, but I think that sort of info should be readily available to the populous.  JMO. We shall see.

He said it would. 

[AUDub 11,113]

4 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Not happening.

Eh they think that. 

[AUDub 11,113]

6 hours ago, pensacolatiger said:

If you read up a little more on public forum doctrine you may see, it can be very ambiguous.  Almost like interpretation hasn’t caught up to current technology……

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/824/public-forum-doctrine

"So you see, doctor, it an imbalance of the humors"

[Leftfield 2,570]

On 10/28/2022 at 8:14 PM, pensacolatiger said:

Maybe you are on the leading edge of covid viral load research?  Maybe you should report your findings to webmd because they don’t seem convinced of viral load affecting transmission.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/covid-viral-load

 

or maybe you’re just a dumb lib that believes everything “muh cnn” pumps into your eager little throat 🤣

Wow. You actually found something worth questioning. I'll admit, considering everything else I've read, I'm surprised at webmd's statement. I'd be interested in seeing what reasons they have or research they'd cite.

Unfortunately, for your argument at least, viral load is not the only factor in transmission, nor did I ever make it out to be. You were correct in another post that I brought viral load up, but it was in the context of what scientists were thinking before the vaccines were released. The vaccines were not being made to reduce spread, but to combat severe illness. It was suspected the vaccines might reduce spread due to reduced viral load (a not-unreasonable thought), but scientists would have to wait until studies were done to verify. 

I'd also point out that in the same section that includes the statement you cite, it says that how sick a person gets is a factor in how contagious they are. A person with no symptoms and high viral load my be more contagious than someone with a low viral load that has severe symptoms. We know that the vaccine is effective at preventing severe illness, so that statement itself contradicts your overarching point about transmission.

You were so hard up to find the statement you were looking for that you missed obvious things that wreck your overall stance on the subject (that vaccines are useless and those who keep getting them are duped idiots). In addition to what I pointed out above, if you'd read to the end of the link you posted, you'd see they strongly urge you to get vaccinated. You ignored everything in the link that didn't support your position in an attempt to secure a meaningless victory. 

So, yeah, column B.

Edited October 31, 2022 by Leftfield

[CoffeeTiger 5,061]

14 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Not happening.

Sure it will. It happen now. Just Twitters moderation team, that Musk wants to get rid of, deletes and bans it.

 

 

 

[Didba 5,256]

20 hours ago, pensacolatiger said:

If you read up a little more on public forum doctrine you may see, it can be very ambiguous.  Almost like interpretation hasn’t caught up to current technology……

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/824/public-forum-doctrine

Dude, that article is just a summary of my first amendment class in law school and I’ve already explained everything in that article in a previous comment. Nothing in that article supports anything you have said. 
 

There has not been a SCOTUS case or any precedent by any court treating an entire social media platform as a public forum or Limited public forum. 
 

Further, the ambiguity is about when a public officials social media account stops being a public forum and SCOTUS didn’t rule on that case because Trump deleted his twitter account, and no longer was president so the Court ruled the issue moot and lacking standing.
 

The only time courts have viewed a social media page as a public forums is when it is the official account for a government employee. 
 

there is no ambiguity as to whether an entire social media platform is a public forum. 

[homersapien 11,336]

On 10/28/2022 at 11:36 PM, AUFAN78 said:

There will be moderation. I'm betting on it.

Why?   What's their incentive to moderate under the existing business model?

Edited October 31, 2022 by homersapien

[CoffeeTiger 5,061]

[CoffeeTiger 5,061]

On 10/28/2022 at 10:37 PM, AUFAN78 said:

Not happening.

It literally started happening immediately. 

[AUDub 11,113]

12 hours ago, homersapien said:

Why?   What's their incentive to moderate under the existing business model?

Advertisers. Advertisers won't advertise on a cesspit.

And Google play and the Apple store delist things like gab.ai over their lack of moderation.

[aubiefifty 16,658]

On 10/28/2022 at 8:16 PM, pensacolatiger said:

Well now you sound incredibly insecure

i hunt with didba twice a year and he is a big ol gym freak  that could play on our D line if he wanted. trust me when i say he is not insecure. and we never fail to bring down a nice buck or two with out assault rifles. and i make him drgg the buck out because he has the guns. so pensacola survey says........you lie baby!

[I_M4_AU 7,750]

2 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

It literally started happening immediately. 

Of course they are testing the limits.  Like any child would do when given freedom not seen before.  Let’s give Elon time to react and then jump on him. He did delete the Pelosi tweet linking a false story.

[pensacolatiger 313]

49 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

i hunt with didba twice a year and he is a big ol gym freak  that could play on our D line if he wanted. trust me when i say he is not insecure. and we never fail to bring down a nice buck or two with out assault rifles. and i make him drgg the buck out because he has the guns. so pensacola survey says........you lie baby!

Now he sounds even more insecure, maybe he’s got a proportion issue🤣

[I_M4_AU 7,750]

8 minutes ago, pensacolatiger said:

Now he sounds even more insecure, maybe he’s got a proportion issue🤣

What’s really weird is he has a proxy for his insecurity.  Very rare.