Muskism

[AURex 2,474]

Elon Musk proclaims himself as an absolutist regarding "free speech." Of course, as with most conservatives who advocate for free speech, the notion really only applies to conservative speech (which they think is censored).

Elon first got notice for his concept of free speech when he fired SpaceX employees who criticized his public babbling about politics.

And of course with Twitter, we have numerous examples, most recently banning the guy who reports on Elon's latest whereabouts, as well as firing all the employees who had been responsible for blocking hate speech, misinformation, terrorist planning, and Russian/Chinese propaganda.And now he's blocked journalists from the NY Times and Washington Post, because ... um ... their speech isn't free??? Um .. OK.

Plus of course attacking actual free speech regarding scientific information about vaccines and health care. Prosecute Fauci? hahahaha

Muskism is the new Trumpism. Sigh ...

 

Edited December 16, 2022 by AURex

[AUDub 12,281]

It's "great man theory" all over again. Sort of a capitalist version of the ubermensch. 

[DKW 86 8,212]

OTOH, Actually censoring people on twitter has been apologized by the former CEO. He admits they did censor one side over the other and that it was a mistake to do so.

BUT THAT WAS OKAY to so many here on this forum and across America. When you say you support democracy and yet support ANY type of censorship, you are too stupid to inflict your opinion on others.

[homersapien 12,851]

5 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

OTOH, Actually censoring people on twitter has been apologized by the former CEO. He admits they did censor one side over the other and that it was a mistake to do so.

BUT THAT WAS OKAY to so many here on this forum and across America. When you say you support democracy and yet support ANY type of censorship, you are too stupid to inflict your opinion on others.

Hear that Titan? 

You're either anti-democratic and/or too stupid to "inflict your opinion on others". 

Edited December 17, 2022 by homersapien

[I_M4_AU 9,769]

24 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Hear that Titan? 

You're too stupid to "inflict your opinion on others". 

How petty.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

Power will always have bias, prejudice, self interest within it's agenda.  That is why Musk overpaid for Twitter.  He wanted his bias, prejudice, self interest to determine what, who would be censored.

At the time of Dorsey's decision, Republicans controlled the DOJ and therefore, the FBI.  Unless you are nuts enough to believe that, Democrats secretly control the FBI,,, Trump couldn't do anything about that in four years, I do not understand the issue. 

Did the FBI threaten Twitter in any way?  Explicit or implied?

Is it more reasonable to believe the FBI and, every news agency other than the NYP, made a mere mistake, an honest mistake?

Edited December 17, 2022 by icanthearyou

[homersapien 12,851]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

How petty.

So do you think ANY type of "censorship" on a public forum indicates you don't "support democracy"?

Are you capable of a straight response to the above question?

[DKW 86 8,212]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

Hear that Titan? 

You're either anti-democratic and/or too stupid to "inflict your opinion on others". 

So you approve of one side being able to censor anyone that doesnt agree with them? Interesting...

And you talk about democracy so much. You do realize that that is not democracy at all, right? Even you know that, right?

Edited December 17, 2022 by DKW 86

[I_M4_AU 9,769]

30 minutes ago, homersapien said:

So do you think ANY type of "censorship" on a public forum indicates you don't "support democracy"?

Are you capable of a straight response to the above question?

My comment was about you trying to bring Titan in on a conversation to help bolster your position.  Petty

[homersapien 12,851]

1 minute ago, DKW 86 said:

So you approve of one side being able to censor anyone that doesnt agree with them? Interesting...

Of course, I didn't say that, did I?  

(Are you going to call me a liar now? )

Just pointing out the issue is far too complex for simplistic proclamations - one person's censorship is another person's moderation. 

It's up to the host/owner to make that determination.   And no one is forcing anyone to participate on their forum.  If you think the host is stupid, don't participate.

 

[DKW 86 8,212]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Of course, I didn't say that, did I?  

(Are you going to call me a liar now? )

Just pointing out the issue is far too complex for simplistic proclamations - one person's censorship is another person's moderation. 

It's up to the host/owner to make that determination.   And no one is forcing anyone to participate on their forum.  If you think the host is stupid, don't participate.

 

And you make my points for me.

What is "common sense moderation" today becomes outrageous censorship when the other side comes back into power. 

Better to leave it all alone and not empower anyone NOW nor in the FUTURE. 

Free Speech for everyone. 

 

Edited December 17, 2022 by DKW 86

[homersapien 12,851]

10 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

My comment was about you trying to bring Titan in on a conversation to help bolster your position.  Petty

Oh lighten up.  

Titan doesn't mind - after all, he's the "censor" of this forum, and it's a far better place for it. 

(Titan, please don't feel you need to enter the conversation. )

And really, "help bolster my position?"    My position doesn't need "bolstering". 

Edited December 17, 2022 by homersapien

[homersapien 12,851]

3 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

And you make my points for me.

What is "common sense moderation" today becomes outrageous censorship when the other side comes back into power. 

Better to leave it all alone and not empower anyone NOW nor in the FUTURE. 

Free Speech for everyone. 

 

You betcha. 

(I think you just want to see naked Hunter Biden pics.  )

[DKW 86 8,212]

Just now, homersapien said:

You betcha. 

(I think you just want to see naked Hunter Biden pics.  )

If there are NHB Pics i personally dont care, and I wouldnt stop anyone from viewing nor posting them. 

Free Speech...

[homersapien 12,851]

4 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

If there are NHB Pics i personally dont care, and I wouldnt stop anyone from viewing nor posting them. 

Free Speech...

Maybe you should start your own hosting site then. 

(Just keep in mind you'll likely have to self-fund it.)

Edited December 17, 2022 by homersapien

[DKW 86 8,212]

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Maybe you should start your own hosting site then.

I am playing around with a substack site now. And should I open it up, you will be invited to post your opinion there openly without fear of censorship. Ultimately, the only ones that censor others are those that are too stupid to be able to argue a thought or idea. I ran 15 or so people/mods off this site because they wanted to censor everything and everyone on the board. I know who and what I am. They went so far overboard it was laughable. They censored even the sports forums.

Free Speech always wins. Those of us that can freely think dont mind figuring out who the crazies are and ignoring them. 

Edited December 17, 2022 by DKW 86

[homersapien 12,851]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

I am playing around with a substack site now. And should I open it up, you will be invited to post your opinion there openly without fear of censorship. Ultimately, the only ones that censor others are those that are too stupid to be able to argue a thought or idea. I ran 15 or so people/mods off this site because they wanted to censor everything and everyone on the board. I know who and what I am. They went so far overboard it was laughable. They censored even the sports forums.

Free Speech always wins. Those of us that can freely think dont mind figuring out who the crazies are and ignoring them. 

What if a cabal of pedophiles starts using your site to post photos - and addresses - of children?

Going to "censor" them?

Edited December 17, 2022 by homersapien

[icanthearyou 4,468]

Moderation is necessary.  Sure, mistakes will be a part of it but, without some censorship you will have utter chaos which will ultimately create violence and destruction.

[homersapien 12,851]

Three Cheers For Content Moderation

There is no one-size-fits-all pro-free-speech answer to the intractable content moderation paradox. 

 

https://www.thebulwark.com/three-cheers-for-content-moderation/

[jj3jordan 2,238]

19 hours ago, homersapien said:

What if a cabal of pedophiles starts using your site to post photos - and addresses - of children?

Going to "censor" them?

No. Track them down and throw them in prison.

[homersapien 12,851]

12 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

No. Track them down and throw them in prison.

That's not what I asked. 

Are you going to allow them to post on (your) website or are you going to censor them? 

 

Edited December 18, 2022 by homersapien

[jj3jordan 2,238]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

That's not what I asked. 

Are you going to allow them to post on (your) website or are you going to censor them? 

 

But that is the answer. Like a typical liberal you fail to address the problem. Censoring the pervert is not the answer. The problem is that he exists. Censoring just makes more perverts want to post. Eliminate the problem at the origin. Start throwing them in prison and eventually you run out of perverts.

[DKW 86 8,212]

On 12/17/2022 at 2:46 PM, homersapien said:

What if a cabal of pedophiles starts using your site to post photos - and addresses - of children?

Going to "censor" them?

You are going to bring a cabal of pedophiles? 😁

I got rid of the overboard-moderators. I got rid of a troll from NY that also probably hacked the site one day. 

If they are affecting the site, sure. You only have so many trolls. But moderating for content is always BS.

Edited December 19, 2022 by DKW 86

[arein0 1,177]

7 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

But that is the answer. Like a typical liberal you fail to address the problem. Censoring the pervert is not the answer. The problem is that he exists. Censoring just makes more perverts want to post. Eliminate the problem at the origin. Start throwing them in prison and eventually you run out of perverts.

So are you saying you would leave the pictures up and arrest him? I would agree with arresting him, but you have to also take down (censor) his post because like you said it leaving it up encourages more. I know if someone posted something like that here and it wasnt taken down, I would stop coming to this site.

[DKW 86 8,212]

On 12/17/2022 at 3:13 PM, homersapien said:

Three Cheers For Content Moderation

There is no one-size-fits-all pro-free-speech answer to the intractable content moderation paradox. 

 

https://www.thebulwark.com/three-cheers-for-content-moderation/

Got whiplash reading that. You moderate non-content. Hacks, Trolls, Bots, etc. Content? leave it alone.

The one and only thing Rush Limbaugh ever got right was this: When someone is making a fool out of themselves, get out of the way, let them crash and burn. 

I got rid of the mods for censoring EVERYTHING. They were childlike in their actions. Petty, bitchy, etc.