Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ganelon
The issue is that social media shouldn’t mediate what you can say or not n their websites, beyond the usual - like being racist, sexist, overly inflammatory, or saying downright illegal things, such as posting child porn. When you censor such an important public figure, especially on such flimsy grounds, I’d say you’re overstepping your authority. I understand where you’re coming from, but i think Trump is doing his best to be going through this crisis. The Democrats just seek to politicize everything lol.
"like being racist, sexist, overly inflammatory, or saying downright illegal things, such as posting child porn."
This sums up Trump though.
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Also this is why I kept bringing up the first tweet lol.
Everyone is so focused on the second tweet when the first tweet was the worse one.
Might I remind you the first tweet was where Trump threatened Twitter with legal action and issued an executive order against them for posting neutral facts about a tweet that he made
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ganelon
The issue is that social media shouldn’t mediate what you can say or not n their websites, beyond the usual - like being racist, sexist, overly inflammatory, or saying downright illegal things, such as posting child porn. When you censor such an important public figure, especially on such flimsy grounds, I’d say you’re overstepping your authority. I understand where you’re coming from, but i think Trump is doing his best to be going through this crisis. The Democrats just seek to politicize everything lol.
A social media platform absolutely should be allowed to have a terms of service and be allowed to censor anything that they deem to have broken said terms of service. Don't like it? Don't use them. Boycott. Find a platform that allows your speech. That's the beauty of CAPITALISM
HOW can you say that a social media platform shouldn't be allowed to censor, but the government should be allowed to put people in JAIL based on what they say?? Thats the most ass backwards thinking I've ever seen. The 1st ammendment protects your speech from government retaliation. It does not dictate what corporations and companies decide to allow on their platforms. I thought conservatives were all about small government? Yet want the government to dictate to social media platforms how to operate?
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SuperJack
Trump isn't a racist?
I can't be a racist. Some of my best friends are black.
I can't be a serial killer. Some of my best friends are still alive
I can't be a pedophile. Some of my best friend are chil.... Huh. Doesn't quite work.
But you get my point.
In my life I've found little reasoning behind saying that being friends people which you supposedly hate (according to whoever calls you Xist/ic) doesn't mean anything at all.
I can imagine people that mistreat others and laugh thinking they're friends but they are actually harming the other person, but I'd dare say that most cases saying you have close black/gay/whatever friends DOES mean something. Specially if they're close to you as I've just said.
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ganelon
I mean, fair enough. I guess you have a point but, do you really feel he is being racist here, or trying to incite violence against black people?
If he was at all concerned about black people, he would not threatened the rioters using a quote from a previous racial incident and instead try to help reform the blatant abuse and racism of law enforcement and bring justice to the guilty party.
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SuperJack
If he was at all concerned about black people, he would not threatened the rioters using a quote from a previous racial incident and instead try to help reform the blatant abuse and racism of law enforcement and bring justice to the guilty party.
Bingo. Why is retaliating against rioters smart instead of addressing the injustice that brought on the rioting in the first place?
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
If I come to sc2mafia and vote in an ongoing game that I'm not signed up for, I'm gonna get banned
Oh noes muh free speech
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gyrlander
In my life I've found little reasoning behind saying that being friends people which you supposedly hate (according to whoever calls you Xist/ic) doesn't mean anything at all.
I can imagine people that mistreat others and laugh thinking they're friends but they are actually harming the other person, but I'd dare say that most cases saying you have close black/gay/whatever friends DOES mean something. Specially if they're close to you as I've just said.
My point was that just because there are white rioters involved doesn't mean that the riot isn't seen as racist.
The majority of the comment was just a joke about how stupid the saying sounds.
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
You think the rioters are your good Samaritans rising up for the oppressed? Why are they targeting innocent policemen who had nothing to do with the murder?
They even vandalized stores when the owners had nothing to do with the murder. I don’t think these people care at all about George Floyd. I think these people just wanted to fuck shit up and wanted a reason to do it
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ganelon
You think the rioters are your good Samaritans rising up for the oppressed? Why are they targeting innocent policemen who had nothing to do with the murder?
They even vandalized stores when the owners had nothing to do with the murder. I don’t think these people care at all about George Floyd. I think these people just wanted to fuck shit up and wanted a reason to do it
this was addressed to Banana btw.
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ganelon
You think the rioters are your good Samaritans rising up for the oppressed? Why are they targeting innocent policemen who had nothing to do with the murder?
They even vandalized stores when the owners had nothing to do with the murder. I don’t think these people care at all about George Floyd. I think these people just wanted to fuck shit up and wanted a reason to do it
There are always going to be people that take advantage of a situation
But if George Floyd isn't murdered, the riots never happen in the first place. Address the injustice, you prevent future riots.
You shoot them down? You just escalate the situation. When has escalation ever been the smart way to go?
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SuperJack
My point was that just because there are white rioters involved doesn't mean that the riot isn't seen as racist.
The majority of the comment was just a joke about how stupid the saying sounds.
You mean "being against the riot" instead of the "riot" being fascist, I presume?
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ganelon
You think the rioters are your good Samaritans rising up for the oppressed? Why are they targeting innocent policemen who had nothing to do with the murder?
They even vandalized stores when the owners had nothing to do with the murder. I don’t think these people care at all about George Floyd. I think these people just wanted to fuck shit up and wanted a reason to do it
I can still reply though.
Unfortunately in riots there are a select few who will take advantage of the chaos who then loot and vandalise.
Yet should you consider the rest of the protest invalid and wrong because of select few who ruin it?
What else are the supposed to do? Call the police because the police murdered someone? Who do you turn too when the police are killing the innocent and silencing the media?
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gyrlander
You mean "being against the riot" instead of the "riot" being fascist, I presume?
Idk I'm just saying just because there are white peole rioting doesn't mean that the riot is occuring due to the mistreatment of black people.
Trump doesn't have to be against black rioters. But the fact that this riot is basic for the mistreatment of black people.
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Marshmallow Marshall
To be more specific, it's about to become (or has already become) a partisan-filled, biased arguing thread instead of a debate on free speech itself. Now to participate to it a bit...
You had to have known this would happen. In fact, you should be in jail for inciting this conflict ;)
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
I just want to say that the EO was tried a few years ago and failed. Zuckerberg has even written his own academic journal about how to properly regulate social media. It's been an on going discussion for awhile. While I do think Trump is petty as fuck I don't think he wrote an EO up in retaliation. They have probably been sitting on it for awhile and Trump is just being opportunistic.
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Still shocked people are surprised about violent riots being met with force to disperse them. What do you think the government should do? Let the city burn? It needs to be stopped and based on footage I have seen I wouldn't be surprised if lethal and non lethal rounds are required. You reap what you sow.
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
"Looting leads to shooting, and that’s why a man was shot and killed in Minneapolis on Wednesday night - or look at what just happened in Louisville with 7 people shot. I don’t want this to happen, and that’s what the expression put out last night means. It was spoken as a fact, not as a statement. It’s very simple, nobody should have any problem with this other than the haters, and those looking to cause trouble on social media. Honor the memory of George Floyd!"
There we go. Now Trump should have been a lot more concise with his wording originally, but this is an example of presumption of guilt culture I loathe. It's now got a social media giant playing god on what is acceptable speech. Now that it's been clarified that he wasn't "glorifying violence" will Twitter remove the quarantine measure on the post? This entire process can be avoided by doing the sane thing, questioning the individual to clarify what they meant like bloody adults.
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BananaCucho
You had to have known this would happen. In fact, you should be in jail for inciting this conflict ;)
Right ;-; how naive was I...
Re: Freedom of thought and speech vs morality
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rumox
"Looting leads to shooting, and that’s why a man was shot and killed in Minneapolis on Wednesday night - or look at what just happened in Louisville with 7 people shot. I don’t want this to happen, and that’s what the expression put out last night means. It was spoken as a fact, not as a statement. It’s very simple, nobody should have any problem with this other than the haters, and those looking to cause trouble on social media. Honor the memory of George Floyd!"
There we go. Now Trump should have been a lot more concise with his wording originally, but this is an example of presumption of guilt culture I loathe. It's now got a social media giant playing god on what is acceptable speech. Now that it's been clarified that he wasn't "glorifying violence" will Twitter remove the quarantine measure on the post? This entire process can be avoided by doing the sane thing, questioning the individual to clarify what they meant like bloody adults.
Yeah when I read that Tweet that was one possible interpretation that came to my mind.
"Looters will be shot" If you are not a troublemaker, you have nothing to fear.
But yeah, really should've been phrased better.