North Korea and US politics

[paul7388]

I dont think its that crazy.
Most things found on the internet is true.

View attachment 123464

Your internet search history worries me.

And you wonder why police raided your house the other day

 

[Kroffe]

Your internet search history worries me.

And you wonder why police raided your house the other day

Actually that search was rather mild.
"Trump and putin" was all that was needed. =)

 

[Kroffe]

Your internet search history worries me.

And you wonder why police raided your house the other day

Maybe you were expecting something more like this.

 

[Kelly Jo]

I dont think its that crazy.
Most things found on the internet is true.

View attachment 123464

 

[Kelly Jo]

Batshit crazy yes.

 

[Kroffe]

Hey, no fair.
I thought we had a thing going Kelly.
And now i find out you and Sufferinsilcence had a relationship all along.

 

[Kelly Jo]

*blink *blink

 

[dionysus]

Old Attachment (Invalid)

 

[Kroffe]

@dionysus
Can you hook me up with some candy from Garland sugar shack?

 

[dionysus]

price of real maple syrup?
maybe ill lick a stamp after pancakes and ya can smell it

(nothing in the envelope of course, that sounds like work)

 

[Kroffe]

Can you maybe lick the stamp before licking the pancakes, so i dont get a stamp smelling all pancakey.

 

[paul7388]

Maybe you were expecting something more like this.

Couldn't be arsed to play the clip so no idea what it is.

Just think tho in 2 weeks you will be able to use the other emotes and not just the like one. Sure that will keep you amused for a day or two.

 

[Kroffe]

Couldn't be arsed to play the clip so no idea what it is.

Just think tho in 2 weeks you will be able to use the other emotes and not just the like one. Sure that will keep you amused for a day or two.

Its a 2 minute video Paul.
Im sure you spend longer than that picking out a skirt kilt in the morning.

Also i think you underestimate my fondness of emojis.
Will keep me amused for atleast a week.

 

[Kelly Jo]

I got suspended from Twitter. Again. For the fourth time.
*sigh
You suppose it was something that I said?
Being a Conservative cheerleader is hard.
Guess I'll hafta hang out here...

 

[sufferinsilence]

I got suspended from Twitter. Again. For the fourth time.
*sigh
You suppose it was something that I said?
Being a Conservative cheerleader is hard.
Guess I'll hafta hang out here...
View attachment 123538

Just out of interest: what did you post?

 

[mack341]

What was your handle [if that's what they call them these days ]?

I've been interested in the censorship angle and twitter, was looking it up the other day, as the twitter platform has become quite significant in the realm of political debate and issues, so there is a danger to democracy if they are censoring one side of the argument [ conservative views ]

 

[Kelly Jo]

Just out of interest: what did you post?

You tryna get me booted here, too? heh heh heh
FYI: Gangsta talk (n chit) does not equate with crank-Woah! cultural appropriation.

At least that's what Twitter says.

Edit
Translation: It is not okay to tell people to stop acting like a C.W. when they act like--->:

 

[Kroffe]

What was your handle [if that's what they call them these days ]?

I've been interested in the censorship angle and twitter, was looking it up the other day, as the twitter platform has become quite significant in the realm of political debate and issues, so there is a danger to democracy if they are censoring one side of the argument [ conservative views ]

But can one expect free speech on a private platform?
Is it not up to twitter,facebook,youtube etc what they want to show on their site?
Wouldnt that be in line with conservative thinking aswell? (genuinly wondering)

 

[Kelly Jo]

What was your handle [if that's what they call them these days ]?

I've been interested in the censorship angle and twitter, was looking it up the other day, as the twitter platform has become quite significant in the realm of political debate and issues, so there is a danger to democracy if they are censoring one side of the argument [ conservative views ]

Twitter was my safe space... Only my mom has that info and that's only so she can delete it if something happens to me. Can't have my kids finding out their mom loves Trump. lol

 

[mack341]

But can one expect free speech on a private platform?
Is it not up to twitter,facebook,youtube etc what they want to show on their site?
Wouldnt that be in line with conservative thinking aswell? (genuinly wondering)

If it was a members club where you paid to join then yes I would consider it a walled off 'private platform', but it isn't, it would be the same as describing google as a private search engine so they can direct consumers to only the left/liberal articles. Clearly once they get to the market position thay have and role in society, there is a duty to be impartial as much as possible [within the laws of freedom of speech in each jurisdiction].

It is a interesting question you pose though, market forces etc.. and I wouldn't say my view is the final one; however do adults really want politicians/bureaucrats and corporations joining up to decide what people can and can't say, any threat to their interests/plans real or perceived will be squashed.

At the moment things aren't too bad but it's the future one has to have an eye on, slipping into a 1984 scenario [or think of all the dystopian films, robocop, running man, blade runner etc] that's not something I want to pass onto our descendants.

 

[mack341]

Twitter was my safe space... Only my mom has that info and that's only so she can delete it if something happens to me. Can't have my kids finding out their mom loves Trump. lol

I understand your desire for privacy ... will you get back your account? That is sad though if it has created a generational divide as well, I guess it's not 'trendy' to support trump, but it saves you stress of having daily political debates with your youngsters

Looking back when I was 18 or 19 I would've probably been a bernie or warren fan

 

[Kroffe]

If it was a members club where you paid to join then yes I would consider it a walled off 'private platform', but it isn't, it would be the same as describing google as a private search engine so they can direct consumers to only the left/liberal articles. Clearly once they get to the market position thay have and role in society, there is a duty to be impartial as much as possible [within the laws of freedom of speech in each jurisdiction].

It is a interesting question you pose though, market forces etc.. and I wouldn't say my view is the final one; however do adults really want politicians/bureaucrats and corporations joining up to decide what people can and can't say, any threat to their interests/plans real or perceived will be squashed.

At the moment things aren't too bad but it's the future one has to have an eye on, slipping into a 1984 scenario [or think of all the dystopian films, robocop, running man, blade runner etc] that's not something I want to pass onto our descendants.

But where does one then draw the line?
Would the Meister be allowed to decide whats ok/not ok on this page for example?
Or if i create a site, do i only get to decide on its contents until a certain amount of people has joined?
Id like to think i would be allowed to decide for myself whats allowed on my site, no matter how many members there are.
I thought this was the conservative view aswell.
That government should not go in and control how private companies run.

I dont see how paying to join would make any difference to it being a private platform or not.
Does that make Tinder premium a private platform, and tinder without premium not a private platform?
Sounds weird, no?

 

[mack341]

This recent case in the uk regarding Harry Miller is the level of things we have reached atm, with the police being more interested in pursuing something they regarded as thought crime via twitter than actual crime, what a waste of police resources in a time of rising violent crime etc..

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Announcing the court’s decision, Mr Justice Julian Knowles said: “The claimant’s tweets were lawful and that there was not the slightest risk that he would commit a criminal offence by continuing to tweet.

“I find the combination of the police visiting the claimant’s place of work, and their subsequent statements in relation to the possibility of prosecution, were a disproportionate interference with the claimant’s right to freedom of expression because of their potential chilling effect.”

The judge added that the effect of the police turning up at Mr Miller’s place of work “because of his political opinions must not be underestimated”.

He continued: “To do so would be to undervalue a cardinal democratic freedom. In this country we have never had a Cheka, a Gestapo or a Stasi. We have never lived in an Orwellian society.”

...I conclude that the police’s actions led him, reasonably, to believe that he was being warned not to exercise his right to freedom of expression about transgender issues on pain of potential criminal prosecution.”

 

[mack341]

But where does one then draw the line?
Would the Meister be allowed to decide whats ok/not ok on this page for example?
Or if i create a site, do i only get to decide on its contents until a certain amount of people has joined?
Id like to think i would be allowed to decide for myself whats allowed on my site, no matter how many members there are.
I thought this was the conservative view aswell.
That government should not go in and control how private companies run.

I dont see how paying to join would make any difference to it being a private platform or not.
Does that make Tinder premium a private platform, and tinder without premium not a private platform?
Sounds weird, no?

Good questions, the meister or staff obviously could do as they wish, but once you have elected and prospective politicians posting on a site [plus journalists and political pundits] you're now acting and affecting things in the realm of democracy.

If you make it clear the platform is not a vehicle for free [legal] speech and has a liberal bias in the byline, then fine, but don't pretend to be something you aren't, that is misadvertising or misrepresentation to the public at large.

The govt do regulate how firms behave in all manner of ways, the monoploy laws for one, price fixing etc.. impartiality on uk television via ofcom esp around election time.

 

[mack341]

But where does one then draw the line?
Would the Meister be allowed to decide whats ok/not ok on this page for example?
Or if i create a site, do i only get to decide on its contents until a certain amount of people has joined?
Id like to think i would be allowed to decide for myself whats allowed on my site, no matter how many members there are.
I thought this was the conservative view aswell.
That government should not go in and control how private companies run.

I dont see how paying to join would make any difference to it being a private platform or not.
Does that make Tinder premium a private platform, and tinder without premium not a private platform?
Sounds weird, no?

You seem to know a lot about tinder? ...I didn't think much political debate and influence went on there