The Coffee House Rules

--

Soooo, what the hell Lee!! I'm chopped liver?????????????????

Lightning wrote: ↑

Sat. Mar. 26, 2022 11:16 am

I think both of you are very wise and admirable members here with how you present your ideas and knowledge. If only we could all be so blessed, the world would be such a nicer place

freetown fred wrote: ↑

Sat. Mar. 26, 2022 1:42 pm

Soooo, what the hell Lee!! I'm chopped liver?????????????????

When horse sense is needed we know where to find it.

Good to be appreciated for SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you Richard--people don't realize how sensitive I am!!

There are conservative sites up and running so their is no excuse to use FB or Twitter if you don't like their brand of censorship. I just really hate how most all politicians try to stir up *censored* bait, use scare tactics and lie to divide our beautiful country. How about our elite dickhead politicians go to Washington to find compromises and bring that to the table. How about Americans don't fall for this crap anymore and we start getting rid of the obstructionists in Washington. I lived in NY for most of my life and you couldn't like the Mets and Yankees. It was always us against them. Tribalism . That is how Hitler got elected. Conservatives and Liberals alike need to find common ground and if you think you don't then what. Fight it out in the street. That is where our last admin was taking this country. Let's wakeup people and get our heads out of our u know what. That said I was a student for 49 years, earned a master's degree. Taught children my whole career. I never heard of all the crap that we are told is being taught in our schools. There are school boards in each district and parents have a loud voice. It's mostly all bs. Common core is real though but that is not the problem.

LOL---indeed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

traderfjp wrote: ↑

Sat. Mar. 26, 2022 5:38 pm

There are conservative sites up and running so their is no excuse to use FB or Twitter if you don't like their brand of censorship.

It's not their brand of censorship that is in question but the abuse of section 230 to achieve it. That law was enacted before the explosion of social media and is intended to protect service providers from being sued over the actions of their users.

Once gain Cruz had a bill a few years back that sites with X millions of users would be required to certify they were not censoring political speech to maintain their 230 exemption. This would only affect these mega services like Twitter. Seems like a reasonable compromise to me.

Just an FYI but before this became a Conservative talking point it was the Democrats who were calling for similar measures. Biden himself in the past supported fully removing section 230. Such ideas no matter who is proposing them is idiotic to put it bluntly, that little section of law is one of the foundation stones of free speech on the internet.

Politicians become disconnected to what is really happening or are to lazy to understand how legislation effects the market place. I didn't know about section 230. I think there is a similar law that protects amusement parks. I also agree that Dems are just as bone headed as republicans. I was always republican and the orange man pushed me to become an independent. Some of the Republicans seem dangerous supporting rigged elections when there is no evidence. I love my country too much and respect all the men and women who fought for our democracy so I c any support this lunacy.

Section 230 was implemented as part of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. It's similar to the gun legislation, It protects the service provider from being sued when their product is used illegally. It also protects them from being sued for any action they take to remove content.

This legislation protects both ISP's and content provider like coalpail.com. The primary intention at the time was to prevent ISP's from being sued for blocking adult content. The bulk of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 has been removed as unconstitutional but section 230 remains.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230

(c)Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material
(1)Treatment of publisher or speaker
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

(2)Civil liability
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
(A)any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or

(B)any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).[1]

To reiterate this is a foundation block of free speech on the internet, without this law sites like coalpail.com would be impossible to keep online. While I would certainly support amending it so larger mega services like Twitter would be compelled to provide free speech platform what I would not support is it's wholesale removal.