Big Tech/Social Media Censorship. Musk: Blackmailing Advertisers Can ***** Off.

[Chef Jim]

5 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

The article points out the Facebook’s policy in similar situations is to allow the posting of the link but not boost it through algorithms until it’s vetted. 
 

That seems way better than Twitter’s nuking policy. 

Who is doing FB vetting and what is their policy?  

[ChiGoose]

2 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

If you want to say companies can have their own TOS and remove things that violate them...that's fine.  But the moment you have these same companies removing content at the specific request of the government and/or government agencies then thats clearly not ok. It's a clear first ammendment violation. It's quite fascist to be honest.

 

The guy that

@ChiGoose linked to had so much hand waving gobbledygook it puts chigoose himself to shame.

Well then it’s a good thing that Taibbi stated that the government didn’t request the items to be taken down!

 

Also, what your call gobbledygook is what most people call facts and logic. But I’m not surprised you had difficulty parsing it. 

[BillsFanNC]

GG is absolutely 💯 correct here. You're an absolute moron if you believe the liberal activist hive mind trying to twist the meaning of Taibbis tweet.

 

 

Edited December 11, 2022 by BillsFanNC

[Doc]

50 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

Even if not that's not the major issue here is it?  

 

The government getting involved would be a major issue.

[ChiGoose]

2 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

Who is doing FB vetting and what is their policy?  

According to TechDirt, Facebook’s policy when something is flagged as a potential misinfo op is to allow it to be shared but not to boost it through the algorithm until Facebook’s internal fact checkers had reviewed it. 

[Chef Jim]

7 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

According to TechDirt, Facebook’s policy when something is flagged as a potential misinfo op is to allow it to be shared but not to boost it through the algorithm until Facebook’s internal fact checkers had reviewed it. 

Dance puppet dance. Who are these internal fact checkers and what is their process?  And what is the process of the initial flagging of the post?  

[ChiGoose]

9 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

Dance puppet dance. Who are these internal fact checkers and what is their process?  And what is the process of the initial flagging of the post?  

Dunno I don’t work at Facebook. What are they?

[Chef Jim]

2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Dunno I don’t work at Facebook. What are they?

No clue. So when you said it’s way better than Twitter you were speaking out your ass. Thanks.  

[ChiGoose]

7 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

No clue. So when you said it’s way better than Twitter you were speaking out your ass. Thanks.  

No, I was saying that allowing the posting of links while they are being vetted is better than completely nuking the links. 
 

But you knew that, you’re just being a troll. That, or you can’t read. 
 

Thanks. 

[Chef Jim]

4 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

No, I was saying that allowing the posting of links while they are being vetted is better than completely nuking the links. 
 

But you knew that, you’re just being a troll. That, or you can’t read. 
 

Thanks. 

 

And FB could end up nuking it in the end anyway correct? 

 

One man's debate is another trolling.  

[SoCal Deek]

Facebook has the intelligence capabilities to ‘vet’ posts in real time? How exactly? Are we’re to believe that these t-shirt wearing liberal millennials are running their own intelligence operations? And our government’s okay with that? Come on people! Has everyone lost their minds? 

[Chef Jim]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

Facebook has the intelligence capabilities to ‘vet’ posts in real time? How exactly? Are we’re to believe that these t-shirt wearing liberal millennials are running their own intelligence operations? And our government’s okay with that? Come on people! Has everyone lost their minds? 

 

This Calvin and Hobbes cartoon got a flagged by FB.

 

[ChiGoose]

11 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

And FB could end up nuking it in the end anyway correct? 

 

One man's debate is another trolling.  

There is no fool-proof form of content moderation. Every system is going to have flaws. 
 

I said I think it’s better not to delete or block things while they are being vetted. You decided to be a troll about it. That’s not a debate, it’s just performative assholery. 

[BillsFanNC]

More dem fascist meltdowns incoming....

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

19 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

There is no fool-proof form of content moderation. Every system is going to have flaws. 
 

I said I think it’s better not to delete or block things while they are being vetted. You decided to be a troll about it. That’s not a debate, it’s just performative assholery. 

One person’s vetting is another person’s election interference….but hey, you’ve got to do some pretty intense vetting if you’re going to fundamentally transform a country. 
 

Or so I’m told. 

Edited December 7, 2022 by SoCal Deek

[BillsFanNC]

Yet another example of leftists redefining language.

 

Content moderation is censorship.

[Chef Jim]

24 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

There is no fool-proof form of content moderation. Every system is going to have flaws. 
 

I said I think it’s better not to delete or block things while they are being vetted. You decided to be a troll about it. That’s not a debate, it’s just performative assholery. 

 

See you don't understand how debate works.  Let me explain.

 

1.  You made a point

2.  I challenged that point for further clarification by asking questions.  Allowing you to either solidify your point or give me the opportunity to poke holes in it.

3.  You clarified your point and you were right in how you clarified it. FB's process is better but not necessarily "way" better but that is semantics

4.  You then began to call me a troll and an #######.  

5.  Good job.  🙄

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, BillsFanNC said:

Yet another example of leftists redefining language.

 

Content moderation is censorship.

Hey you’ve got to do a little ‘content moderation’ if you’re going to fundamentally transform a country. 😉

[BillsFanNC]

Remember as well that Twitter not only suspended the NY Post account and not only banned users from sharing the story with their followers, they also banned sharing the story in private messages on the platform.

 

At the behest of the government. 

 

Curious how there was never any urgency or danger that caused Twitter "fact checkers" or "content moderators " to ever suppress the  slew of false reporting in the latest get Trump efforts.

 

 Hmmmmm  

 

 

[ChiGoose]

18 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

See you don't understand how debate works.  Let me explain.

 

1.  You made a point

2.  I challenged that point for further clarification by asking questions.  Allowing you to either solidify your point or give me the opportunity to poke holes in it.

3.  You clarified your point and you were right in how you clarified it. FB's process is better but not necessarily "way" better but that is semantics

4.  You then began to call me a troll and an #######.  

5.  Good job.  🙄

My point was that nuking a story is worse than allowing it but not amplifying it. I made no claims about the quality of the fact checking itself as it was irrelevant to the point I was making.
 

You did the whole “just asking questions” cowardly BS about the vetting instead of just expressing your own position, and then pretended it was a good faith debate instead of just the childish exercise in trolling that it was.