Anonymous ID: 583c03 Sept. 26, 2020, 11:04 a.m. No.10798922   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>8929 >>8981 >>8982 >>9441

>>10798914

This is straight from Codemonkey himself.

https://twitter.com/CodeMonkeyZ/status/1308896953128947713?s=20

 

The new CDA Section 230 revision proposed by the DOJ will be akill shot for online freespeech. Enjoy these last few days of being able to freely express yourself online.

If congress passes these new CDA Section 230 revisions, the internet will enter into a new age of mass censorship unlike anything you've ever imagined.

Anonymous ID: 583c03 Sept. 26, 2020, 11:10 a.m. No.10798977   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>10798970

I swear anon I have been IP shadow-banned off reddit on certain forums. I can't even post. Multiple twitter accounts shut down. Mostly I was discussing spygate and the Democrat connections to Robert Byrd and the KKK. Those two topics got me on a lot of lists out there.

Anonymous ID: 583c03 Sept. 26, 2020, 11:13 a.m. No.10799002   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>9060 >>9064

>>10798981

My guess is that it has to do with liability. 8chan would be held liable to people under certain conditions. Since this place has the most porn, gore, etc that is removed, it has to do with the moderation function. See, the idea behind 230 in its current form actually came about because of child porn originally.

 

Websites will remove things that are obscene. The are not then subject to liability as a publisher - endorsing everything on the site and then anybody could sue them. It literally is the only way that Facebook and Twitter can exist. Problem seems to be the way they are going about it? Maybe Ron has no clue but I doubt that. He would know a lot about this.

 

So instead of learning about the intricacies - I am assuming Ron is concerned about the liability 8ch may have - and probably thinks the changes would remove his liability shield under Section 230?

 

Or maybe it has nothing to do with 8ch and he is simply saying that it is going to allow Facebook, Twitter, etc. to censor even more? I don't know why he is concerned honestly.

 

Seems like that whole IBOR thing is all fuck all.

Anonymous ID: 583c03 Sept. 26, 2020, 11:15 a.m. No.10799022   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>10798982

I used to post on r/politics regarding people who resigned, were fired and who we had documented evidence committed crimes during FISAgate. Now, I can post and don't get upvoted or downvoted - shadowbanned. Same thing from r/news.

 

I'm assuming Chink money got involved.

Anonymous ID: 583c03 Sept. 26, 2020, 11:25 a.m. No.10799121   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>9146

>>10799097

I mean Facebook could fight all the third-party defamation cases with the hundreds of billions. They'd probably just moderate the fuck out of the website. But it definitely isn't something they want to have happen. Twitter might be in trouble since they don't have as much cash. 8ch could not survive.

Anonymous ID: 583c03 Sept. 26, 2020, 11:31 a.m. No.10799158   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>10799064

The bigger problem there is the recent court ruling that said social media is not subject to the first amendment at all.

 

Are you surprised this came out of the Ninth Circuit?

 

Ninth Circuit: Private Social Media Platforms Are Not Bound by the First Amendment

 

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/ninth-circuit-private-social-media-platforms-are-not-bound-first-amendment

Anonymous ID: 583c03 Sept. 26, 2020, 11:32 a.m. No.10799163   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>9254

>>10799147

 

(Repost, linked to the wrong post)

The bigger problem there is the recent court ruling that said social media is not subject to the first amendment at all.

 

Are you surprised this came out of the Ninth Circuit?

 

Ninth Circuit: Private Social Media Platforms Are Not Bound by the First Amendment

 

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/ninth-circuit-private-social-media-platforms-are-not-bound-first-amendment

Anonymous ID: 583c03 Sept. 26, 2020, 11:40 a.m. No.10799222   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>9311

>>10799186

Haha I mean its possible at this point. The first arrest will shock everyone. When the truth is revealed about Haiti no blacks will support the democrats. Toxic to everyone it touches. This is not another four year election. Why is the DS focused on the black vote - reteaching history, starting race riots, controlling the DA's who bring the charges. They are losing control of the black vote.

 

CLINTONS AND HAITI before the election? Red october.

Anonymous ID: 583c03 Sept. 26, 2020, 11:45 a.m. No.10799272   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>9389

>>10799254

Section 230 protects them for defamation liability from third-parties. So essentially it allows cancel culture to exist. Because if someone "cancels" me and damages my reputation on Twitter, for example, I can't go and sue Twitter for hosting that defamatory statement. Nothing to do with the first amendment though. I could then sue Twitter for publishing that defamatory statement and they would have to make sure no one talks shit to anyone else on Twitter - which is literally all that happens if you think about it. Almost everything is defamatory on Twitter.