Troy Stiffler

That's as rough as speech gets on this well-moderated forum. You could probably send the FBI to Something Awful or 8Chan and arrest thousands of posters. You could also apply it to domestic disputes that happen on Facebook or Reddit. I honestly have no idea how well auto-moderation bots work on the big platforms. But the internet is full of personal threats.

Other than forcing moderation by making the website owners legally responsible for these threats, I'm not sure what the solution would be. Maybe the next big innovation in social media.

B5Erik

I'm not talking about taking shit.

I'm talking about telling verifiable lies with the intent of manipulating people to a violent point of view.

Just like shouting FIRE in a theater where there is none. It is dangerous and people can (and often do) get hurt as a result.

Why So Blu?

Correlation does not imply causation. Save that shit for places like China, where you cannot speak out against the government.

Someone mentioned that they could enhance laws already in place. Hell, I know you can be prosecuted if you convince someone to commit suicide via online means, etc. The way you want it to happen is an unreasonable blanket over the whole thing and that's the issue.

B5Erik

OK, well, then you can count on more violence like we saw on Wednesday.

Sure, the people responsible can be arrested after the fact, after people have been hurt or killed.

How about this - what if those people HAD gotten to Congress and killed some of them, and then Trump issued Martial Law and took power indefinitely? That almost happened.

There have to be SOME reasonable limits as to what you can post online. Inciting people to violence (and spreading lies to scare them is one form of incitement) cannot be allowed.

Do you really disagree with that?

dsa_shea

If website owners begin to be legally responsible for what is posted, like Trump wants to happen, almost all of the rhetoric by his followers will disappear. The clamps on what is posted will be much tighter. I would rather see these social media platforms become tighter in the identification of their users. Work with law enforcement when people are harrased and let the perpetrators be charged. When you see the lady that came back from a bike race in China and be accused of being patient zero with zero evidence, harrassed to no end and feel threatened with no real protection or recourse, then there is a true problem. The problem lies in not the fact that these platforms exist, but the true accountability of the people using them. Spread lies and hate, get called out for it and pay through the judicial system. You want to use the platforms? You first have to fully reveal who you are. If not, get to stepping. Trump wants these companies to be held accountable like it is going to help his cause. In fact, it would tighten the vice even further.

Why So Blu?

Sure, but you have not listed anything remotely reasonable to counter that. You just want a blanket arrest warrant, which will effect not only the guilty, but the innocent will also get swept up in the mess. We're not living in Terry Gilliam's Brazil here.

B5Erik

No, I'm not. I'm talking about specific cases where people post verifiable lies to scare people or persuade them to commit acts of violoence.

I'm sorry if you think that it should be OK to post such things, but I don't.

Why So Blu?

Verifiable lies? I'm no lawyer, but that's what you'll have to prove in a court of law. That someone will act on it. Sorry, we don't have the precognition police department like they do in Minority Report. You can't go back and arrest them before actually committing the crime.

Again, this also comes down to the rules that govern a forum or social media site. Violate those rules and you're banned. Now if there's movement and a threat is imminent then that's something different.

Why So Blu?

*I also don't doubt that a lot of social media platforms will have to redefine their terms of service. Get ready for an update blast from your favorite platforms in the days/weeks to come.

Dan

The last couple pages of this thread are wild.

DJariya

https://deadline.com/2021/01/parler-...pNL-brwOx3WUAY

The Parler CEO said that pretty much every vendor dropped their service and they may go under. Good.

Michael Corvin

Thoughts and prayers.

DJariya

Good. No one needs to hear what those lunatics think. Wah wah wah. I need to be heard.

mickey65

Womp, womp...

WCChiCubsFan

If Parler goes under because its vendors have decided they don’t want to do business with them, Republicans and Libertarians should celebrate it as an example of the market at work.

Toddarino

I know a few guys at work are gonna be wild about Parler getting shut down. After Facebook kept giving them vacations, they jumped ship.

Coral

Ahhh, such a shame that Meinspace is going out of business.

Surely all the rich members of the GOP can help fund them, no? I'm sure Putin will.
Maybe the proud boys can collect all the loose change they find under the sofa cushions they're sleeping on in their mom's basement.

Norm de Plume

Why the concealment of this, ahem, individual's identity?

dvd-4-life

Why haven't the Capitol Police arrested Donnie Jr and Rudy G?

They aren't protected just because Donnie Dipshit Sr is the sitting POTUS.

There is video proof of them doing a crime.

Maybe they (Capitol Police) are more concerned about jaywalkers and people who steal bubble gum from Walmart.

B5Erik

I don't want to get sued.

I probably wouldn't be, and even though there is only a tiny chance of that, I just don't want to risk it.

sracer

You wouldn't be sued because there is no expectation of privacy when making a public statement. If that person's privacy setting was set to "friends only" and you are one of that person's friends, then there is maybe a potential. Given that there are over 600 reactions, any claim to privacy would be a stretch.

Cellar Door

Related to the Parler discussions: I saw this today in the Forth Worth reddit page. This was posted (on Twitter) just yesterday by the Fort Worth Police Officers Association, which is apparently a private group that advocates for police officers and has hundreds of police officers as members. So in the midst of Parler being deplatformed for being full of nutjob conspiracy theorists who promote violence, and in the wake of such nutjobs attempting an insurrection in our nation's capital, this law enforcement advocacy group decides to ask people to connect with them on Parler. The timing, I think, speaks volumes.

Abob Teff

Again, very possible, but first you have to make the connections. Yes, we know what they said. Yes, we know what happened. Now you have to prove one caused the other. Had people been chanting “Trial by combat!” as they stormed the building, you would have a pretty good tie. As it is, you have to find the links.

Thousands of people are going to die tomorrow from COVID! That doesn’t mean that when it happens I am now guilty of murdering them.

We are a nation of laws. We don’t grab the offender and hang them on the spot. We are a nation of laws. Under our system you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not on social platforms or the evening news, not even when there is video evidence running 24-7.

Abob Teff

I wondered this, too.

Abob Teff

Yelling “fire” in a crowded theater is not illegal if nobody reacts to you. The words are not illegal. It’s still a lie.

I will absolutely agree with you that there should be consequences for making statements that lead to people getting hurt. Now you just have to prove that is what happened, not just say that is what happened.