Aseahawkfan wrote:https://www.yahoo.com/news/musk-restore-trump-twitter-holding-010323955.html
Trump can return to Twitter.
How long before he gets banned again with Musk at the helm? We shall see.
Musk and the Democrats do not get along. He would love nothing more than to see Biden taken down even though he won't directly say it.
c_hawkbob wrote:He may be old news but I know people that are still willing to take up arms, against me, at his say so. I imagine most of these people are on Truth Social anyway but I would still just as soon such word got out to as few people as possible.
c_hawkbob wrote:He may be old news but I know people that are still willing to take up arms, against me, at his say so. I imagine most of these people are on Truth Social anyway but I would still just as soon such word got out to as few people as possible.
RiverDog wrote:If he uses it as a means to encourage illegal acts, then by all means, he should be banned immediately, like within seconds of him sending a tweet. But other than that, I don't see the harm.
It's likely a moot point anyway as like HT said, Trump has come out and said he's not going back to Twitter.
c_hawkbob wrote:I don't wanna see him banned again after he paints a target on my house.
c_hawkbob wrote:I don't wanna see him banned again after he paints a target on my house.
RiverDog wrote:This is an honest question: Can't they take down a post/tweet advocating violence or any other TOS violation within seconds if they have them on a watch list as they obviously would with Trump?
If they can't, then of course, I would agree to keeping a known violator off the platform.
I-5 wrote:Regarding 1st Amendment and Twitter, the two have nothing to do with each other no matter what someone may believe.
Hawktawk wrote:Not sure why it’s a debate . Man would be in prison in any other western nation . It shouldn’t be a debate . The position of President has become a joke on us all . A feifdom that is so powerful anything goes . The powers of the potus must be stripped .
c_hawkbob wrote:That's all based on Trumps choice to use twitter as a means of official communications and therefor only relevant to whether or not he can block people on twitter. Has nothing to do with Twitter's right to block him.
That's my take, too, that the 1st Amendment only applies to government, not to private entities. But not everyone agrees with that take.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Social media needs regulation. It should be treated like TV and radio. It has the same if not greater reach than TV and radio in the modern day. Social media provides the ability to immediately deliver information on a near global scale. It may be difficult to apply the same standards given it is used by Joe Blow around the world including trolls and bots, but they should still start applying some standards to social media companies. I would not be surprised if there are studies that show social media has contributed to human stupidity and just about every other negative human trait out there including the obvious such as lying and gullibility.
I-5 wrote:The problem with any type of subscription plan is that it defeats the point of social media. Advertising is what drives soc med business, and the content that users post for free is the actual product. Musk knows this, or should.
idhawkman wrote:You are right the content is the product but like many other apps there is a free side and a premium side.
Those who want the perks of the blue check mark have to pay for the perks they get with it. Otherwise they are free to participate in the "free" part of the platform.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests