Robert wrote: ↑Fri Dec 02, 2022 11:00 am
Josh wrote: ↑Fri Dec 02, 2022 10:45 am
So apparently a private company actually can’t decide what speech is on its platform after all…
Politicians will never let go of that power and control. When it works in their favor, they allow it. When it does not, they grab it back.
U.S. elected used to be more conscientious about this.
If nothing more, in the least they respected that all, including themselves, would be subject to prevailing laws. This could be a bit frustrating for the electorate, ‘cause, it meant, the elected could often appear wishy-washy to opponents. They weren’t. They were being mindful of their own sins+crimes (they weren’t about to end).
If you enjoy theft, in decision-making, it’s likely you’ll be lenient on thieves.
Today, the push appears to be to somehow craft legal language that is 2-tiered.
One indulgent set of rules for libs, another strict set for all others. It’s weird to witness this play out. They seem convinced it’s just a matter of nuanced legal language to get there. No shortage of legal language to play with!
For those who worship self as god. No bottom to the pit.