• Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.

Elon Musk announces Twitter suppressed Hunter Biden Laptop Story

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,638
Trophies
2
XP
5,834
Country
United Kingdom
You're both wrong, but smf is at least on the right track. The speech clause of the United States' 1A states that "Congress shall make no law...": but it has since morphed into a general free speech clause via the power of the judicial branch.
Right and there was no suggestion the government was using the judicial branch to force twitter to do anything, it appears Twitter did this voluntarily & for added measure the democrats weren't in government at the time of the Hunter Biden tweet removal.

Twitter shouldn’t have made the tool in the first place, and the government shouldn’t have abused it to remove inconvenient material from public discourse.
The particular example you were using was reported during the Trump administration, so the government didn't abuse it. What tweets did Trumps administration ask to be removed? That would seem more pertinent to your argument.

I'm not sure why you think a report tool shouldn't exist though, my understanding is that it was used to fast track tweets to be moderated as Twitter don't have enough employees to monitor them all.

Indeed. But, as I said: fascists are gonna fascist. What's better for fascists to gain power with a constitution like the United States? Government control of corporations, or corporate control of government? It's the second option. Twitter's elite had discretion on what they did - which is why they complied only with requests from their little fascist buddies. If any non-fascists tried to even the score, they'd beat them down with the US Constitution.
The report tool was used by both republicans and democrats (while they were either in or out of government) to highlight tweets that violated Twitters terms. It doesn't sound particularly fascist to want twitter to enforce it's terms, but if it is then both parties are facists. As is Twitter and Elon Musk for preventing Kanye posting swastikas.
 
Last edited by smf,

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
Indeed. But, as I said: fascists are gonna fascist. What's better for fascists to gain power with a constitution like the United States? Government control of corporations, or corporate control of government? It's the second option. Twitter's elite had discretion on what they did - which is why they complied only with requests from their little fascist buddies. If any non-fascists tried to even the score, they'd beat them down with the US Constitution.
The intersection of government and private business should be under non-stop scrutiny by the public at large. The state *shouldn’t be allowed* to suggest what content should be removed if there is no court ruling or warrant that makes the information unfit for dissemination. At present, there are precious few rules that restrict the government from influencing the flow of information online. In the past, when the government tried to influence what’s being printed (by private news corporations, I might add), the judiciary branch sided with the people. It is high time that social media reach the same point of reckoning. Nobody will convince me that such notifications weren’t considered to be threatening in nature if Twitter’s legal team was involved in the process - the possibility of being subject to legal repercussions must’ve been very real and on the table. From where I’m sitting, all I can see is a URL that the state wants to “go away” and a corporation going along with it. The tool very well may have been created in good faith, to allow the platform to better comply with the law, but I can’t help but feel that the danger and the potential for misuse is too great to ignore.
I'm not sure why you think a report tool shouldn't exist though, my understanding is that it was used to fast track tweets to be moderated as Twitter don't have enough employees to monitor them all.
That *is* the reason, the government has no business highlighting or fast-tracking anything in that space.
 
Last edited by Foxi4,

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,638
Trophies
2
XP
5,834
Country
United Kingdom
That *is* the reason, the government has no business highlighting or fast-tracking anything in that space.
Again, democrats weren't in government when the hunter biden tweets were reported.

It's dumb as fuck to say that as soon as you get into government you aren't allowed to report tweets that violate twitters terms of service.

This is just "L@@K Hunter Biden" crap.

Nobody will convince me that such notifications weren’t considered to be threatening in nature if Twitter’s legal team was involved in the process - the possibility of being subject to legal repercussions must’ve been very real and on the table. From where I’m sitting, all I can see is a URL that the state wants to “go away” and a corporation going along with it.
I've never noticed anyone convince you of anything ever.

Why do you imagine there must have been legal threats?
 
Last edited by smf,

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
Again, democrats weren't in government when the tweets were reported.

It's dumb as fuck to say that as soon as you get into government you aren't allowed to report tweets that violate twitters terms of service.
I don’t care which political party used the tool, I care that it exists and the state uses it. This isn’t about Trump or Biden, it’s about the state influencing moderation decisions with a dedicated tool explicitly created to highlight information the government wants to disappear from public discourse. Moderation decisions should be unbiased - a report made by a random user and a report made by the *government* do not carry the same weight.
 

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,638
Trophies
2
XP
5,834
Country
United Kingdom
I don’t care which political party used the tool, I care that it exists and the state uses it. This isn’t about Trump or Biden, it’s about the state influencing moderation decisions with a dedicated tool explicitly created to highlight information the government wants to disappear from public discourse. Moderation decisions should be unbiased - a report made by a random user and a report made by the *government* do not carry the same weight.
Decisions were unbiased, the reports could be made by democrats and republicans. Random users are idiots, it is ridiculous to suggest that everyone should have the same access. You might feel shitty because they have more power than you, well that's just life. That certainly isn't a 1st amendment issue.

You seem to be ignoring facts here.

WHEN THESE TWEETS WERE REPORTED, THE "STATE" WAS BUSY EATING CHICKEN WINGS AND GRABBING PUSSIES.

You'll be arguing Joe Biden can't call the cops to report a crime soon, because it's state interference. The police would feel threatened etc.
 
Last edited by smf,

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
Decisions were unbiased, the reports could be made by democrats and republicans.

WHEN THESE TWEETS WERE REPORTED, THE "STATE" WAS BUSY EATING CHICKEN WINGS AND GRABBING PUSSIES.
You can think that - my opinion on this is unshaken and will not change. The government shouldn’t be telling social media platforms which posts it thinks should be removed, for the same reason why it shouldn’t tell news agents which newspapers they should be selling or TV stations which programs they should be airing - that’s an interference in public discourse.

I’ve made my position abundantly clear and I have nothing to add on the subject. What I can say is that if I, as a moderator on this website, received a report from a verified government account regarding a specific post and requesting its removal, not because it’s illegal (by way of court injunction) or otherwise prohibited (various warrants, for instance based on an on-going trial) but because they don’t want it to be talked about, based on no law whatsoever, two things would happen. I would feel threatened, both personally, and as a member of staff, and I would consider it as an attempt to coerce me to remove information from the web. I certainly wouldn’t want to go along with it just because I’m told to, but I would feel pressure applied to my hand. That’s not acceptable. Thankfully, so far the most “legal” notifications we deal with are DMCA-based, and they’re usually clean cut. I hope I’ll never be put in a position of making this call - I would not wish to collaborate if I received such a request.
You'll be arguing Joe Biden can't call the cops to report a crime soon, because it's state interference. The police would feel threatened etc.
Crimes can and should be reported. On the flip side, if Joe Biden “called the police” and ordered them to “pacify” someone talking about something he didn’t like with no legal justification, yeah, I’d have a big problem with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tabzer

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,638
Trophies
2
XP
5,834
Country
United Kingdom
You can think that - my opinion on this is unshaken and will not change. The government shouldn’t be telling social media platforms which posts it thinks should be removed,
You're commenting on a thread about a situation when the government didn't tell social media platforms which they think should be removed. A point you repeatedly have refused to accept.

But you're entitled to your opinion, it doesn't mean it violates the 1st amendment.

All the made up stuff about legal threats doesn't help your argument either.

A DMCA takedown request and a "report tweet that violates twitter terms portal" are two entirely different things.

Your argument seems to be based around either misinterpreting or purposefully misrepresenting the facts & it's unclear why you would bother.
 
Last edited by smf,
  • Like
Reactions: THX4210

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
You're commenting on a thread about a situation when the government didn't tell social media platforms which they think should be removed. A point you repeatedly have refused to accept.

But you're entitled to your opinion, it doesn't mean it violates the 1st amendment.

All the made up stuff about legal threats doesn't help your argument either.

A DMCA takedown request and a "report tweet that violates twitter terms portal" are two entirely different things.
The report portal has an explicit function. I oppose that function. The details are almost immaterial - to me, it’s the existence of that pipeline that’s the big story. We’ve known about it for a while, and we know Facebook has a similar system - this story only offers a glimpse into how it is (mis)used. That’s all there is to it. It is a loaded gun, one that can be pointed at anyone for any reason, and the government should not be allowed to wield it. The government is not a “typical user” - deciding what does and does not violate rules set out by a private company is not its job and it cannot do so without the appearance of impropriety. If actual users find something worthy of reporting, they can do so - the government should not without an accompanying legal justification.

https://www.businessinsider.com/fac...-to-request-content-be-suppressed-2022-11?amp
 

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,638
Trophies
2
XP
5,834
Country
United Kingdom
The report portal has an explicit function. I oppose that function. The details are almost immaterial - to me, it’s the existence of that pipeline that’s the big story. We’ve known about it for a while, and we know Facebook has a similar system - this story only offers a glimpse into how it is (mis)used. That’s all there is to it. It is a loaded gun, one that can be pointed at anyone for any reason, and the government should not be allowed to wield it. The government is not a “typical user” - deciding what does and does not violate rules set out by a private company is not its job and it cannot do so without the appearance of impropriety. If actual users find something worthy of reporting, they can do so - the government should not without an accompanying legal justification.

https://www.businessinsider.com/fac...-to-request-content-be-suppressed-2022-11?amp
So you've known about it for a while, but you only think it's worth mentioning when hunter biden is attached to it.

The government isn't deciding whether it's does or does not violate the rules. The portal merely points the twitter employees at the tweets, the portal isn't limited to the government.

"actual users"? You mean you want any republican imbecile to be able to sit there reporting any tweet they don't like just to tie the twitter employees up in knots.

The issue with 1st amendment is it assumes the government are the bad guys and the normal people can't do any particular harm by talking. It's woefully outdated & if they were writing the constitution and amendments now they would write them differently for sure.
 

CommanderCool

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2020
Messages
275
Trophies
0
Age
105
XP
442
Country
United States
ok but once again: why do any of you give a shit about a piece of shit that is as shitty as fucking shit as the shit that is shitter?
 

sombrerosonic

Idiot machine
Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2022
Messages
1,453
Trophies
2
Location
The Tower of pizza
XP
2,880
Country
United States
Apparently... Republicans who scream "NO HOMO!" all the time, really -really- want to see Hutner's dick pics.
Only if he's in a sexy bikini
Post automatically merged:

Prove it.

oreo-cookie.gif
Aw fuck yea Oreo's. I like the Vannila ones better, the chocklate cookies are shit in my opinion

The only question i had is this, Why are people calling you all calling right winged people, "Nazi"?
 
Last edited by sombrerosonic,

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
So you've known about it for a while, but you only think it's worth mentioning when hunter biden is attached to it.
And I’ve had a problem with it for a while also. I don’t care about the specific story being memory holed, I care that the government has a pipeline it can use to influence moderators.
The government isn't deciding whether it's does or does not violate the rules. The portal merely points the twitter employees at the tweets, the portal isn't limited to the government.
The government shouldn’t be doing that, and should not be using the portal. That is not its job.
"actual users"? You mean you want any republican imbecile to be able to sit there reporting any tweet they don't like just to tie the twitter employees up in knots.
Actual users with actual accounts on the platform, not the government. I’ll ignore the rest of the statement since it’s make-believe.
The issue with 1st amendment is it assumes the government are the bad guys and the normal people can't do any particular harm by talking.
That’s not an “issue”, that’s a well-justified check on the power of the government. It shouldn’t, and was never intended to, control speech. Any attempts, no matter how minuscule, of exerting pressure on public discourse when no laws were violated should be squashed immediately.
It's woefully outdated & if they were writing the constitution and amendments now they would write them differently for sure.
There’s a built-in system for updating the Constitution, should it need updating. In the case of the 1st, it does not - the sentiment is pretty clear, and it’s “hands off”.
 

lolcatzuru

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2012
Messages
1,458
Trophies
1
XP
2,237
Country
United States


i dont need to, his son already did
Post automatically merged:

If there was actual evidence of that, then sure.

The way the republicans have acted over hunter biden's laptop makes me think there is nothing to see.


It's not. The speech was allowed, they weren't prosecuted for it. The first amendment doesn't say anything about deleting social media content.

again, there is, his son already said there was. Can i ask you something? why is it your team always becomes very disingenuous when their guy is heating up? you didnt need proof of a pee tape, or russian collusion for donnie, just said that makes sense, you have leaked emails from the son of the ( fake) president and suddenly thats not how it works anymore, can you explain that?
Post automatically merged:

The reporting system was used by democrats and republicans.
AFAICT it was voluntarily set up by Twitter.

Whether you think it's ok or not is irrelevant to whether it's a 1st amendment issue.

When the hunter biden tweet was removed in 2020, the democrats weren't in government. What "or else" are you imagining?

actually thats a lie, there were plenty of them in office.
 
Last edited by lolcatzuru,

tabzer

This place is a meme.
Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
5,844
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
4,910
Country
Japan
You clearly don't understand tampering.

What part of the legitimate news of the laptop being verified screams "tampering" to you, lol. You may just be in denial.

Now you're trying to assume shit and attempting defamation against me. People get sued over that shit, you know. Alex Jones is a fine example of that.

You said that you don't care about Biden's private life and you use phrasing that suggests that being a "cokehead" is the concern, and not the pedophilia. How else can that be interpreted? Let me know when people come knocking down your door saying, "tabzer sent me".
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Jayro

Xzi

Time to fly, 621
Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
17,714
Trophies
3
Location
The Lands Between
Website
gbatemp.net
XP
8,459
Country
United States
a report made by a random user and a report made by the *government* do not carry the same weight.
Ultimately it makes no difference though, it's up to the business in question whether they follow through on any given report. Even Musk can't afford to have conservatives plastering Hunter's dick pics all over Twitter. There's always going to be a need for a line drawn in the sand, and new Twitter is slowly working itself back to the exact same place old Twitter was in that regard.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: tabzer

tabzer

This place is a meme.
Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
5,844
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
4,910
Country
Japan
That's right Xzi, there is no reason why anyone should just trust government or institutional agents over anyone else. The responsibility falls solely on the person who commits the action.
 

lolcatzuru

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2012
Messages
1,458
Trophies
1
XP
2,237
Country
United States
Ultimately it makes no difference though, it's up to the business in question whether they follow through on any given report. Even Musk can't afford to have conservatives plastering Hunter's dick pics all over Twitter. There's always going to be a need for a line drawn in the sand, and new Twitter is slowly working itself back to the exact same place old Twitter was in that regard.

mind if i screen shot this in 6 months when you are reeing that he once again made your god look bad?
 

Jayro

MediCat USB Dev
Developer
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
12,884
Trophies
4
Location
WA State
Website
ko-fi.com
XP
16,775
Country
United States
You said that you don't care about Biden's private life and you use phrasing that suggests that being a "cokehead" is the concern, and not the pedophilia.
I've seen the photos of him with the crack cocaine.Nobody's come forward with the pedo evidence. That's why.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    He said he had 3 different doctors apt this week, so he prob there. Something about gerbal extraction, I don't know.
    +1
  • ZeroT21 @ ZeroT21:
    bored, guess i'll spread more democracy
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    @K3Nv2 one more time you say such bs to @BakerMan and I'll smack you across the whole planet
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Make sure you smack my booty daddy
    +1
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    telling him that my partner is luke...does he look like someone with such big ne
    eds?
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    do you really think I could stand living with someone like luke?
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    I suppose luke has "special needs" but he's not my partner, did you just say that to piss me off again?
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    besides I had bigger worries today
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    but what do you know about that, you won't believe me anyways
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    @BigOnYa can answer that
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    BigOnYa already left the chat
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Biginya
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    Auto correct got me, I'm on my tablet, i need to turn that shit off
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    With other tabs open you perv
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    I'm actually in my shed, bout to cut 2-3 acres of grass, my back yard.
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    I use to have a guy for that thanks richard
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    I use my tablet to stream to a bluetooth speaker when in shed. iHeartRadio, FlyNation
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    While the victims are being buried
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Grave shovel
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    Nuh those goto the edge of the property (maybe just on the other side of)
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    On the neighbors side
    +1
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    Yup, by the weird smelly green bushy looking plants.
  • Xdqwerty @ Xdqwerty:
    Water park was quite fun
    Xdqwerty @ Xdqwerty: Water park was quite fun