(08-06-2018 02:09 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 02:03 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  So what is the endgame to all of this, folks ?

I have a feeling at what it is, and I don't think any of us are going to like it.

Fox News will be next.

Obama tried to censor them without success.

(08-06-2018 03:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  Anyone who follows and accepts CNN's vitriol as fact is a hair-brained dingus who is probably also believes man never went to the moon.

https://twitter.com/ELITESTARDUST/status...5915729922

CAPTIVE AUDIENCE

(08-06-2018 02:47 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 02:44 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  So all this time I’ve been hearing the answer to all problems is the free market and that if companies start doing things that are bad competition will spring up to force it to be better or drive them out of business. Always that government should stay out of it entirely and this capitalist utopia will make things perfect. Now all of a sudden someone needs to step in and force a private company to do something they don’t want to. Cry me a river.

I think what you are hearing, and it's what concerns me, is the equal application of private company's policies. If Alex Jones said something that is deserving of a permanent ban, EVERYBODY else that has said that same thing or it's equivalent should receive the same ban.

The issue is the near monopoly these platforms have as well as the coordinated action. If there are many options, its not an issue.

To have a free market, you need some regulation of monopolies and oligopolies. What is unfortunate, is that many industries now seem to be trending toward oligopolies with only 2 or 3 players.

(08-06-2018 03:09 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:03 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 02:57 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Sure seems to be, if you can’t logically see this is the same basic principle of that cake douche telling the gay couple to take a hike. So are you saying that was wrong and he should be forced to do something he fundamentally finds repulsive?

does it apply to immutable characteristics ...

NOT SO FAST MY FRIEND

Don't spoil my fun dammit. We were just started down the garden path.

Lol

he refuses to answer the question ...

SILENCE SPEAKS VOLUMES

(08-06-2018 03:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 02:47 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 02:44 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  So all this time I’ve been hearing the answer to all problems is the free market and that if companies start doing things that are bad competition will spring up to force it to be better or drive them out of business. Always that government should stay out of it entirely and this capitalist utopia will make things perfect. Now all of a sudden someone needs to step in and force a private company to do something they don’t want to. Cry me a river.

I think what you are hearing, and it's what concerns me, is the equal application of private company's policies. If Alex Jones said something that is deserving of a permanent ban, EVERYBODY else that has said that same thing or it's equivalent should receive the same ban.

The issue is the near monopoly these platforms have as well as the coordinated action. If there are many options, its not an issue.

To have a free market, you need some regulation of monopolies and oligopolies. What is unfortunate, is that many industries now seem to be trending toward oligopolies with only 2 or 3 players.

So net neutrality is a bad thing since there are so few options in so many parts of the county for an essential service?

(08-06-2018 03:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  Anyone who follows and accepts CNN's vitriol as fact is a hair-brained dingus who is probably also believes man never went to the moon.

You would not believe the amount of people that think we never went to the moon. It is staggering the amount of idiots. In my experience, it has mostly been 20 somethings that think we never went.

(08-06-2018 03:13 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:09 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:03 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 02:57 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Sure seems to be, if you can’t logically see this is the same basic principle of that cake douche telling the gay couple to take a hike. So are you saying that was wrong and he should be forced to do something he fundamentally finds repulsive?

does it apply to immutable characteristics ...

NOT SO FAST MY FRIEND

Don't spoil my fun dammit. We were just started down the garden path.

Lol

he refuses to answer the question ...

SILENCE SPEAKS VOLUMES

Which side is an immutable characteristic in your opinion the bakers religion or the couples sexual orientation?

(08-06-2018 02:06 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 02:00 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 01:58 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  My thought process on this is real simple, if you support the rights of businesses like that cake guy and Hobby Lobby to make choices about how they want to run their private businesses then don’t cry now. This is the logical step from those decisions. You can’t force someone to bake a cake for a gay couple simply because he thinks that’s vile, well those companies think infowars is vile and don’t want to allow their services to spread those views. Either you can force companies to do things they don’t want or you can’t, pick a side and stick with it.

False argument. There is no monopoly on cake making businesses. Apple/Youtube/Facebook, etc.. have a monopoly on electronic/social media.

You can create your own social networking/video sharing platform if you'd like. No one is stopping you. Now, you might have to incur greater costs to get the same good, the option open to you might be inferior, there might not be enough of a customer base to make it commercially viable (or you late entry into the market might be much more expensive than that of the original entrants), and you might have to delay or alter what you were planning to do, but no one is stopping you from doing it.

Besides those companies have TOCs that cover stuff like Jones' rants too. You agreed to it when you hit their page. See he agreed, right. And they are just putting their values into practice by refusing to do business with people who behave poorly on their property.

See no discrimination. There's no monopoly either.

Actually, according to Obama's logic, FB, YT, Tw didn't create their social network/video sharing services on their own.

I mean, Al Gore had to invent the internet using the tax dollars of Joe American. The networking hardware & software, the computers, telephony, etc... these all were part of FB, YT and Tw.

They didn't do it on their own. By this logic, they owe their existence to AJ, and you and me and everyone else.

Which, I might add, is why we should nationalize these companies, take their reserves and their profits and split their massive fortune among all of us workers. After all, it's our backs upon which their fortunes are built!

(08-06-2018 03:25 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:13 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:09 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:03 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 02:57 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Sure seems to be, if you can’t logically see this is the same basic principle of that cake douche telling the gay couple to take a hike. So are you saying that was wrong and he should be forced to do something he fundamentally finds repulsive?

does it apply to immutable characteristics ...

NOT SO FAST MY FRIEND

Don't spoil my fun dammit. We were just started down the garden path.

Lol

he refuses to answer the question ...

SILENCE SPEAKS VOLUMES

Which side is an immutable characteristic in your opinion the bakers religion or the couples sexual orientation?

Which one is right?

(08-06-2018 03:25 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:13 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:09 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:03 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 02:57 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Sure seems to be, if you can’t logically see this is the same basic principle of that cake douche telling the gay couple to take a hike. So are you saying that was wrong and he should be forced to do something he fundamentally finds repulsive?

does it apply to immutable characteristics ...

NOT SO FAST MY FRIEND

Don't spoil my fun dammit. We were just started down the garden path.

Lol

he refuses to answer the question ...

SILENCE SPEAKS VOLUMES

Which side is an immutable characteristic in your opinion the bakers religion or the couples sexual orientation?

you really don't understand the difference.....

one could argue brick and mortar vs. the ethereal is synonymous....but you'd be wrong....

there's a difference between religious rights vs.monopolizing the media that is the internutz.....

hopefully congress and the SCOTUS will help move that along quick like....

this was all part of the equation going in when DJT picked the fight with the MSM.....people like you simply tend to focus on the tidbits and knee-jerk yourselves to death......

hell, that's why I come here exclusively.....too many of y'all crack me the fk up.....

this board is a hodge-podge of porridge, pudding, and pie.....

(08-06-2018 03:25 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Which side is an immutable characteristic in your opinion the bakers religion or the couples sexual orientation?

freedom of religion enshrined in the bill of rights ...

FRAMEWORK

(08-06-2018 03:38 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:25 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:13 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:09 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:03 PM)green Wrote:  does it apply to immutable characteristics ...

NOT SO FAST MY FRIEND

Don't spoil my fun dammit. We were just started down the garden path.

Lol

he refuses to answer the question ...

SILENCE SPEAKS VOLUMES

Which side is an immutable characteristic in your opinion the bakers religion or the couples sexual orientation?

you really don't understand the difference.....

one could argue brick and mortar vs. the ethereal is synonymous....but you'd be wrong....

there's a difference between religious rights vs.monopolizing the media that is the internutz.....

hopefully congress and the SCOTUS will help move that along quick like....

this was all part of the equation going in when DJT picked the fight with the MSM.....people like you simply tend to focus on the tidbits and knee-jerk yourselves to death......

hell, that's why I come here exclusively.....too many of y'all crack me the fk up.....

this board is a hodge-podge of porridge, pudding, and pie.....

So it’s completely impossible to start a competeing social media platform or video streaming service? So net neutrality is bad because monopolies are bad?

The mistake is assuming that just because it is called "net neutrality," it is actually about net neutrality.

(08-06-2018 03:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 02:47 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 02:44 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  So all this time I’ve been hearing the answer to all problems is the free market and that if companies start doing things that are bad competition will spring up to force it to be better or drive them out of business. Always that government should stay out of it entirely and this capitalist utopia will make things perfect. Now all of a sudden someone needs to step in and force a private company to do something they don’t want to. Cry me a river.

I think what you are hearing, and it's what concerns me, is the equal application of private company's policies. If Alex Jones said something that is deserving of a permanent ban, EVERYBODY else that has said that same thing or it's equivalent should receive the same ban.

The issue is the near monopoly these platforms have as well as the coordinated action. If there are many options, its not an issue.

To have a free market, you need some regulation of monopolies and oligopolies. What is unfortunate, is that many industries now seem to be trending toward oligopolies with only 2 or 3 players.

This is where we differ a bit. I don't care if there are 2-3 players or 50 just so long as each player applies their standards evenly.

(08-06-2018 03:42 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:25 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Which side is an immutable characteristic in your opinion the bakers religion or the couples sexual orientation?

freedom of religion enshrined in the bill of rights ...

FRAMEWORK

So if a cake baker were a member of the Church of Satan and turned away a couple who wanted a cake with a bible passage on it because it's against his religious beliefs is that ok?

(08-06-2018 04:00 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:42 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:25 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Which side is an immutable characteristic in your opinion the bakers religion or the couples sexual orientation?

freedom of religion enshrined in the bill of rights ...

FRAMEWORK

So if a cake baker were a member of the Church of Satan and turned away a couple who wanted a cake with a bible passage on it because it's against his religious beliefs is that ok?

That's the problem with so many of you liberals. You think small. You are obsessed with hole in the wall pastry shops while Fahrenheit 451 is being set up all around you.

(08-06-2018 04:00 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  So if a cake baker were a member of the Church of Satan and turned away a couple who wanted a cake with a bible passage on it because it's against his religious beliefs is that ok?

answer my question first ...

OK

(08-06-2018 01:04 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 12:59 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  INFOWARS has become the first book to be burned by the media's FAHRENHEIT 451 order.

Again, you are welcome to raise 20 billion bucks to build a duplicative ISP network and spend an equal amount to build and promote video sharing and social networking platforms. Its a free market right? No one is banning his speech, they're simply refusing to promote it on their platforms.

Seriously though, he'll just move his schtick over to OAN and RT. They just don't have the viewers and members and his speech will be further marginalized. You wont be able to share his garbage on fb or on your youtube channel.

Don't Alex Jones supporters have some sort of video networking platform?

I don't have a dog in this hunt and IMO this guy was a potential liability for the right headed into the midterms. So if he's gone so be it. However I think the concern here is how a public service like the internet can be controlled by private policy rather than by constitutional access.

IMO that should concern both the left and the right because it means potentially it could be manipulated easily and beyond government control.

As for OAN, they are wholly independent and I doubt they have a thing to do with this guy. I find OAN useful. They cover angles that the mainline news won't. So taken as a whole they help to inform the news regardless of bias. By the way the best news out there comes from the Japanese channel. No editorial comment just information from both sides of the issue. Kudos to the Japanese News!

(08-06-2018 04:02 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 04:00 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  So if a cake baker were a member of the Church of Satan and turned away a couple who wanted a cake with a bible passage on it because it's against his religious beliefs is that ok?

answer my question first ...

OK

Is your question is religion an immutable characteristic? Is your question are youtube and Facebook monopolies? Ask your question clearly and I'll happily answer it.

(08-06-2018 03:44 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:38 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:25 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:13 PM)green Wrote:  

(08-06-2018 03:09 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Don't spoil my fun dammit. We were just started down the garden path.

Lol

he refuses to answer the question ...

SILENCE SPEAKS VOLUMES

Which side is an immutable characteristic in your opinion the bakers religion or the couples sexual orientation?

you really don't understand the difference.....

one could argue brick and mortar vs. the ethereal is synonymous....but you'd be wrong....

there's a difference between religious rights vs.monopolizing the media that is the internutz.....

hopefully congress and the SCOTUS will help move that along quick like....

this was all part of the equation going in when DJT picked the fight with the MSM.....people like you simply tend to focus on the tidbits and knee-jerk yourselves to death......

hell, that's why I come here exclusively.....too many of y'all crack me the fk up.....

this board is a hodge-podge of porridge, pudding, and pie.....

So it’s completely impossible to start a competeing social media platform or video streaming service? So net neutrality is bad because monopolies are bad?

tell me how that's different than ma bell vs. the major internutz players.....

toss in the overwhelming evidence of prejudicial design relative to freedom of speech......

I'm all fk'n ears....