Was youtube right to remove the controversial video featuring Joe Roagan...

@ElwoodBlues was it illegal information?

@Notanymore No more illegal than a gay wedding cake. But if businesses can refuse a gay wedding cake because they find it distasteful, there's plenty more they can refuse, right?

@ElwoodBlues so business should be free tonserve whom they want? That's completely against the left agenda. But lets maintain that!

@Notanymore Nope. I think that's a very dangerous precedent SCOTUS set there.

Harmful misinformation is different from refusal to serve a group, however.

@ElwoodBlues who decides harmful information?

@Notanymore Under Sec 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the platform has that right. For a primer, see https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/section-230-the-internet-law-politicians-love-to-hate-explained/

@ElwoodBlues I have no idea what you're trying to convey with that

@Notanymore I'm trying to convey that the history of sec 230 is to allow "family friendly" platforms to censor "adult" content without fear of First Amendment concerns. Censorship of things like "adult" content is thus foundational to social media.

@ElwoodBlues if joe rogan is censored as adult and some of the other horseshot that trends on YouTube is fine there's a problem

@Notanymore "Adult" content is just one form of censorship allowed by Sec 230. You could set up a gerbil lovers' site and censor all non-gerbil content.

What it really comes down to is Sec 230 assumes that if a market for a particular kind of platform exists, capitalism will supply the need. Thus if Rogan is unhappy with one platform, he can switch to another or start his own. Capitalism is foundational to the internet too.

In fact, I believe SCOTUS had a nod towards capitalism in their gay wedding cake decision - the buyer could seek out another baker, or something like that.

@ElwoodBlues okay. Let's all agree that businesses can chose who they cater to and call it a night. Fair?

@Notanymore No. Not all businesses have Sec 230 protection. And I suspect there's an expectation that Sec 230 businesses have to have some consistency with their terms of service rules; they can't just make them up as they go along and switch them arbitrarily.

It is an odd thing that all the successful social media platforms and hosting platforms are run by what Trumpsters consider "leftists." It's odd that the Rupert Murdochs and Koch Bros of the world haven't even attempted to build a platform for "their people."

Another odd thing is that the immediate solution proposed by Trumpsters for de-platforming is ultimately strict intrusive government regulations on the platforms. These formerly anti-regulation folks want to be able to say "this is how you have to run your platform, otherwise you're in legal hot water." And of course if there is a solution to businesses moving all their manufacturing offshore, it's ultimately going to take the form of strict intrusive government regulations. Has unregulated capitalism led us to an untenable situation?

@ElwoodBlues I'm sorry the user you're trying to bore into submission is no longer interested in hearing your long winded rants about why you're right and smarter than the average bear boo boo! If you wish to talk about something interesting, please choose a topic that you have fucked through the mattress already.

@Notanymore How about we just spend 30 seconds feeling sorry for right-wingers who have painted themselves into so many corners recently? Nah, they're too busy feeling sorry for themselves; they wouldn't even notice!

@ElwoodBlues god bless you, you poor neurotic little man.

@Notanymore Yes, ask me about complex questions and then whine that the answers are complex; whatever makes you feel good!!

@ElwoodBlues I don't recall asking, if I asjed, I got the same answers over and over regardless of stating my own opinions which differ from yours. I respectfully adked to agree that we wouldn't see eye to eye, yet here we are.....surprisingly still.....do you talk about anything interesting, or is your bullshit allocated to political bias?

@Notanymore From my perspective, you asked about the rules & ethics of "deplatforming." When the answers started getting longer than a tweet, you asked me to agree to an inaccurate overly simplistic summary. And then dismissed my response as "boring."

@ElwoodBlues okay. Here's a question.....how long jas this conversation went on?

@Notanymore Dunno. Like many text based conversations it's had many pauses while other things occur.

@ElwoodBlues well....my assessment is too long for something so petty.