Twitter moderator ?

[VitaMan]

Now that it is private, and all about free speech, who will they get to moderate that ?

Already rumblings about hate speech.

It is very similar to this site. 10% of the members make 90% of the postings.

[oilfieldace]

I recommend Trump as Moderator, he is Fair and Balanced

[WTF]

He'd grab'em by the pussy

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

Now that it is private, and all about free speech, who will they get to moderate that ?

Already rumblings about hate speech.

It is very similar to this site. 10% of the members make 90% of the postings.

I nominate biomed1 to moderate.









Let's Go Astros!

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

Now that it is private, and all about free speech, who will they get to moderate that ?

Already rumblings about hate speech.

It is very similar to this site. 10% of the members make 90% of the postings.

Musk has already said certain things won't be allowed. no death threats or other things that are clearly illegal the first amendment notwithstanding. not everything can be said under the blanket of free speech. Muskrat knows this. he's about allowing free speech to a certain point but most importantly he's about not suppressing one political side at the behest of the other and that's exactly what happened on twitter.


case in point 1 - The NY Post getting their official account suspended over the Hunter Biden laptop story. and being told the account would only be restored if they deleted the post and the link to the story. to their credit the NY Post did not back down and twittybird backed down. of course the story remained up on their site which they control.


case in point 2 - Alex Berenson who had his twittybird account permanently banned for posting about the covid vaccine and it's side effects. turns out he was right all along, there are serious potential sides effects and they are happening in far larger numbers than the FDA and big pharma want reported. and the fact that it's not effective in stopping transmission at all which Pfizer recently had to admit they didn't even test for despite the fact that they, the FDA and flatulent Fauci all publicly touted as one reason to get the vaccine.


Berenson based his posts on studies from reputable research many of it from Israel and it's all turned out to be true yet labeled "misinformation" because the powers that be making billions off this didn't want the truth to come out.

[VitaMan]

Let's see. Free speech and suppressing free speech by making rules is a rocky road.

On the other hand Mr. Musk seems to have a golden touch.

[farmstud60]

Actually the stories about Covid=19 and "following the science" should scare anyone that likes actual data. I farm and have been involved with life science my entire life. The one thing that is a guarantee is that there are no black and white answers in life sciences.


Take the case of vaccines. There has never been a 100% safe vaccine with no side effects for 100% of the people. Same can be said with animals. Side effects are often small and a very small percentage might be affected. The risk to reward ratio makes the vaccine a logical choice.


The problem with Covid-19 is the the "official" line really wasn't very accurate. When it was first spreading, it was obvious that a large percentage of people had no symptoms for very mild symptoms. The extreme cases were a small percentage, but they certainly were in the hospital for several months and some died.


I was also talking to a college friend who had a daughter that came down with Covid-19 at Thanksgiving, and she was helping her Mom cook food and around most of the immediate family for 3 days before she actually got confirmation it was Covid-19. Of twelve to 14 people she was around and definitely were exposed, none got it.


So instead of being honest and that they really didn't know what was going on with the virus, the "experts" went all control mode instead of being honest

[ICU 812]

There is free speech and there is hate speech. Here on this forum, the mods seem to keep the discussion about ideas and concepts, not personalities.

I think something like that can be made to work on other platforms as well. It is one thing to state that someone is a no-good whatever-ist or something-tard. It is another to show that that politician is not worthy of their office because of x-y and Z.

We seem to be able to do that here, there must be ways do similar things elsewhere on the internet.