James Woods banned by Twitter because...... drum roll......

[Pavlov]

No. People have a reasonable expectation that their ideologies aren't going to be suppressed when using Twitter.

lol still making up.

Cite the law you think applies here, derp.

[Blake]

lol still making up.

Avante's ideology shouldn't have been suppressed!!

[ElNono]

No. People have a reasonable expectation that their ideologies aren't going to be suppressed when using Twitter.

Sorry to disappoint, but that is simply false.

[SnakeBoy]

James Wood is no different than your average panelist/guest in CNN/Fox News. They're going to opine what they can, sometimes they're gonna get their microphone shut down, sometimes they'll cut them off to commercials, sometimes they won't let them talk.

Can you sue CNN or Fox for that? No you can't. It's a private business, it's their platform and part of the condition of being on their platform is that you're going to stick to their rules and decisions.

The only gray area (not that gray, it's actually enforceable) is outright protected class discrimination. You know, sex, religion, race, national origin, etc.

The others are news services and twitter/fb/etc. are just platforms. I don't remember the details but I've heard/read arguments that they are (or could be) jeopardizing their "platform" status which would make them subject to different rules & regulations, namely legal liability for the things that are posted on their sites.

[Pavlov]

The others are news services and twitter/fb/etc. are just platforms. I don't remember the details but I've heard/read arguments that they are (or could be) jeopardizing their "platform" status which would make them subject to different rules & regulations, namely legal liability for the things that are posted on their sites.

that would mean it would be their duty under the law to ban James Woods.

[Spurtacular]

What law are you referring to. Quit stalling.

lol still making up.

Cite the law you think applies here, derp.

You gots pretending this is a law board.

[Spurtacular]

Sorry to disappoint, but that is simply false.

Not at all. Unfair business practices are routinely thwarted in the courts.

[Pavlov]

You gots pretending this is a law board.

you've been pretending you have a legal argument all along, counselor.

lol derp

[Pavlov]

Not at all. Unfair business practices are routinely thwarted in the courts.

still pretending you have a legal argument

[Spurtacular]

Sociopath telling me his truth, over and over.

[Pavlov]

Sociopath telling me his truth, over and over.

every time you are asked to explain your legal argument you curl up in a ball and cry out buzzwords hoping we'll leave you alone.

You have no idea what you are talking about and you prove it every time you are called out.

[Blake]

Not at all. Unfair business practices are routinely thwarted in the courts.

Great, show one of these cases. One.

[Blake]

You gots pretending this is a law board.

It's your argument, stupid.

[Spurtacular]

every time you are asked to explain your legal argument you curl up in a ball and cry out buzzwords hoping we'll leave you alone.

You have no idea what you are talking about and you prove it every time you are called out.

I won't serve as a paralegal for a sociopath, so I must be lying.

[Pavlov]

I won't serve as a paralegal for a sociopath, so I must be lying.

You abandon every legal argument you try to make, so you have no legal argument.

And you curl up into a ball and cry out buzzwords every time you are called out, so you have no legal argument.

[Spurtacular]

You abandon every legal argument you try to make, so you have no legal argument.

And you curl up into a ball and cry out buzzwords every time you are called out, so you have no legal argument.

Nothing's abandoned. I'm not a sociopath's free paralegal.

[Pavlov]

Nothing's abandoned. I'm not a sociopath's free paralegal.

buzzword

What is your argument?

[Blake]

Nothing's abandoned. I'm not a sociopath's free paralegal.

Your claim of a potential lawsuit is stupid. You're talking out of your ass.

[Spurtacular]

Hens

[Pavlov]

Hens

buzzwords

What is your argument again besides stamping your feet and crying "Twitter unfair!"?

[Blake]

Hens

re ed chicken

[ElNono]

The others are news services and twitter/fb/etc. are just platforms. I don't remember the details but I've heard/read arguments that they are (or could be) jeopardizing their "platform" status which would make them subject to different rules & regulations, namely legal liability for the things that are posted on their sites.

That's why I explicitly mentioned panelists/guests (which one could argue are not journalists per se, so they wouldn't be afforded freedom of the press rights). At the end of the day, an opinion from James Woods on twitter or Fox News is not really different.

What you're thinking about are the DMCA Safe Harbor provisions and Section 230 of the CDA (Communications Decency Act). As far as I know so far, the only exception is for online pedo porn.

[ElNono]

Not at all. Unfair business practices are routinely thwarted in the courts.

When they are illegal. There's simply no law thwarting Twitter from having and enforcing their TOS.

[Spurtacular]

When they are illegal. There's simply no law thwarting Twitter from having and enforcing their TOS.

Provided its done fairly and not in a discriminatory manner. That is not what Twitter and others are doing.

[Spurtacular]

buzzwords

What is your argument again besides stamping your feet and crying "Twitter unfair!"?

Your response to using a word for the first time.
buzzwords is your new white flag.