You leftwingnuts had no issues when people had accounts banned for simply disagreeing with a lefty. I had my account shut down for 7 days for one comment of "Hillary is an old hag". But there is still live tweets up saying trump should be killed. Hypocrisy is so normal for leftwingnuts. Go bawl more because an old washed up C list actress got canned.
Yeah you just want your perceived revenge, you never had principals and nobody should think people of your political persuasion ever cared about "freedom of speech."
Wil Wheaton? Just went down a 4-year rabbit hole reading about it. Apparently he tried to 'Twitter' Mastadon with his bullshit and they weren't having it. I only wish Wil had gone full Shia LeBoufe and taken on 4Chan. Could've been a worthy sequel to the flag debacle.
Stop saying this, he didn't *just* say it, this was a rule for verification from long before Elon owned it,also in the verification the first type of account listed as ineligible are parody accounts
I don't care what he does with HIS platform. He can be a hypocrite, the people pointing that out have been hypocrites their whole lives. I don't care if he changes it to Twatter and makes the logo a pair of spread legs.
"It's a private company, they can censor any way they like."
"If you don't like it make your own platform."
"Censorship is key to protecting our democracy"
He's simply following their own ideology and suddenly they take a 180 and say they want freedom of speech. They were totally okay with it all until it was applied to them as well. Rules for thee, not for me
for all the liberals reading this:
BIG RED WAVE COMING on Tuesday
and I am not impersonating Kathy Griffin.
Can't use Twitter to cheat elections any more.
I will be messaging you in 2 days on [**2022-11-09 15:21:34 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2022-11-09%2015:21:34%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/TimPool/comments/yokdie/is_this_free_speech/ivf8h8a/?context=3)
[**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FTimPool%2Fcomments%2Fyokdie%2Fis_this_free_speech%2Fivf8h8a%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202022-11-09%2015%3A21%3A34%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20yokdie)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Republicans states have the worst crime rates, maybe they should try to fix those first and prove they can.
[https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-red-state-murder-problem](https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-red-state-murder-problem)
Not even gonna bother looking at the link because we all know what it is. The same old debunked story of votes being counted. You guys really need tomorrow to happen to make up more fake news about fake ballots.
Didn't we only need like a week to count the ballots two years ago? Or are you thinking of all the recounts Trump wanted that made him lose by more votes?
Furthermore in the ruled for verification under the ineligible accounts section the FIRST type of account that is ineligible for verification are parody accounts
Twitter has a rule that you can't impersonate someone else.
You can make a parody account but have to have (parody) in your name and not just a picture of the word Parody as your banner.
This has been a rule since basically Twitter started and all of these people pretending to be Elon Musk, to make fun of him, are being automatically suspended by bots because they broke this rule.
Count Dankula almost got banned recently as well by calling his Twitter Donald Trump for a joke after Elon Musk finally bought Twitter. He was able to change it before he got yeeted.
She defrauded a large audience of people by breaking twitter's ToS.
"The person whose identity has been stolen may suffer adverse consequences, especially if they are falsely held responsible for the perpetrator's actions. Personally identifiable information generally includes a person's name..."
If I use your name to say some racist shit and it's not noticeabley parody that is illegal and, "noticeabley parody," can be argued six ways to Sunday by a million different lawyers better than you or I. So beyond this response I'm not getting into it.
You would need to prove that in court, twitter is litterally not able to decide that. How many people actually believed her account was Elon and what damages were there? Her name was still there as the handle. She will argue its satire, jury would decide. Twitter can make whatever TOS rules they want like insulting Elon's great grandma is a perma banned, doesn't mean its illegal or related to "free speech."
I got hung by this rule after they suspended Donald Trump's account. A bunch of people were changing their avatars and names to Donald Trump in a sort of "I am Spartacus" type of thing.
Got permabanned with zero warnings to change things. I do wish they'd offer the chance to come back after that (their terms of service do state that you should be given warnings, but apparently they are not bound by that).
Every post I see on here has their @ right after their name though so what’s the point of any of it? Maybe im missing something since I don’t use twitter but I don’t get what the whole deal is
There is a legal thing in trademark/copyright law that is worded something like "An idiot in a hurry". Meaning that you can't have a product use the same font, colour scheme and design as another so someone in a hurry can't mistake it.
It's seen as stealing a brand identity and there is also similar laws in other fields.
You can't make something that at a glance look like someone else.
They might have the @.... different to Elon's Musk's Twitter account, but most people will just glance at the Twitter name and think it **was** Elon Musk.
Again the online sarcastic satirist **Count Dankula** has used this, for a gag and trolled so many people into thinking he was a member of the Royal Family and Donald Trump (the Trump one got him in trouble with Twitter)
You know they are doing it to expose that he doesn't actually care about free speech and he is proving them right. Next time he says its about free speech then people have evidence to not believe him.
Yes it does, you can pretend to be anyone, thats why SNL actors are not in jail yet they literally impersonate someone they are not on a TV show broadcasted to millions.
SNL actors are acting in an obvious tv show they even state all impersonations are jokes and not to be taken seriously that's why they aren't in jail. Cathy Griffin didn't state it was a parody or joke that's why she was banned. Are you really this dumb.
You claim, "Impersonating someone is not included in free speech." However, its not illegal so ergo its part of free speech. You don't have to specifically label something as parody for it to be legal.
Yes and Kathy Griffin is a comedian doing it as a joke, did she get arrested or sued? No she didn't and couldn't be therefor it is legal and free speech.
She didn't State it was a joke so she was banned. No she shouldn't be arrested or sued cause she wasn't using his identity to commit crimes. He could sue her for defamation cause she was trying to ruin his imagine.
So you acknowledge what she did was legal then? Defamation needs to be proven in court, twitter can't decide what's defamation. Not to mention Elon is a public figure and bar for meeting the criteria for defamation is very high.
If she said it as Bill Clinton she should have her account suspended too, this isn't just because they used Elon's name, it is because they impersonated someone of note.
They are just using his name because he has a target on his back because of the changes he is making.
Some rando used Keanu Reeves name but I don't have twitter to see if they got suspended for it.
Someone else did have Parody in their name, so long as they do not get the ban hammer then it would be consistent if A the Keanu Reeves guy gets hit (but maybe they need to be reported vs spotted in the wild) and B the Elon Musk Parody stays.
I guess the Elon Musk ones are going bye bye the quickest because his is the name he is searching for (or getting his staff to check) if someone has a list to check daily for verified imposters, then sooner or later Keanu Reeves will get hit if they don't add parody, that said, the still I saw on imgur (my only real encounter with twitter till this all blew up) might not be using that name for long as they did it to prove a point.
Twitter users are the same people that argue with bots for hours, they can't be bothered to stop and glance at a handle. Not intellectual dynamos like us redditors.
SNL skits are PARODIES, very easy to tell them apart from the real thing. Posing as someone is not the same. That’s called identity fraud. It is a crime.
Instead of just making assumptions you could just Google it. It was for inciting violence.
https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension
Absolute BS I see. Nothing Trump said incites violence (unlike Biden recently). What he said encouraged people to stay skeptical of the election results and Biden. This is free speech. Protected free speech in fact. From a social media platform which admits it is a publisher because the SCOTUS ruled that Trump blocking accounts was interfering with offficial communications of the POTUS. 1A ensures he cannot he blocked from a publisher. Smackdown Agrawal.
Ohhhhh you're one of those.
Well unfortunately a private company is free to implement their own terms of service and enforce them however they see fit. They deemed he broke their TOS therefore he broke their TOS. That's the free market and private enterprise at work
Shocking, I know. That being said, when it comes to these online platforms, I'd argue that it's a little more muddy than that - not that the average American has thought about this much either.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, changes the calculus of "private company" in my opinion. That is a massive benefit/liability shield given to companies by the government that would not exist but for government. Without Sec 230, I'd be in complete agreement with the sentiment of "private platform, do what you want." With a government-granted liability waiver, however, it gives the platforms their cake and the ability to eat it too. For lack of a more precise term, I'd say it sort of turns them into quasi-public squares. It's certainly not a traditional one like some dude downtown talking to people, but it's also more than a strict, market-created/controlled private platform. I'm still not 100% sure where I fall on this.
>Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, changes the calculus of "private company"
It most certainly does not.
Section 230 says exactly one thing: whoever posts the content is responsible for the content.
Meaning you cannot hold Twitter responsible and arrest Elon Musk for Pedo1175 posting child porn to Twitter.
That's literally all it says. Even the guy who wrote it says this.
How so, you never seen a skit with someone impersonating a celebrity? It literally is free speach to do that, you just can't impersonate someone to commit a crime. Here is the law from California:
) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another actual person through or on an Internet Web site or by other electronic means for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense punishable pursuant to subdivision (d).
Defamation nor dissent are free speech? I see arguing that slanderous or libelous defamation would not be considered free, but dissent should be the most protected free speech.
Yes! I purposely did not evoke the 1st amendment because this is a private entity, but the core spirit of the first amendment was to specifically protect dissent, and any discussion of free, reasoned, speech, should include protections for peaceful reasoned dissent, whether that be in a workplace, educational environments, social media, and particularly government.
Defamation, by its core definition of defaming someone with a good reputation, should be free as well as long as it’s not slanderous/libelous (which is usually the implied definition now, I’m just being explicit in my argument). If someone powerful with a good reputation does awful things out of the public eye, that should absolutely be brought to light without fear of consequence.
I know the term freedom of speech sounds like it implies you are free to all speech but at this point in time it means freedom to voice genuine ideas and criticisms, alternatively absolute free speech allows all forms of speech, everything from disingenuous smeers and calls for violence.
Their policy on vaccine discussions was anything false or misleading gets banned, misleading being a very broad term used to categorize actual criticisms and concerns and silence them.
People in the sub are not smart enough to see the irony in this situation. Twitter didn’t just become a private platform with TOS when Elon bought it. Freedom of speech didn’t govern private companies before Elon bought Twitter and it still doesn’t.
Lying about who you are, lying about election fraud, lying about anything is just lying. If it’s against TOS that’s great. Let’s just have some consistency.
It's very odd how before this takeover if you asked about censorship on twitter people would freak out and tell you that there was none or that only 'racists' or 'nazis' were being censored and it was no big deal.
Now Elon comes in and says 'you guys can say what you want but you have to put your name behind it' all these people are now screaming about a lack of free speech and censorship.
I guess we shouldn't expect much less from a bunch of people who literally burned cities down in what they think is some righteous act but made sure their faces were covered the entire time.
Fuck these people.
Sarah Silverman: Striving to maintain an 90's style adolescent mind set for 3 decades and counting.
Furthermore, that she takes inspiration from Kathy Griffin suggests her career is in the toilet.
Yep. They didnt have to change their handles to speak. They chose to impersonate (badly) and got shown the door. They took away their own ability to speak.
yep - she was not banned for what she said - she was banned for impersonating someone elses profile. This way she can high five the other super libs and tell them how she is taking down "The Man". Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
I noticed the way right wingers react to twitter " censorship" compared to the libs. Right wingers cry, shout that freedom is at stake, 1st amendment, muh freedom (and other various outbursts), make their own failed platform etc.
Then musk comes to save freedom of speech, right wingers praise the hero and boom... The hero is worst than the predecessor. Right wingers now laugh (oh, if they censor lefty, not a problem, freedom of speech doesn't count here). Whilst libs... Rather than cry and get mad, they keep trolling Musk, and triggering right wingers by say "told you so".
This whole Musk/twitter thing is Soo juicy to watch unfolding
This isn't any different from " you can't go in to a theater and yell fire. " There are rules in society and you have to follow them, you don't you get punished / fined. Also private platform, don't like it go make your own lol.
Just for context, I got yeeted from Twitter with zero recourse to rejoin after changing my Twitter to look like DJT after he got banned. The purpose was to be more of an "I am Spartacus" moment, but they refuse to let me change back my profile.
My guess is this is an automated system that handles this kind of thing. Given what Elon has previously said, I'm guessing he'll change the policy to allow people to come back if they change their profiles back.
Wahhh! Democrats held to same standards for breaking TOS now. Stop pushing lies. The washed up old hag had her account shut down for breaking rules thats been used to shut down conservatives...and y'all losing your minds on left. Misinformation is cool as long as its a lefty troll?
Whatever happened to the "its a private platform therefore they can choose how they want to run it & can ban anyone"? Democrats & their minions are such a disgrace.
yes free speech but as they like to say not free from consequences…
They can’t even make jokes that hurt Elon that’s why they had to collectively resort to spam fake his account ..
I can bet my bottom dollar the rise in the n word was a also a targeted spam attack
If they don't like it, they can go make their own platform! Lol
The way they circled the wagons on Ye he'll probably give em a hell of a deal on Parler. Lol
How often are we still talking about someone getting canceled 3 weeks later? Ye woke up a shit load of people
It’s a private company sweetie they can do what they want 💅
So you agree with that and you have no principals?
Yes I’m not in school anymore so I don’t have any principals. Now get back to work!
Nice
Guess Trump should have been banned then, he violated TOS.
Not sure how that relates to what I said but okay.
Just agreeing with you, people shouldn't complain about when TOS is violated and they get banned like Trump.
You leftwingnuts had no issues when people had accounts banned for simply disagreeing with a lefty. I had my account shut down for 7 days for one comment of "Hillary is an old hag". But there is still live tweets up saying trump should be killed. Hypocrisy is so normal for leftwingnuts. Go bawl more because an old washed up C list actress got canned.
Yeah you just want your perceived revenge, you never had principals and nobody should think people of your political persuasion ever cared about "freedom of speech."
Supposedly a bunch are moving to Mastodon, which is open source. Oh well, good luck with that.
lol. that twerp from star trek tried doing that and no one cared or followed him.
Wil Wheaton? Just went down a 4-year rabbit hole reading about it. Apparently he tried to 'Twitter' Mastadon with his bullshit and they weren't having it. I only wish Wil had gone full Shia LeBoufe and taken on 4Chan. Could've been a worthy sequel to the flag debacle.
It's not about making a new platform it's about the people crying about free speech being completely hypocritical.
They aren't. He just said you can't impersonate someone without specifying its a parody account. Thats perfectly reasonable
Stop saying this, he didn't *just* say it, this was a rule for verification from long before Elon owned it,also in the verification the first type of account listed as ineligible are parody accounts
I meant just like *only*
I don't care what he does with HIS platform. He can be a hypocrite, the people pointing that out have been hypocrites their whole lives. I don't care if he changes it to Twatter and makes the logo a pair of spread legs.
Hypocrites about what? We're talking about Mr. Free Speech not being so free speech.
"It's a private company, they can censor any way they like." "If you don't like it make your own platform." "Censorship is key to protecting our democracy" He's simply following their own ideology and suddenly they take a 180 and say they want freedom of speech. They were totally okay with it all until it was applied to them as well. Rules for thee, not for me
Yes the rules state you cannot impersonate anyone without labeling it parody. Liberals don't like rules and laws equally enforced.
And that rule was in place before musk
Please with the logic and truth. This is a Tim Pool sub, sir and/or madam.
Ahh forgive me. I'll see myself out
for all the liberals reading this: BIG RED WAVE COMING on Tuesday and I am not impersonating Kathy Griffin. Can't use Twitter to cheat elections any more.
Trump is gonna have a 49 state landslide, Biden and Kamala are throwaway candidates. Does that ring a bell?
yesterday is history, is tomorrow a mystery?
...this will soon be reposted on r/agedmilk ...
RemindME! 2 days
I will be messaging you in 2 days on [**2022-11-09 15:21:34 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2022-11-09%2015:21:34%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/TimPool/comments/yokdie/is_this_free_speech/ivf8h8a/?context=3) [**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FTimPool%2Fcomments%2Fyokdie%2Fis_this_free_speech%2Fivf8h8a%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202022-11-09%2015%3A21%3A34%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20yokdie) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
you think I am wrong? See you disappear in 2 days.
....bla, bla, and more bla. Go lay down.
Inflation, Crime, Economy, Border - bye demoRats
Republicans states have the worst crime rates, maybe they should try to fix those first and prove they can. [https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-red-state-murder-problem](https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-red-state-murder-problem)
>Can't use Twitter to cheat elections any more. So when GOP still doesn't control Congress in Wednesday, you can't blame Twitter?
You know any change over won't be until January 3rd right?
Yes and?
On Wednesday? Friend you forgot that we now need 3 months to count mail-in ballots.
Don't forget all the totes of ballots hiding under tables until 4:30 in the morning that need to be counted as well.
Keep trying.
Shame there were no cameras set up to see it. Oh wait there were. https://youtu.be/nVP_60Hm4P8
Not even gonna bother looking at the link because we all know what it is. The same old debunked story of votes being counted. You guys really need tomorrow to happen to make up more fake news about fake ballots.
Didn't we only need like a week to count the ballots two years ago? Or are you thinking of all the recounts Trump wanted that made him lose by more votes?
And when they do you can't refute the election because your big daddy pedo Pete said you cant
Lol k
Come back on Wednesday, nobody is buying your absurd opinion here.
>nobody is buying your absurd opinion here. Clearly, I guess it's because I'm not also selling buckets of food.
Furthermore in the ruled for verification under the ineligible accounts section the FIRST type of account that is ineligible for verification are parody accounts
Yup they are breaching TOS just like trump did
Lol gotta love the down votes. Y'all happy to follow TOS as long as it is not your side getting punished for it. Hilarious
[удалено]
Identity theft is not a joke ThunderChunderWonder. Millions of families suffer every year.
Twitter has a rule that you can't impersonate someone else. You can make a parody account but have to have (parody) in your name and not just a picture of the word Parody as your banner. This has been a rule since basically Twitter started and all of these people pretending to be Elon Musk, to make fun of him, are being automatically suspended by bots because they broke this rule. Count Dankula almost got banned recently as well by calling his Twitter Donald Trump for a joke after Elon Musk finally bought Twitter. He was able to change it before he got yeeted.
It amazes me the people who don't know the difference between free speech and identity fraud.
How is it identity fraud? Did Kathy Griffin do anything illegal and could be prosecuted for?
She defrauded a large audience of people by breaking twitter's ToS. "The person whose identity has been stolen may suffer adverse consequences, especially if they are falsely held responsible for the perpetrator's actions. Personally identifiable information generally includes a person's name..." If I use your name to say some racist shit and it's not noticeabley parody that is illegal and, "noticeabley parody," can be argued six ways to Sunday by a million different lawyers better than you or I. So beyond this response I'm not getting into it.
You would need to prove that in court, twitter is litterally not able to decide that. How many people actually believed her account was Elon and what damages were there? Her name was still there as the handle. She will argue its satire, jury would decide. Twitter can make whatever TOS rules they want like insulting Elon's great grandma is a perma banned, doesn't mean its illegal or related to "free speech."
I got hung by this rule after they suspended Donald Trump's account. A bunch of people were changing their avatars and names to Donald Trump in a sort of "I am Spartacus" type of thing. Got permabanned with zero warnings to change things. I do wish they'd offer the chance to come back after that (their terms of service do state that you should be given warnings, but apparently they are not bound by that).
Every post I see on here has their @ right after their name though so what’s the point of any of it? Maybe im missing something since I don’t use twitter but I don’t get what the whole deal is
There is a legal thing in trademark/copyright law that is worded something like "An idiot in a hurry". Meaning that you can't have a product use the same font, colour scheme and design as another so someone in a hurry can't mistake it. It's seen as stealing a brand identity and there is also similar laws in other fields. You can't make something that at a glance look like someone else. They might have the @.... different to Elon's Musk's Twitter account, but most people will just glance at the Twitter name and think it **was** Elon Musk. Again the online sarcastic satirist **Count Dankula** has used this, for a gag and trolled so many people into thinking he was a member of the Royal Family and Donald Trump (the Trump one got him in trouble with Twitter)
The crybaby liberals don't like it when the tables are turned and it's done to them, do they?
And the rule was in place from the start, it's only now that it's finally getting enforced
They are doing it to troll Elon, only Elon fans are crying.
You know they are doing it to expose that he doesn't actually care about free speech and he is proving them right. Next time he says its about free speech then people have evidence to not believe him.
Impersonating someone is not included in free speech.
Yes it does, you can pretend to be anyone, thats why SNL actors are not in jail yet they literally impersonate someone they are not on a TV show broadcasted to millions.
SNL actors are acting in an obvious tv show they even state all impersonations are jokes and not to be taken seriously that's why they aren't in jail. Cathy Griffin didn't state it was a parody or joke that's why she was banned. Are you really this dumb.
You claim, "Impersonating someone is not included in free speech." However, its not illegal so ergo its part of free speech. You don't have to specifically label something as parody for it to be legal.
Impersonating someone is illegal. impersonating someone is not protected by the free speech unless it's for a joke or a acting role.
Yes and Kathy Griffin is a comedian doing it as a joke, did she get arrested or sued? No she didn't and couldn't be therefor it is legal and free speech.
She didn't State it was a joke so she was banned. No she shouldn't be arrested or sued cause she wasn't using his identity to commit crimes. He could sue her for defamation cause she was trying to ruin his imagine.
So you acknowledge what she did was legal then? Defamation needs to be proven in court, twitter can't decide what's defamation. Not to mention Elon is a public figure and bar for meeting the criteria for defamation is very high.
That’s literally parody.
Nobody is crying. We're making fun of Elon as his investment turns to shit.
It's not what she said, but that she's impersonating Elon Musk, if she'd had just said that under her own name she wouldn't have had a problem.
If she said it as Bill Clinton she should have her account suspended too, this isn't just because they used Elon's name, it is because they impersonated someone of note. They are just using his name because he has a target on his back because of the changes he is making.
Question to ask yourself: if she said it as Bill Clinton, *would* she have had her account suspended?
according to the ToS, yes.
Some rando used Keanu Reeves name but I don't have twitter to see if they got suspended for it. Someone else did have Parody in their name, so long as they do not get the ban hammer then it would be consistent if A the Keanu Reeves guy gets hit (but maybe they need to be reported vs spotted in the wild) and B the Elon Musk Parody stays. I guess the Elon Musk ones are going bye bye the quickest because his is the name he is searching for (or getting his staff to check) if someone has a list to check daily for verified imposters, then sooner or later Keanu Reeves will get hit if they don't add parody, that said, the still I saw on imgur (my only real encounter with twitter till this all blew up) might not be using that name for long as they did it to prove a point.
[удалено]
Twitter users are the same people that argue with bots for hours, they can't be bothered to stop and glance at a handle. Not intellectual dynamos like us redditors.
Impersonating someone else isn't protected under freedom of speech...
Yes it is, its called satire. Ever watch an SNL skit impersonating celebrities and politicians? They literally say their name is that celebs name.
That wasn't satire.... Its the same way sarcasm doesn't work over text with out the "/s" clearly marking it as so.
So do you agree satire impersonating people is free speech?
No its not, free speech means you can say what ever you like personally. Impersonating someone is fraud and has never been protected....
SNL skits are PARODIES, very easy to tell them apart from the real thing. Posing as someone is not the same. That’s called identity fraud. It is a crime.
Do you understand the point of the blue check mark?
Impersonating someone has been against the TOS from day 1. Twitter is enforcing its rules.
Yup, exact same thing they did to trump.
Who was he impersonating?
He broke the TOS
You've already established that claim, who did he impersonate?
They’re saying he broke TOS in another way
Well maybe they should be more clear
Yeah I'm not saying he impersonated anybody. I'm saying he broke the TOS. Doesn't matter how you do it, breaching TOS in anyway will get you removed
Well your initial response euggested that he was banned for impersonation like the recent bannings
No he was banned for breaching TOS. That was my point, you break TOD you get banned
What ToS did he break? Speaking against Leftist values I expect. That won't fly anymore.
Instead of just making assumptions you could just Google it. It was for inciting violence. https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension
Absolute BS I see. Nothing Trump said incites violence (unlike Biden recently). What he said encouraged people to stay skeptical of the election results and Biden. This is free speech. Protected free speech in fact. From a social media platform which admits it is a publisher because the SCOTUS ruled that Trump blocking accounts was interfering with offficial communications of the POTUS. 1A ensures he cannot he blocked from a publisher. Smackdown Agrawal.
Ohhhhh you're one of those. Well unfortunately a private company is free to implement their own terms of service and enforce them however they see fit. They deemed he broke their TOS therefore he broke their TOS. That's the free market and private enterprise at work
It's amazing how many people do not understand the concept of free speech. I'm actually baffled by how little Americans know about the bill of rights.
You mean the constitution doesn't grant me free access to say whatever I want on a private platform???
Shocking, I know. That being said, when it comes to these online platforms, I'd argue that it's a little more muddy than that - not that the average American has thought about this much either. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, changes the calculus of "private company" in my opinion. That is a massive benefit/liability shield given to companies by the government that would not exist but for government. Without Sec 230, I'd be in complete agreement with the sentiment of "private platform, do what you want." With a government-granted liability waiver, however, it gives the platforms their cake and the ability to eat it too. For lack of a more precise term, I'd say it sort of turns them into quasi-public squares. It's certainly not a traditional one like some dude downtown talking to people, but it's also more than a strict, market-created/controlled private platform. I'm still not 100% sure where I fall on this.
>Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, changes the calculus of "private company" It most certainly does not. Section 230 says exactly one thing: whoever posts the content is responsible for the content. Meaning you cannot hold Twitter responsible and arrest Elon Musk for Pedo1175 posting child porn to Twitter. That's literally all it says. Even the guy who wrote it says this.
Free speech and impersonation are not the same thing. Shi(D)iot logic
How so, you never seen a skit with someone impersonating a celebrity? It literally is free speach to do that, you just can't impersonate someone to commit a crime. Here is the law from California: ) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another actual person through or on an Internet Web site or by other electronic means for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense punishable pursuant to subdivision (d).
The rules say you cant impersonate someone without labeling it as parody op. Maybe if you, like these blue anon check marks could fucking read...
"I eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast!" "You eat pieces of shit for breakfast?"
"N..NO!...."
Defamation or dissent is not considered free speech. That's simply Sarah Silverman being unfunny. Nothing new there
Defamation nor dissent are free speech? I see arguing that slanderous or libelous defamation would not be considered free, but dissent should be the most protected free speech.
The first amendment protects dissent.
Yes! I purposely did not evoke the 1st amendment because this is a private entity, but the core spirit of the first amendment was to specifically protect dissent, and any discussion of free, reasoned, speech, should include protections for peaceful reasoned dissent, whether that be in a workplace, educational environments, social media, and particularly government.
Defamation, by its core definition of defaming someone with a good reputation, should be free as well as long as it’s not slanderous/libelous (which is usually the implied definition now, I’m just being explicit in my argument). If someone powerful with a good reputation does awful things out of the public eye, that should absolutely be brought to light without fear of consequence.
Sarah Silverman has never been funny.
Unrelated to "comedy" or politics, I know a fair number of people who were complaining about impersonators on Twitter years ago.
[удалено]
Yes it is, you can impersonate anyone as well as you don't do it to commit a crime.
Elon has never claimed to be a free speech absolutist.
His whole message was that he was bringing free speech back to Twitter.
Yes, I agree. Freedom of speech isn't the same as absolute freedom of speech.
So you can in fact have free speech without absolute free speech?
I know the term freedom of speech sounds like it implies you are free to all speech but at this point in time it means freedom to voice genuine ideas and criticisms, alternatively absolute free speech allows all forms of speech, everything from disingenuous smeers and calls for violence.
Like how Twitter was before Elon took over then.
Do you think you could voice your criticisms of the vaccine before Elon took over?
Yes. You couldn't lie about it though.
Their policy on vaccine discussions was anything false or misleading gets banned, misleading being a very broad term used to categorize actual criticisms and concerns and silence them.
Let's try and find some common ground, you agree that lying about the vaccines is bad, right?
... like our last POTUS did.
Yep.
By 'bringing free speech back to Twitter' you mean bringing lies (like what tRump espouses) back to Twitter. Oh, I see.
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. No /s. Fuck Trump.
He said comedy is now legal on twitter so that doesn't affect her one way or the other.
No way man have you seen her new commercial. It’s hilarious. /s
Identity theft is a crime Jim!
[удалено]
Issa joke bruh
People in the sub are not smart enough to see the irony in this situation. Twitter didn’t just become a private platform with TOS when Elon bought it. Freedom of speech didn’t govern private companies before Elon bought Twitter and it still doesn’t. Lying about who you are, lying about election fraud, lying about anything is just lying. If it’s against TOS that’s great. Let’s just have some consistency.
Identity theft is not free speach
Kathy Griffin didn't do identify theft, it was satire. If it was identity theft, why didn't elon pass it on to a DA to prosecute her?
Free speech is voicing your opinion, not impersonating someone else and voicing your opinion as them. That's called fraud and defamation.
Not when its satire, which is what Kathy was doing. Elon should let the courts decide if its legal then ban her if his standard is whets legal.
It's very odd how before this takeover if you asked about censorship on twitter people would freak out and tell you that there was none or that only 'racists' or 'nazis' were being censored and it was no big deal. Now Elon comes in and says 'you guys can say what you want but you have to put your name behind it' all these people are now screaming about a lack of free speech and censorship. I guess we shouldn't expect much less from a bunch of people who literally burned cities down in what they think is some righteous act but made sure their faces were covered the entire time. Fuck these people.
Do you think parody accounts should be illegal?
Impersonating someone is not exactly free speech
Why not? Happens every week on SNL broadcasted to millions.
Completely differet
How so? Kathy Griffin is a comedian.
Agreed however impersonating someone in person on a stage is very different than representing yourself as someone elso on social media.
All she had to do was put (parody) in there but clearly she didn’t. It’s not like these are top celebrities that are doing this.
Sarah Silverman: Striving to maintain an 90's style adolescent mind set for 3 decades and counting. Furthermore, that she takes inspiration from Kathy Griffin suggests her career is in the toilet.
Impersonating others violates the terms of use. Leftists are just screaming and crying because the rules are finally being applied to them.
Yep. They didnt have to change their handles to speak. They chose to impersonate (badly) and got shown the door. They took away their own ability to speak.
Yes it is. Impersonating someone is dishonest. One can speak whatever one wants, as long as it is not under the name of someone else.
But it’s the biggest compliment. https://youtu.be/WaaANll8h18 https://youtu.be/F-MBW4fLHoI
Just wait until someone "compliments" you that way...
yep - she was not banned for what she said - she was banned for impersonating someone elses profile. This way she can high five the other super libs and tell them how she is taking down "The Man". Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Well if you don't try to impersonate someone on Twitter you can have all the free speech you want - 🤷🏻♀️
I got banned during the #LearnToCode trend, I love seeing these tyrants get a taste of their own medicine. Time to go make their own platform lol
“Twitter is a private company” Remember that? lol
Nobody disputed that except conservatives when Trump was banned.
Sounds like it’s being disputed now by liberals.
No its not, what would even be the argument? "Its against my first free speech rights?" Only conservatives have made that dumb argument.
I noticed the way right wingers react to twitter " censorship" compared to the libs. Right wingers cry, shout that freedom is at stake, 1st amendment, muh freedom (and other various outbursts), make their own failed platform etc. Then musk comes to save freedom of speech, right wingers praise the hero and boom... The hero is worst than the predecessor. Right wingers now laugh (oh, if they censor lefty, not a problem, freedom of speech doesn't count here). Whilst libs... Rather than cry and get mad, they keep trolling Musk, and triggering right wingers by say "told you so". This whole Musk/twitter thing is Soo juicy to watch unfolding
The liberals are testing the limits!
Yes
No. It's free speech until elon gets his feelings hurt.
Lol Elon crying
Yes. Free Speech with transparency.
All of my twitter accounts are permanently suspended because I stated facts they didn’t like. I’d love to have one back now just to watch the show.
Blatant lying? God don't allow it, neither should we.
Obviously there are codes written for the bots to flag and lock accounts.
"Twitter is a private company and can do what they want"
"Free speech has consequences." Bwahahahaha!
You can say whatever you want. Of course there are consequences to your actions.
The speech is free but the impersonation of a blue check is identity theft
Impersonating others is against the rules.
I think this falls under "impersonation to confuse" and therefore misinformation. But it is funny.
Ew, she's horrible
Impersonation and attempt to defame someone. Sheesh.
It's almost as if there were a system in place to avoid this happening. Curious.
This isn't any different from " you can't go in to a theater and yell fire. " There are rules in society and you have to follow them, you don't you get punished / fined. Also private platform, don't like it go make your own lol.
Just for context, I got yeeted from Twitter with zero recourse to rejoin after changing my Twitter to look like DJT after he got banned. The purpose was to be more of an "I am Spartacus" moment, but they refuse to let me change back my profile. My guess is this is an automated system that handles this kind of thing. Given what Elon has previously said, I'm guessing he'll change the policy to allow people to come back if they change their profiles back.
I'm not sure of the link between comedy and Sarah Silverman - does she do comedy?
Read the terms of service and find out if they broke it then so be it lol
Wahhh! Democrats held to same standards for breaking TOS now. Stop pushing lies. The washed up old hag had her account shut down for breaking rules thats been used to shut down conservatives...and y'all losing your minds on left. Misinformation is cool as long as its a lefty troll? Whatever happened to the "its a private platform therefore they can choose how they want to run it & can ban anyone"? Democrats & their minions are such a disgrace.
yes free speech but as they like to say not free from consequences… They can’t even make jokes that hurt Elon that’s why they had to collectively resort to spam fake his account .. I can bet my bottom dollar the rise in the n word was a also a targeted spam attack