Ron Paul baffled at being censored by Facebook: I am a non-interventionist and preach non-violence

RememberMurray

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Messages
3,841
Reaction score
2,330
Points
113
This. Nobody is saying they shouldn't have the right to do it. But that doesn't mean they're above criticism.
If you are angry at a decision made by a private business, you can always try complaining to the business itself.

I've been told that giant corporations are in general extremely responsive to customer complaints.
 

forever a gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,623
Reaction score
604
Points
113
They provide the forum.

So if I hand out gas cans to rioters I am not liable either, right? Gas is legal.

Same thing.
Completely different. One is actively taking a role in distributing. One is words. The better analogy would be if I were standing next to a gas station encouraging people to come and fill up their gas cans to use for nefarious reasons. Should the gas station be held liable? Of course not. Could I be held personally liable or criminally liable for things I say and do? Of course. If I'm dumb enough to post things on Twitter that are illegal, the police have a pretty easy way to prove I did something and come find me. Is it Twitter's problem to police every tweet on their platform? No.

You're confusing your analogies. In your analogy, the gas station is twitter. I am myself in each example. I can be held liable for handing out gas cans to rioters. Just like I can be held liable for facilitating the sale of people in the illegal sex trade on Twitter. I was the one who participated. Not the gas station and not Twitter.
 
Last edited:

forever a gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,623
Reaction score
604
Points
113
If you are angry at a decision made by a private business, you can always try complaining to the business itself.

I've been told that giant corporations are in general extremely responsive to customer complaints.
I'm not angry at anything. I don't give a crap about Twitter or FB or any of them. I don't use them, and honestly don't quite understand the people that do.

It's a topic of collegial discourse, that's all. We discuss things in our little bubble of GH where literally nothing will have an effect on the outside world. That doesn't mean the discourse can't be entertaining.
 
Last edited:

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
5,945
Reaction score
2,880
Points
113
Completely different. One is actively taking a role in distributing.
If you allow your format to be used to actively promote violent actions its not really different. You are essentially providing the gas. I could argue its worse because the number of people affected could be much larger.
 

RememberMurray

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Messages
3,841
Reaction score
2,330
Points
113
Completely different. One is actively taking a role in distributing. One is words. The better analogy would be if (A) I were standing next to a gas station encouraging people to come and fill up their gas cans to use for nefarious reasons. Should the gas station be held liable? Of course not. Could I be held personally liable or criminally liable for things I say and do? Of course. If I'm dumb enough to post things on Twitter that are illegal, the police have a pretty easy way to prove I did something and come find me. (B) Is it Twitter's problem to police every tweet on their platform? No.

You're confusing your analogies. In your analogy, the gas station is twitter. I am myself in each example. I can be held liable for handing out gas cans to rioters. Just like I can be held liable for facilitating the sale of people in the illegal sex trade on Twitter. I was the one who participated. Not the gas station and not Twitter.
A) If the gas station was aware of what was going on and did nothing to stop it, such as calling the police and reporting suspicious activity, then I think there's a chance they may have some liability.

B) Based on their recent actions, Twitter seems to believe that it is, indeed, "their problem". It is certainly their right to do whatever they see fit regarding the banning of individuals.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
23,006
Reaction score
4,428
Points
113
It's not really a free speech act that I'm trying to spew. I fully admit that I don't know what the right answer is in this case. I didn't have a problem with Twitter banning Trump. He went well beyond that "yelling fire in a movie theater" line. Way beyond. I would have a problem with Twitter banning others just because they have conservative viewpoints. Is that what Twitter was doing here with Ron Paul? I don't know their motivation. Do they have the right to do it? As I said before, yes. But I thought Facebook and Twitter were created to find out what your high school friend was cooking for dinner and other useless drivel. I would hate to see them fall in line with the CNN/MSNBC/NY Times/FoxNews ilk and be some sort of moral compass. That's just my preference, I suppose.

"You can't have it both ways". I couldn't agree more with that statement. It is why I asked the question of Murray in the first place. I was curious how he would respond.
I believe it was Facebook that blocked Ron Paul. And yeah....I'm not sure what prompted that.
 

forever a gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,623
Reaction score
604
Points
113
A) If the gas station was aware of what was going on and did nothing to stop it, such as calling the police and reporting suspicious activity, then I think there's a chance they may have some liability.

B) Based on their recent actions, Twitter seems to believe that it is, indeed, "their problem". It is certainly their right to do whatever they see fit regarding the banning of individuals.
Since we're going to keep living in the world of this analogy, let's expound some more.
A) Are they actively or passively allowing it to happen? Did Cup Food's owners get in trouble with the law for having an establishment that often had drug deals and/or other nefarious things occurring in their parking lot or in front on the sidewalk? I'm pretty sure they've never gotten into any trouble even though it was well known. If the gas station in our analogy is actively participating or providing cover from police, not answering police questioning regarding said activity, then sure they could be held liable to some minor degree. Worst I suppose that could happen IF they were actively helping would be accessory to a crime. But in our analogy, the conveyance (gas station and Twitter) is not actively participating, but passively not doing anything to prevent it.

B) For the umpteenth time, yes, it is their right. Nobody is debating that. Maybe you can come up with another gay-hating baker analogy.
 

forever a gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,623
Reaction score
604
Points
113
I believe it was Facebook that blocked Ron Paul. And yeah....I'm not sure what prompted that.
I think the lesson here is that you know Ron Paul and/or the people he's targeting are old if he's using Facebook in the first place.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
5,945
Reaction score
2,880
Points
113
Since we're going to keep living in the world of this analogy, let's expound some more.
A) Are they actively or passively allowing it to happen? Did Cup Food's owners get in trouble with the law for having an establishment that often had drug deals and/or other nefarious things occurring in their parking lot or in front on the sidewalk? I'm pretty sure they've never gotten into any trouble even though it was well known. If the gas station in our analogy is actively participating or providing cover from police, not answering police questioning regarding said activity, then sure they could be held liable to some minor degree. Worst I suppose that could happen IF they were actively helping would be accessory to a crime. But in our analogy, the conveyance (gas station and Twitter) is not actively participating, but passively not doing anything to prevent it.

B) For the umpteenth time, yes, it is their right. Nobody is debating that. Maybe you can come up with another gay-hating baker analogy.
Sidewalk is public, so there is no analogy. It would be Cup foods allowing someone to sell drugs or illegal weapons in their store.

I think drugs should be legal and at the very least NO ONE should ever go to jail for possessing a fucking plant. That is the height of absurdity.
 

forever a gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,623
Reaction score
604
Points
113
Sidewalk is public, so there is no analogy. It would be Cup foods allowing someone to sell drugs or illegal weapons in their store.

I think drugs should be legal and at the very least NO ONE should ever go to jail for possessing a fucking plant. That is the height of absurdity.
To a general degree, I would completely agree with you. How libertarian of you. If somebody wants to become addicted to a substance and ruin their life, why is it a government/police problem? It should be my liberty to do that to my own body, no matter the substance. You could say it's a societal problem, but hasn't it been proven in more open countries that use hasn't increased with less enforcement? My only beef with drugs is the use and sale of them in public places, and the use of them while driving. I find the smell of pot smoke to be way more offensive than cigarette smoke. Plus, it carries way farther. When walking through the parks in DT StP, you can smell the homeless people's pot from like a block away. You need to be much closer to smell the cigarette smoke. But if you want to smoke in your/somebody else's house, or a private establishment that allows it, smoke 'em up!
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
5,945
Reaction score
2,880
Points
113
I find the smell of pot smoke to be way more offensive than cigarette smoke.
Not me. My mom smoked cigs when I was young and thats the most vile smoke to me, I hate when someone is smoking cigs in their car un front of me on the road. The worst is when they smoke in the porta potty and I walk in with my N95 and that stench gets stuck in the mask. Grrrr

The smell of a dead skunk is better than pot smoke tho, that dead skunk smell equals instant mouthwater 😎

And I haven't really smoked weed in 20 years except for 2 or 3 times.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
5,945
Reaction score
2,880
Points
113
If somebody wants to become addicted to a substance and ruin their life, why is it a government/police problem?
I have been addicted to a couple and going to jail wouldn't have put me in a better place than I am right now. In fact I believe their illegality actually contributed to my addiction.

Weed was the first and I didn't quit until I had an unlimited supply. Then I just got sick of it and sick of the brain fog. Before I had an unlimited supply I was stuck in this mindset of smoking weed whenever I had the opportunity because I didn't want to miss it if it was available.

Illegality sets up a perfect partial reinforcement scenario which is the best way to train a person.

Partial reinforcement is why playing "hard to get" makes people fall head over heals for you. Illegality sets up the very same scarcity factor, but with drugs, that psychologically reinforces the addiction.

I have been thinking for years about actually working with someone to try to publish some of these ideas.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
5,945
Reaction score
2,880
Points
113
So when you seek drugs, you never know for sure if you will get them, this unknown and random reward for seeking the drug sets up the partial reinforcement schedule described below.

Partial reinforcement, unlike continuous reinforcement, is only reinforced at certain intervals or ratio of time, instead of reinforcing the behavior every single time. This form of scheduling reinforcement after certain number of correct responses or certain interval of time is also termed as intermittent reinforcement.

This type of reinforcement is regarded more powerful in maintaining or shaping behavior. Also, behaviors acquired from this form of scheduling have been found to be more resilient to extinction.


 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
2,060
Reaction score
1,095
Points
113
You have the right to be wrong - just like me!!

I posted extensively on the following using stats: race issues , that most of the violence perpetuated against people this summer was committed by the FAR RIGHT and not BLT; furthermore, the immigration thread I never saw, but it has been statistically proven that immigrants commit crimes at a lower rate then White Folks and add more to the economy than they take - round up all the Brownies and see what happens to the cost of your veggies/fruits when the farms have to pay minimum wage or in a poultry plant etc...

To be clear, I like your bucket posting, but feel you are woefully uninformed on these issues as are most Rs. Why I don't think you are, there are some on here and in greater society who stigmatize immigration due to the color of the skin of those from Mexico/Central America and take a simplistic view of it in my opinion.

There also can be a strong economic argument made that to compete with China in the long run, we need to become a much more populated country; I read an interesting piece about it - this one isn't the specific one I read, but for more economic strategic thinkers, it is not an uncommon topic (Google it) - covered her by Harvard Business Review -

Making the U.S. Competitive Again (hbr.org)

Immigration: The inflow of talent from outside our borders has long been a key strength of the U.S. economy. But less-than-friendly immigration policies, plus growing opportunities in once stagnant countries like China and India, have lessened America’s pulling power. Immigration laws that truly encouraged skilled workers to come here would be a big plus. One specific suggestion: Staple a “green card” work permit to every advanced degree awarded in the U.S. to a foreign student.

While I worked for a boutique firm for most of my business career, many of my contacts at my clients were from Ivy Leagues schools (I never graduated from them, but did serve as a consultant to them) and I learned form them pragmatism in dealing with business - as the color that matters is green at that level. Quite frankly the that level of strategic economic thinking is not on this board, nor would I expect it to be - as that is smaller segment of the population and many of those folks stay on the coasts, as they make more money - also back when that was my life, i was pumping 60-70 hours a week. I only started posting ~3 months ago and will be done with the OTB after Biden is peacefully sworn in, while still popping on the sports board.

During the election, they mentioned that for every 9 Hispanic babies born in Texas, only one Caucasian. American Is changing and I favor a more pluralist inclusive society - I personally don't care if I make less money, as I've added a simplistic/minimalist approach to my life now and weaning myself from the hallow commercialism that is deemed so important in society.
I thought u were challenging the idea of media bias so if that wasnt your intent then my bad.

Economy has seen historic unemployment, historic real median income growth. Small business owners say due to trump policy.

Obama and Clinton said our economy cant sustain illegal immigration. Should accept migrant workers and encourage immigration in STEM fields.

Dems/media said precious little to discourage the mayhem that was this summer. Credit to repubs for calling out trump for his part in the capitol riot. We regularly heard over the summer how black people were hunted down in their homes when truth was that last year 9 unarmed blacks were shot by cops.

Of course challenging china and especially getting the 4 arab countries to recognize israel. Saudi is allowing israeli plane to fly over its space.

My point is that conservatives can put up with all the dishonesty about the trump record as dems won the election. Conservatives know dems call the shots. However we have now seen amazon refuse to deliver biography of clarence thomas. Banning and censoring of consrevatives become commonplace. Of course we know what happens when conservatives appear on campuses. And now dems such as obama and some gh posters are calling for killing filibuster. Just making the point that doing such a thing might be a bridge too far for many conservatives.

Do understand your leaving the OTB. Since the election my posts have gone way down as well. Go Pitino ☺.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
5,945
Reaction score
2,880
Points
113
Economy has seen historic unemployment, historic real median income growth. Small business owners say due to trump policy.
Why don't you borrow a million dollars, rent a penthouse, order all the hookers and blow you can handle. You will be living higher than you ever imagined, until the bill comes.

That sums up the Trump economy.
 

ecoperson

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
389
Reaction score
310
Points
63
I thought u were challenging the idea of media bias so if that wasnt your intent then my bad.

Economy has seen historic unemployment, historic real median income growth. Small business owners say due to trump policy.

Obama and Clinton said our economy cant sustain illegal immigration. Should accept migrant workers and encourage immigration in STEM fields.

Dems/media said precious little to discourage the mayhem that was this summer. Credit to repubs for calling out trump for his part in the capitol riot. We regularly heard over the summer how black people were hunted down in their homes when truth was that last year 9 unarmed blacks were shot by cops.

Of course challenging china and especially getting the 4 arab countries to recognize israel. Saudi is allowing israeli plane to fly over its space.

My point is that conservatives can put up with all the dishonesty about the trump record as dems won the election. Conservatives know dems call the shots. However we have now seen amazon refuse to deliver biography of clarence thomas. Banning and censoring of consrevatives become commonplace. Of course we know what happens when conservatives appear on campuses. And now dems such as obama and some gh posters are calling for killing filibuster. Just making the point that doing such a thing might be a bridge too far for many conservatives.

Do understand your leaving the OTB. Since the election my posts have gone way down as well. Go Pitino ☺.
9 unarmed 'blacks' being shot by cops is 9 too many. Actually, wasn't one woman shot in her own home... or was that 2019... there are so many of these cases that they all blend together. We've become immune to it all. Sad.

And enough with the banning conservative talk drivel... I think I just demonstrated the errors in your semantics in another thread.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,639
Reaction score
1,861
Points
113
Still amazes me that some posters held that we have an unbiased press. At least that assertion has been laid to rest. Looks like we are now to the point where conservatives need to build their own when they are denied. Sad that we have gotten to this place and hopefully conservatives are willing to do the work necessary to maintain a presence in the marketplace.
The RW media system is MASSIVE. The level of RW delusion didn't get this bad by mere chance. It's been directly formed and fomented by the mainstreaming of RW nutjobs throughout media all across the nation. FOX News is a bastion of nuts who were on RW Talk Radio decades ago. It's all nuts.

The media has now essentially split into essentially two camps, which directly corresponds with the political split: (1) those who portray truth and facts and support democracy, and (2) RW/authoritarian/propaganda/malevolent-foreign-government media. The two are about comparable in size and reach across the country.
 
Last edited:

golfing18now

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
2,208
Reaction score
735
Points
113
The RW media system is MASSIVE. The level of RW delusion didn't get this bad by mere chance. It's been directly formed and fomented by the mainstreaming of RW nutjobs throughout media all across the nation. FOX News is a bastion of nuts who were on RW Talk Radio decades ago. It's all nuts.

The media has now essentially split into essentially two camps, which directly corresponds with the political split: (1) those who portray truth and facts and support democracy, and (2) RW/authoritarian/propaganda/malevolent-foreign-government media. The two are about comparable in size and reach across the country.
Can you point me in the direction of those sources that fall into bucket #1?
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
5,945
Reaction score
2,880
Points
113
Can you point me in the direction of those sources that fall into bucket #1?
Most mainstream media. NY Times, WA Post and other major newspapers in the country. AP, NPR, CBS, ABC ect

Sure they mostly slant a bit left. But they generally aren't pushing total bullshit that fox news does non stop.

A few minutes of Fox news last week literally blew my wife's mind, she has never watched it before. She was like wtf, why are they talking about Hillary? I forgot about her years ago.

That is just everyday on Fox, going crazy about things that are ancient history for any sane person.
 
Last edited:

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
23,006
Reaction score
4,428
Points
113
Not me. My mom smoked cigs when I was young and thats the most vile smoke to me, I hate when someone is smoking cigs in their car un front of me on the road. The worst is when they smoke in the porta potty and I walk in with my N95 and that stench gets stuck in the mask. Grrrr

The smell of a dead skunk is better than pot smoke tho, that dead skunk smell equals instant mouthwater 😎

And I haven't really smoked weed in 20 years except for 2 or 3 times.
I have NO idea what 'fag' is talking about. Cigarettes REEK in comparison to weed. All of those added chemicals? And the stench just lingers. Very gross. And lol at saying that you can smell weed smoke from a block away.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,639
Reaction score
1,861
Points
113
Can you point me in the direction of those sources that fall into bucket #1?
Almost all sources of actual news (including the FNC news directorate (an ever-shrinking part of FNC)) do their due diligence on source-checking and bringing us factual news. Some of the news is biased, of course, in presentation such that not all sides of every story are covered, but the news itself is as factual as one could reasonably expect. When the real news gets it wrong, they also correct it. There are exceptions, but what I've said above holds about 98-99% of the time for real news. (I'm not talking about opinion commentary, I'm talking about the news and the facts presented.)

RW media has almost none of the same standards, and is THE main reason for the delusional paranoia rampant amongst the self-described "conservatives" in America. Not only is it extremely biased, it is also largely and intentionally non-factual. The absurd idea that 80% of Republicans have that the election was somehow "stolen" did not come just from Trump, it was propagated across all of RW media. RW media has brainwashed its audience into a cultish mob, with information largely built on mistruths, misrepresentations, and outright lies. Their unyielding support of anything and everything ReTrumplican Party is a cancer on our society that directly led to the 1/6/2021 attempted coup.

I believe in the First Amendment and the need for it. I also believe in the concept of personal responsibility. Neither RW media, nor its audience, practice the latter.
 

RememberMurray

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 25, 2019
Messages
3,841
Reaction score
2,330
Points
113
Since we're going to keep living in the world of this analogy, let's expound some more.
A) Are they actively or passively allowing it to happen? Did Cup Food's owners get in trouble with the law for having an establishment that often had drug deals and/or other nefarious things occurring in their parking lot or in front on the sidewalk? I'm pretty sure they've never gotten into any trouble even though it was well known. If the gas station in our analogy is actively participating or providing cover from police, not answering police questioning regarding said activity, then sure they could be held liable to some minor degree. Worst I suppose that could happen IF they were actively helping would be accessory to a crime. But in our analogy, the conveyance (gas station and Twitter) is not actively participating, but passively not doing anything to prevent it.

B) For the umpteenth time, yes, it is their right. Nobody is debating that. Maybe you can come up with another gay-hating baker analogy.
Wow.

A) The gas station analogy is your analogy, not mine.
I'm afraid you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on whether or not Twitter (or the gas station) might face liability. I think there's a possibility they might, under certain circumstances.

B) You asked a specific question: here it is, since it seems you've forgotten that you asked it: "Is it Twitter's problem to police every tweet on their platform? No."

My reply to your question: Twitter seems to believe that it is, indeed their problem. So I hope that helps you organize your thoughts.
 
Last edited:

USAF

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
3,308
Reaction score
3,266
Points
113
Almost all sources of actual news (including the FNC news directorate (an ever-shrinking part of FNC)) do their due diligence on source-checking and bringing us factual news. Some of the news is biased, of course, in presentation such that not all sides of every story are covered, but the news itself is as factual as one could reasonably expect. When the real news gets it wrong, they also correct it. There are exceptions, but what I've said above holds about 98-99% of the time for real news. (I'm not talking about opinion commentary, I'm talking about the news and the facts presented.)

RW media has almost none of the same standards, and is THE main reason for the delusional paranoia rampant amongst the self-described "conservatives" in America. Not only is it extremely biased, it is also largely and intentionally non-factual. The absurd idea that 80% of Republicans have that the election was somehow "stolen" did not come just from Trump, it was propagated across all of RW media. RW media has brainwashed its audience into a cultish mob, with information largely built on mistruths, misrepresentations, and outright lies. Their unyielding support of anything and everything ReTrumplican Party is a cancer on our society that directly led to the 1/6/2021 attempted coup.

I believe in the First Amendment and the need for it. I also believe in the concept of personal responsibility. Neither RW media, nor its audience, practice the latter.
Great post.
 
Top Bottom