(04-20-2022, 05:09 PM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(04-20-2022, 10:55 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: Your vitriol is the primary driver behind your content, not anything substantive. You have become quite adept at picking up the things you can correct, like typos, while avoiding engaging in any real dialogue. You're smart enough to notice the proofing error, but not genuine enough to address the crux of the argument. Talk about some herp-derp. 

We all know what your point was. Norman addressed it when he asked who gets to decide what's harmful disinformation, and, more importantly, who gets to decide who is censored by it, which is the big concern. You say the courts decide, like that's satisfactory. It's not. They are there to award punitive damages when someone speaks in a way that is harmful to others. They did their job. No one here cares that Alex Jones got financially damaged for spouting off [BLEEP]. 

However, there are several of us that don't want to encourage the process of silencing bad speech because we believe that it's a first principle of Democracy. You remove it, and you remove one of the pillars of liberalism. Your type of thinking will lead to abuse by those in power. It already has. You hide behind the free market on this issue, but is that a cause you really care about? You really think companies should be allowed this kind of discretion? 

MY point was that people like you, who want to silence all the "bad" people, are addressing the symptom, not the disease. The problem is really the failings of our institutions to work for the people, being honest and accountable. If we focus on fixing that, the Alex Jones' of the world lose most of their following. Why don't you point your vitriol towards the establishment that's [BLEEP] everyone over? Alex Jones is small potatoes. 

For all your arrogance, you sure are short-sighted. But hey, maybe you can find some editing mistakes in this post, so you don't have to think about anything. Please present your findings to the forum as proof of your superior intelligence.

Says the stupid [BLEEP] who ignored the entire point this whole time. 

LOL

Go look up disinformation, ruminate on it, and get back to me. It's the point of my posting but you keep trying to steer it somewhere else - all the while presuming to tell ME how I feel. 

 Please. 

You really want a moron like Jones to be free to spread disinformation at will to protect some aspect of Democracy he's blown past by miles?  Nah.  You just want to make this an us vs them issue when it isn't - and it doesn't need to be.

Shocker. Still haven't addressed the point. I know you think you're wowing us all with your brilliance by puffing up your chest and talking up to others with unearned confidence, but highlighting one word is not winning a debate. Most of us don't need to ruminate on the word 'disinformation.' 

Again, I ask you. Who decides what is disinformation? How to you prove it? You said the courts before, but did you know, that the courts haven't proven whether or not Alex Jones was intentionally deceiving the public? That wasn't a part of this process. They proved he profited from spreading falsehoods about a tragedy, but they can't even get the evidence to prove motive. So, tell me Mr. Smartest Guy in the Room, do we create special trials to prove what's disinformation? Will that get applied evenly to large corporations? Will that apply to our government? Then, how we decide who gets censored for it? For how long? 

The reason you are so ill equipped to process this is because it's not grammar. It's not black and white, and you're just not a nuanced person. At least you don't play one on this messageboard.

---