Well, he intends for every user account to be authenticated which is something I’ve thought needed to happen a long time ago.  You’re free to post anonymously pretty much anywhere on the internet if you like or in forums such as this, but in a place that allows for easy amplification such as twitter and other social media sites you should have to personally own what you post.

Anonymous publication is a long standing treasure in this Country. We wouldn't be here without it.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Funny how it’s only just conservatives…

Fringe liberals simply advocate for socialism.  That's provocative enough to get the viral sharing going.  It's easier for them.

Plus the discount Filipino and Malaysian moderators allow it.  It's not racial, doesn't call for violence, etc.

You don't know what you're talking about.

---

Well, he intends for every user account to be authenticated which is something I’ve thought needed to happen a long time ago.  You’re free to post anonymously pretty much anywhere on the internet if you like or in forums such as this, but in a place that allows for easy amplification such as twitter and other social media sites you should have to personally own what you post.

Anonymous publication is a long standing treasure in this Country. We wouldn't be here without it.

Anthony Kennedy wrote that the Federal Government couldn't prohibit corporations from spending money on political speech because the Federal Government has a less intrusive means of achieving a similar result, namely, forcing disclosure of who the donors are.

Democrats have ignored the decision, quixotically promising to overturn it via constitutional amendment rather than deal with it on its own terms.  Neither party wants to force their donors to disclose anything.

At some point someone needs to change tack. As of now, at the federal level, we have no restrictions on how much you can spend, no restriction on how much it can b amplified across social media, and no need to disclose anything about who you are and what your financial interests are.  It's not a recipe for informed decision making by voters, to say the least.

These kinds of disclosures are possible.  All money spent on political speech at the Florida's state level government is disclosed.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Fringe liberals simply advocate for socialism.  That's provocative enough to get the viral sharing going.  It's easier for them.

Plus the discount Filipino and Malaysian moderators allow it.  It's not racial, doesn't call for violence, etc.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Right.  Twitter moderation, which is distributed worldwide, is all about destroying the nuclear family and making the government supreme in all aspects of life specifically in the United States, and nothing else.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Right.  Twitter moderation, which is distributed worldwide, is all about destroying the nuclear family and making the government supreme in all aspects of life specifically in the United States, and nothing else.

You gotta actually pay attention to see it.

All you're doing is going by the loud mouth left's version of things... it's all you've been exposed to.

The reality is big tech and social media have been silencing the conservative voice. And not just the crazies. Because if you actually paid attention - you'd see that crazy lefties screaming for the execution of all Jews get to stay on Twitter

---

Right.  Twitter moderation, which is distributed worldwide, is all about destroying the nuclear family and making the government supreme in all aspects of life specifically in the United States, and nothing else.

You gotta actually pay attention to see it.

All you're doing is going by the loud mouth left's version of things... it's all you've been exposed to.

The reality is big tech and social media have been silencing the conservative voice. And not just the crazies. Because if you actually paid attention - you'd see that crazy lefties screaming for the execution of all Jews get to stay on Twitter

Again, I don't use twitter, but I do read articles about c list celebrities getting suspended and banned from the platform. I try to read their side of the story, and Twitter's side of the story, in each case. 
Like yeah, Elon, next time, don't call every man in Thailand a pedophile.  Next time, Milo, just say you didn't like the Ghostbusters movie.  Don't make it your personal goal to harass Leslie Jones.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Well, he intends for every user account to be authenticated which is something I’ve thought needed to happen a long time ago.  You’re free to post anonymously pretty much anywhere on the internet if you like or in forums such as this, but in a place that allows for easy amplification such as twitter and other social media sites you should have to personally own what you post.

Anonymous publication is a long standing treasure in this Country. We wouldn't be here without it.

My position doesn’t infringe on that.  Still plenty of places to publish anonymously and have it shared via twitter.

---

That place needs a massive amount of bleach, mr. clean and some scrub brushes..

---

Anonymous publication is a long standing treasure in this Country. We wouldn't be here without it.

My position doesn’t infringe on that.  Still plenty of places to publish anonymously and have it shared via twitter.

Nah, Twitter is now a significant part of the public square. The idea that you have to identify yourself in order to say unpopular things is begging them to persecute people who practice Wrongthink.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

The night after Musk takeover, a congressional Twitter shake-up: Republicans gain followers, Democrats lose them

As word spread of Elon Musk’s $44 billion deal to take over Twitter, prominent Republican lawmakers gained thousands of followers overnight, while some key Democrats lost thousands.

Nearly three-quarters – 72% – of the Republican accounts gained Twitter followers in the 24-hour span from Monday midmorning to Tuesday morning, according to a USA TODAY analysis of the Twitter followings of the official congressional accounts for 529 members of the House and Senate.

The biggest winners among GOP lawmakers were Jim Jordan, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Matt Gaetz, Kevin McCarthy, Marsha Blackburn and Lauren Boebert.

Almost all Democratic lawmakers – 268 of 270 accounts – lost followers. The biggest losers were Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer and Maxine Waters, as well as independent Bernie Sanders.



Twitter told USA TODAY the fluctuations in follower counts were caused by new accounts being created and existing accounts being deactivated. The result shows a sharp shift in sentiment and an ideological divide over Musk buying Twitter.

"While we continue to take action on accounts that violate our spam policy which can affect follower counts, these fluctuations appear to largely have been a result of an increase in new account creation and deactivation," Twitter said in an emailed statement...


Run, bots, run!!

---

The night after Musk takeover, a congressional Twitter shake-up: Republicans gain followers, Democrats lose them

As word spread of Elon Musk’s $44 billion deal to take over Twitter, prominent Republican lawmakers gained thousands of followers overnight, while some key Democrats lost thousands.

Nearly three-quarters – 72% – of the Republican accounts gained Twitter followers in the 24-hour span from Monday midmorning to Tuesday morning, according to a USA TODAY analysis of the Twitter followings of the official congressional accounts for 529 members of the House and Senate.

The biggest winners among GOP lawmakers were Jim Jordan, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Matt Gaetz, Kevin McCarthy, Marsha Blackburn and Lauren Boebert.

Almost all Democratic lawmakers – 268 of 270 accounts – lost followers. The biggest losers were Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer and Maxine Waters, as well as independent Bernie Sanders.



Twitter told USA TODAY the fluctuations in follower counts were caused by new accounts being created and existing accounts being deactivated. The result shows a sharp shift in sentiment and an ideological divide over Musk buying Twitter.

"While we continue to take action on accounts that violate our spam policy which can affect follower counts, these fluctuations appear to largely have been a result of an increase in new account creation and deactivation," Twitter said in an emailed statement...


Run, bots, run!!

I don't think it's just the bots.  I kind of think that some employees of Twitter are basically "covering their tracks" and changing some of the things that they have done.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

My position doesn’t infringe on that.  Still plenty of places to publish anonymously and have it shared via twitter.

Nah, Twitter is now a significant part of the public square. The idea that you have to identify yourself in order to say unpopular things is begging them to persecute people who practice Wrongthink.

I disagree with your conclusions though your argument is not without merit.  Perhaps we can agree that those who want to authenticate themselves should be able to do so relatively easily.  For those that have not yet been authenticated, instead of a blue check mark, will have a pink vagina or steaming pile of [BLEEP] or some equally amusing yet appropriate logo next to their names.  And give users the ability to ignore all unauthenticated individuals with a switch in settings if they wish.

---

The night after Musk takeover, a congressional Twitter shake-up: Republicans gain followers, Democrats lose them

As word spread of Elon Musk’s $44 billion deal to take over Twitter, prominent Republican lawmakers gained thousands of followers overnight, while some key Democrats lost thousands.

Nearly three-quarters – 72% – of the Republican accounts gained Twitter followers in the 24-hour span from Monday midmorning to Tuesday morning, according to a USA TODAY analysis of the Twitter followings of the official congressional accounts for 529 members of the House and Senate.

The biggest winners among GOP lawmakers were Jim Jordan, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Matt Gaetz, Kevin McCarthy, Marsha Blackburn and Lauren Boebert.

Almost all Democratic lawmakers – 268 of 270 accounts – lost followers. The biggest losers were Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer and Maxine Waters, as well as independent Bernie Sanders.



Twitter told USA TODAY the fluctuations in follower counts were caused by new accounts being created and existing accounts being deactivated. The result shows a sharp shift in sentiment and an ideological divide over Musk buying Twitter.

"While we continue to take action on accounts that violate our spam policy which can affect follower counts, these fluctuations appear to largely have been a result of an increase in new account creation and deactivation," Twitter said in an emailed statement...


Run, bots, run!!

I don't think it's just the bots.  I kind of think that some employees of Twitter are basically "covering their tracks" and changing some of the things that they have done.

You’re most likely correct. I wonder if Musk has people who are going in to survey the workings. I’d be afraid of sabotage, if I were him.

---

The night after Musk takeover, a congressional Twitter shake-up: Republicans gain followers, Democrats lose them

As word spread of Elon Musk’s $44 billion deal to take over Twitter, prominent Republican lawmakers gained thousands of followers overnight, while some key Democrats lost thousands.

Nearly three-quarters – 72% – of the Republican accounts gained Twitter followers in the 24-hour span from Monday midmorning to Tuesday morning, according to a USA TODAY analysis of the Twitter followings of the official congressional accounts for 529 members of the House and Senate.

The biggest winners among GOP lawmakers were Jim Jordan, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Matt Gaetz, Kevin McCarthy, Marsha Blackburn and Lauren Boebert.

Almost all Democratic lawmakers – 268 of 270 accounts – lost followers. The biggest losers were Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer and Maxine Waters, as well as independent Bernie Sanders.



Twitter told USA TODAY the fluctuations in follower counts were caused by new accounts being created and existing accounts being deactivated. The result shows a sharp shift in sentiment and an ideological divide over Musk buying Twitter.

"While we continue to take action on accounts that violate our spam policy which can affect follower counts, these fluctuations appear to largely have been a result of an increase in new account creation and deactivation," Twitter said in an emailed statement...


Run, bots, run!!

I don't think it's just the bots.  I kind of think that some employees of Twitter are basically "covering their tracks" and changing some of the things that they have done.

It's both of those things, but it's also what the Twitter spokesperson said.  Sincere, real, liberals are deactivating their accounts in protest.  Time will tell if that was a smart move for them.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Nah, Twitter is now a significant part of the public square. The idea that you have to identify yourself in order to say unpopular things is begging them to persecute people who practice Wrongthink.

I disagree with your conclusions though your argument is not without merit.  Perhaps we can agree that those who want to authenticate themselves should be able to do so relatively easily.  For those that have not yet been authenticated, instead of a blue check mark, will have a pink vagina or steaming pile of [BLEEP] or some equally amusing yet appropriate logo next to their names.  And give users the ability to ignore all unauthenticated individuals with a switch in settings if they wish.

I'm on board with this idea.

But still think there's an even better way, that preserves the ability for some influential Twitter users to remain anonymous.

The government should make a law regulating any website where stuff can be shared virally, that before the ten thousandth person sees it, an employee of the website has to vouch that it is truthful, not deceptive, and not fraudulent.  If it doesn't pass that test, the social media company could still share it as long as it was clearly and prominently marked "Not true". A user could bypass the test by allowing the website to prominently mark his post as "just a joke".

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Nah, Twitter is now a significant part of the public square. The idea that you have to identify yourself in order to say unpopular things is begging them to persecute people who practice Wrongthink.

I disagree with your conclusions though your argument is not without merit.  Perhaps we can agree that those who want to authenticate themselves should be able to do so relatively easily.  For those that have not yet been authenticated, instead of a blue check mark, will have a pink vagina or steaming pile of [BLEEP] or some equally amusing yet appropriate logo next to their names.  And give users the ability to ignore all unauthenticated individuals with a switch in settings if they wish.

Sure, that way real [BLEEP] like Franklin, Hamilton, and Madison can hide behind what you see as unneeded anonymity. Lol.

---

I disagree with your conclusions though your argument is not without merit.  Perhaps we can agree that those who want to authenticate themselves should be able to do so relatively easily.  For those that have not yet been authenticated, instead of a blue check mark, will have a pink vagina or steaming pile of [BLEEP] or some equally amusing yet appropriate logo next to their names.  And give users the ability to ignore all unauthenticated individuals with a switch in settings if they wish.

I'm on board with this idea.

But still think there's an even better way, that preserves the ability for some influential Twitter users to remain anonymous.

The government should make a law regulating any website where stuff can be shared virally, that before the ten thousandth person sees it, an employee of the website has to vouch that it is truthful, not deceptive, and not fraudulent.  If it doesn't pass that test, the social media company could still share it as long as it was clearly and prominently marked "Not true". A user could bypass the test by allowing the website to prominently mark his post as "just a joke".

Of course you are. Lapdogs gonna lap.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I think Jaguarmeister has a good middle ground. The option for anonymity is fair. People don't have to read it, but it doesn't prohibit people who want to keep their personal life private. Just do it like their graphic content, "The person posting this has chosen to remain anonymous. Click to view their content."

---

I disagree with your conclusions though your argument is not without merit.  Perhaps we can agree that those who want to authenticate themselves should be able to do so relatively easily.  For those that have not yet been authenticated, instead of a blue check mark, will have a pink vagina or steaming pile of [BLEEP] or some equally amusing yet appropriate logo next to their names.  And give users the ability to ignore all unauthenticated individuals with a switch in settings if they wish.

I'm on board with this idea.

But still think there's an even better way, that preserves the ability for some influential Twitter users to remain anonymous.

The government should make a law regulating any website where stuff can be shared virally, that before the ten thousandth person sees it, an employee of the website has to vouch that it is truthful, not deceptive, and not fraudulent.  If it doesn't pass that test, the social media company could still share it as long as it was clearly and prominently marked "Not true". A user could bypass the test by allowing the website to prominently mark his post as "just a joke".

Not looking for fact checkers or concerned about content personally.  A fact checker’s political bent will undoubtedly shine through.  I’m more concerned about manipulation of groupthink via artificial amplification by algorithms and bots.

---

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519...dSLUxJt07w

https://thepulse.one/2022/04/27/u-s-home...formation/

IN BRIEF

The Facts:
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas testified Wednesday that the Department of Homeland Security is creating a "Disinformation Governance Board" to combat misinformation.
Efforts to control information are at an all time high, and are being done under the guise of "protecting democracy."
Reflect On:
Are we seeing a continual take over of the information landscape?
Who will decide what is misinformation?
What are we to do about what is considered misinformation today but is no longer misinformation months later? Do the punished voices get apologies or their lost revenue back?

In February the US Department of Homeland Security stated that sharing “misinformation” online may be considered domestic terrorism. The latest news with regards to Homeland Security’s efforts came from their Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. He testified Wednesday that the Department of Homeland Security has created a “Disinformation Governance Board” to combat misinformation ahead of the 2022 midterms, but the effort has long been underway.


Mayorkas said the Disinformation Governance Board will be led by Undersecretary for Policy Rob Silver, and co-chaired with principal deputy general counsel Jennifer Gaskill. The board will be headed by executive director Nina Jankowicz.

News of the Disinformation Governance Board comes two days after Tesla CEO Elon Musk secured a $44 billion deal to buy Twitter, a move that seemingly caused panic among many who fear more free speech on Twitter may be a bad thing. We go into a deeper discussion about that here if you’re interested.


According to Mayorkas, the department of Homeland Security claims they are seeing a growing connection between disinformation and the alleged ongoing threat posed by domestic extremism...

---

Texas Landowner Makes Elon Musk an Offer He Can't Refuse: 100 Free Acres and a Single Stipulation

This week, Tesla CEO Elon Musk reached a deal to acquire Twitter. While it could take a few months for the deal to officially close, a landowner in Texas already offered Musk a potential next step.

https://www.westernjournal.com/texas-lan...l24w_sUsak

---

You know trouble is right around the corner when your best friend tells you to hold his beer!!