Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Because atreides1 Dec 2020 #1
You didn't post a justification for not repealing Section 230. Blue_true Dec 2020 #14
Section 230 specifically ALLOWS moderation. NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #28
Trump was not moderated for years on Facebook and Twitter. Blue_true Dec 2020 #43
People always could sue Trump. NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #47
I want to make the Internet the tool for positive intellectual exchange Blue_true Dec 2020 #51
Read up on Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co. and get back to me. NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #55
No citizen has deep enough pockets to sue Trump...you seriously don't understand how it all works. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #38
The short answer is because we care about their Right to free speech, Volaris Jan 2021 #92
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue_true Dec 2020 #15
Why do you think the repeal should be tied to Covid relief, Crunchy Frog Dec 2020 #44
No. But McConnell appears to be set to tie it to the relief. Blue_true Dec 2020 #48
So you want what Mitch and Trump want. Crunchy Frog Dec 2020 #58
I am perfectly willing to stand and watch both of them stab themselves Blue_true Dec 2020 #75
And you didn't answer any of my questions. Crunchy Frog Dec 2020 #60
I am not proposing giving in. I am proposing letting Trump and McConnell Blue_true Dec 2020 #76
So disingenuous it is then. Thanks for letting us know. Crunchy Frog Dec 2020 #88
I am not trying to be a smart ass. Blue_true Dec 2020 #90
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue_true Dec 2020 #91
No. But McConnell appears to be set to tie it to the relief. Blue_true Dec 2020 #49
And doesn't that tell you something? The legal issues and effects Hortensis Dec 2020 #62
Removal of Section 230 will force social media companies to censure Blue_true Dec 2020 #74
No, I lack the simplifying gene. Both parties have agreed for years Hortensis Dec 2020 #77
Social media companies have failed to follow Section 230. Blue_true Dec 2020 #78
To me it has nothing to do with a check I'd receive, but I have Hortensis Dec 2020 #81
I am not about the money, although people that need it should get it. Blue_true Dec 2020 #85
Hello! You've Been Referred Here Because You're Wrong About Section 230 muriel_volestrangler Jan 2021 #93
The interesting thing is I didn't say any of the "if you said". Blue_true Jan 2021 #94
"If you said "Because of Section 230, websites have no incentive to moderate!" muriel_volestrangler Jan 2021 #95
No, I didn't say the social media companies have no incentive to moderate. Blue_true Jan 2021 #96
Section 230 protects DU NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #2
I post inaccurate stuff on occasion. But I never post purposely malicious stuff. Blue_true Dec 2020 #17
People who might object wouldn't sue you...they would go after the sites which have way more Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #23
I post inaccurate stuff on occasion. But I never post purposely malicious stuff. Blue_true Dec 2020 #18
No, you can be sued, DU cannot under Section 230. NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #25
Maybe I am old-fashioned, maybe I have seen that in Court, truth Blue_true Dec 2020 #31
What planet are you from? The American Rule is both sides pay their own fees NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #33
In Florida, a person can file a counterclaim lawsuit if sued and Blue_true Dec 2020 #40
And the other 49 states? NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #50
I don't know about the other 48, my guess is they have some version of the Florida Blue_true Dec 2020 #71
You've stated you're not a lawyer, so that may explain why you don't know how hard it is to win onenote Dec 2020 #63
A person like Trump has been a repeat offender. Blue_true Dec 2020 #72
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue_true Dec 2020 #73
You don't understand...sure they could go after you but they want to go after the sites and Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #32
Then the sites should moderate knowingly false posts. That is not censorship. nt Blue_true Dec 2020 #46
Twitter does, that's why Trump is complaing about their disclaimers. ahoysrcsm Dec 2020 #67
Twitter only recently started putting in the disclaimers, under public pressure Blue_true Dec 2020 #69
And yet, Trump is butt hurt and want's to get rid of 230 because thy use disclaimers. ahoysrcsm Dec 2020 #86
So now, they simply delete his posts all together for being lies. Blue_true Dec 2020 #87
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue_true Dec 2020 #70
No, it doesn't work that way...and opinion is often not false or true...but people with deep Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #79
You are missing my point. An opinion is not the same as a knowing lie. Blue_true Dec 2020 #83
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue_true Dec 2020 #84
Courts are not about truth and justice... lame54 Dec 2020 #42
Repeal of 230 would be like the repeal of the fairness doctrine times a billion. Squinch Dec 2020 #3
I don't see it that way at all. Blue_true Dec 2020 #7
That is most certainly not true. People are sued over all kinds of things and fighting such suits hlthe2b Dec 2020 #19
If you counter-sue and ask for damages and Court costs (including Lawyer fees), Blue_true Dec 2020 #26
I don't think you understand libel and slander laws. LisaL Dec 2020 #27
Clearly he does not. nt NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #29
I'm sorry, but you are really misinformed. hlthe2b Dec 2020 #30
I don't see it that way at all. Blue_true Dec 2020 #8
That is bullshit. Just look at the crazy shit the GOP does no...we need 230 and McConnell gets Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #11
The GOP does what it does BECAUSE they won't get sued for posting Blue_true Dec 2020 #20
230 allowed twitter to take down Trump's lies without it he could have lied with impunity. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #34
That isn't correct. Trump lied with impunity on Twitter since 2008. Blue_true Dec 2020 #41
And they still won't. Fox went to court and was given permission to lie...this would be used to Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #80
What are you a lawyer? Because I don't have the money to defend everything I post...I can't Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #12
I am not a lawyer and I am not lawsuit happy. Blue_true Dec 2020 #22
An individual can already be sued. BarackTheVote Dec 2020 #39
Then sites should moderate content before posting it. Blue_true Dec 2020 #45
Reviewing every post or tweet or YouTube video before it goes up is BarackTheVote Dec 2020 #52
a PRACTICAL solution to what you're concerned about BarackTheVote Dec 2020 #56
Exactly. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #13
I also don't understand why Democrats would want to defend it either, Blue_true Dec 2020 #4
The posts upstream from yours explain very well. Repeal would mean the end of sites like DU hlthe2b Dec 2020 #6
Wow Bev54 Dec 2020 #54
because we passed a stand alone bill that has the support of the American people questionseverything Dec 2020 #5
Section 230 protects all website and all user...the progressive message will disappear without it. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #9
This message was self-deleted by its author moondust Dec 2020 #64
Section 230 has nothing to do with social media. It's about encryption. Renew Deal Dec 2020 #10
That is untrue...it is part of the decency act and it removed liability from sites for what their Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #21
Sorry, I should say the Section 230 debate. Renew Deal Dec 2020 #57
Senate bill rso Dec 2020 #16
That is in the military bill...nothing to do with the 2000 bill. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #35
Wow greenjar_01 Dec 2020 #24
Anyone confused about Section 230 should read post #21. SMC22307 Dec 2020 #36
So true, if Trump said water was wet still check uponit7771 Dec 2020 #61
As long as it's not used as a partisan weapon, I don't have a problem with an election commission. Crunchy Frog Dec 2020 #37
Bullshit. This was a fair and honest election and having a commision will make it seem otherwise. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #82
This is silly. Wikipedia has been sued multiple times over user content. joshcryer Dec 2020 #53
This message was self-deleted by its author jcgoldie Dec 2020 #59
I'll bet Dump hates 230. moondust Dec 2020 #65
He has a hard-on for Jack Dorsey and is always whining about how "conservative voices"... SMC22307 Dec 2020 #68
Section 230 also protects DU JonLP24 Dec 2020 #66
... William769 Dec 2020 #89
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why would Democrats be so...»Reply #87