Posted on 05/13/2019 10:54:23 AM PDT by Red Badger
Well, ok, how about if the author asked you to cite the neo-nazi creed?
I will miss GBFM, lozzlozzzzl and how to desouls the womens.
Wrong recipient; sorry about that!
Sorry, I don’t know what the neo-nazi creed is.
If somebody asked me to recite it? You have to be kidding.
They’re getting ready for the election, when they plan to shut us up entirely and promote radical America-hating leftists.
No you won't.
https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/the-16-commandments-of-poon
the JG
Now if I can only find a link to the article “Its easy to identify a sloot”
Seriously?
Wordpress.com is now Big Tech?
I’ll bet there are at least 500 other hosting services that could handle that blog and the readers would be none the wiser.
Are you saying no hosting service should have any say about the content that they host?
I’m beginning to think that your 1m user test is a fiction and that you just want everyone to be able to post their their random thoughts on anyone else’s platform - for free.
Right?
If it's free speech, and they are carrying significant levels of public traffic, then "No", they shouldn't be allowed to censor content.
If they don't like that requirement, they should find another line of work. I don't care who owns the telephone poles. By G@d they'll carry it all, or they won't carry any of it!
I’m beginning to think that your 1m user test is a fiction and that you just want everyone to be able to post their their random thoughts on anyone else’s platform - for free.
Only if they carry other traffic for free. If they charge other people, they can charge everyone. What they cannot be allowed to do is get huge numbers of communication traffic, and then control what that traffic is.
So we see that the Achilles heel of capitalism is its tendency towards monopoly. Until conservatives address that weakness, good luck with the modern world.
Now you're back to saying Jim can't ban people.
You try to hide behind "huge numbers" but that's just a convenient dodge because your basic premise is so preposterous.
In the authoritarian world you advocate government will define 'huge' and you won't have any say - or property rights.
Notice the qualifier "huge numbers of communication traffic" in my post. If you are small fry, you can do what you want, but when your attempts to censor affect millions, then you need to be forced to carry all traffic.
As regrettable as it is, Free Republic is small fry in the larger scheme of things. I wish it weren't, but it is.
You try to hide behind "huge numbers" but that's just a convenient dodge because your basic premise is so preposterous.
My basic premise is that censorship of speech is just as great of a threat coming from the "private" sector as it is coming from government. We cannot allow it on any large scale.
In the authoritarian world you advocate government will define 'huge' and you won't have any say - or property rights.
Forcing everyone to allow freedom of speech is "authoritarian"? I begin to think you do not understand the word.
I have no idea what your comment means.
...... what's "white nationalism?"
Mesopotamia West (a blog) was wiped off the blogosphere years back; a product of “PC” attacks by SJWs before the term SJW had been coined.
Frank Hilliard was the man’s name, doubt few here know even what I’m on about ...
Aside from what that list is called, I don’t see the problem with any of them. Men need to do everything they can to protect themselves and their resources.
This was my favorite blog. Brilliant guy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.