It's "Twitter Freedom Friday!"

[iso36]

B-5!!!!!
https://i.imgur.com/jG48OXJ.png

B-5?

IBNGO?

Must be all the excitement.

‘Fro-dough will be along shortly to chastise the error.

 

[schism666]

Anyone fuck Ill 74’s wife last night?

This sounds like you fucking around on your wife. You run away, ignore it, hide your Profile...suppression and hiding from the Facts doesn't change anything.

You're projecting, Rob.

Either that or you're White Knighting for Ill's extra-marital activities.

Is it one of those misogynistic "Bro's Before Ho's" deals?

Hey Ill how’s the cybersex uh coming along?

Thanks. You should mind your own business.

View attachment 2192569

 

[Lazaran]

View attachment 2192569

Poor lil’ fella can’t dazzle people with brilliance OR baffle them with bullshit.

What’s a cut-rate midget troll to do???

 

[schism666]

Poor lil’ fella can’t dazzle people with brilliance OR baffle them with bullshit.

What’s a cut-rate midget troll to do???

watching him desperately try to live vicariously through someone he cannot stand is some next-level self-loathing type of sadness.

 

[iso36]

watching him desperately try to live vicariously through someone he cannot stand is some next-level self-loathing type of sadness.

Or I’m laughing at losers.

 

[schism666]

Or I’m laughing at losers.

no, that's not it. no one "laughs" obsessively at someone like you "laugh" obsessively at someone, psycho.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Of course! The NYT story in 2020 was all over Twitter at the time. It’s a good bet the returns Trump must now turn over to Congress now will be leaked to the press and all over Twitter as well.

No, that isn’t what I asked. I specifically asked about October 2020. So if someone obtained Trump’s taxes without Trump or a court releasing them Twitter should have allowed people to post Trump’s taxes, correct?

 

[iso36]

no, that's not it. no one "laughs" obsessively at someone like you "laugh" obsessively at someone, psycho.

Ahahaha!

See?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

No, that isn’t what I asked. I specifically asked about October 2020. So if someone obtained Trump’s taxes without Trump or a court releasing them Twitter should have allowed people to post Trump’s taxes, correct?

If there was no legal exposure to Twitter, the answer would probably be yes. The timing of the election or the fact that the individual was a presidential candidate would not factor into the decision. If the material was already in the public domain (as the NY Post story about Hunter’s laptop was) it be a no brainer. Why do you ask?

 

[schism666]

Ahahaha!

See?

yes that's why i pointed out your psychosis.

 

[iso36]

yes that's why i pointed out your psychosis.

Ahahahaha!

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

If there was no legal exposure to Twitter, the answer would probably be yes. The timing of the election or the fact that the individual was a presidential candidate would not factor into the decision. If the material was already in the public domain (as the NY Post story about Hunter’s laptop was) it be a no brainer. Why do you ask?

Simply to point out the hypocrisy.

 

[AsmodeusPrime]

B-5!!!!!
https://i.imgur.com/jG48OXJ.png

B-5!!!!!
https://i.imgur.com/jG48OXJ.png

The free speech melt down continues.

I LOVE how much free speech infuriates leftoids.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Simply to point out the hypocrisy.

Nothing hypocritical about calling BS on Twitter’s suppression of the NY Post laptop story or being appreciative of Musk releasing details on what happened. All good now. Old guard is gone and the platform is improving.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Old guard is gone and the platform is improving.

https://i.imgur.com/8XrHaRb.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/dd/72/09/dd7209cc90235e2f91e365d216d6c749.gif

https://media.tenor.com/A3fxDWoZcPAAAAAC/bitch-you-better-be-joking-maddy-perez.gif

 

[phrodeau]

Nothing hypocritical about calling BS on Twitter’s suppression of the NY Post laptop story or being appreciative of Musk releasing details on what happened. All good now. Old guard is gone and the platform is improving.

The Wall Street Journal wouldn’t carry the laptop story either. In fact, the original author of the New York Post story wouldn’t allow his name on the byline.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

The Wall Street Journal wouldn’t carry the laptop story either. In fact, the original author of the New York Post story wouldn’t allow his name on the byline.

WSJ is not a social media platform. Apples to oranges. The NY Post ran the story as an exclusive. Other news outlets chose to ignore the Post’s story which is fine. Twitter didn’t want you to read the Post story so they banned it.

 

[Lazaran]

The Wall Street Journal wouldn’t carry the laptop story either. In fact, the original author of the New York Post story wouldn’t allow his name on the byline.

Elon tried………..and failed.

BabyBoobs keeps trying………..and failing.

*nods*

 

[phrodeau]

WSJ is not a social media platform. Apples to oranges. The NY Post ran the story as an exclusive. Other news outlets chose to ignore the Post’s story which is fine. Twitter didn’t want you to read the Post story so they banned it.

Is that what happened to you? Twitter kept you from reading the Post?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Is that what happened to you? Twitter kept you from reading the Post?

No, Twitter didn’t keep me from reading the story. But they did ban it on their platform and suspended users who tried to share it.

 

[phrodeau]

No, Twitter didn’t keep me from reading the story. But they did ban it on their platform and suspended users who tried to share it.

Was anyone denied income because they were prevented from advertising for the Post on Twitter?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Was anyone denied income because they were prevented from advertising for the Post on Twitter?

No. Did someone claim they were?

 

[phrodeau]

No. Did someone claim they were?

So what difference is there between a news outlet and a social media platform, other than who gets paid?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

So what difference is there between a news outlet and a social media platform, other than who gets paid?

I’ll let you read up on section 230 and the various legal distinctions between publishers, distributors, and platforms. The more obvious distinction to the layman is that news outlets try to sell news. They try to build their brands on the accuracy, relevance, and quality of the content they publish. Social media platforms are in the business of monetizing their users. They have have terms of use templates that are subjectively applied, but they have no journalistic standards. If you post a picture of your beagle on Facebook, no one will fact check that it’s your dog or verify it’s breed. And no one will edit your grammar. If you post that your ex gf is a whore, the platform won’t worry about getting sued for libel.

 

[Lazaran]

Was anyone denied income because they were prevented from advertising for the Post on Twitter?

BabyBoobs must think that a brick and mortar business is obligated to allow an unaffiliated sketchy individual to display their own sketchy items on the business’s shelves .

I don’t think that’s how it works