Twitter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by V8Ian

Having concerns about free speech does not lead to being terrified.
Consider; there are two businesses in your community, in direct competition with each other. One business is not prepared to complete on price and service, but wants to be the sole supplier, in order that it may gouge customers. That business starts a campaign of lies to make the other businesses unpopular and unviable.

On this forum name and shame is not allowed, not because freedom of speech is stifled, because of the legal ramifications and costs. The owner of the platform is deemed to be the publisher of any comment on that platform and legally liable for those comments, even if the owner does not agree with said comment. It will be interesting to see how that plays out with the proposed changes coming to Twitter.

---

With all due respect, Ian, I'm having trouble finding an alternative to 'Stifling', here.
'Threatening', perhaps? Are you allowed to threaten someone, even legally, in this day and age?

Just like all announcements by Musk, since about day dot! .. it's a matter of 'waiting ... waiting .. waiting ... waiting .....' [bighmmm]

I just watched Thunderfoots last video ....

Since Musk announced his Twitter intention, Tesla stock has taken a bit of a pounding.

All this nonsense about his intention to allow more freedom, more free speech, less draconian stewardship of the platform ... relative to what baseline.
If he's in charge, and he controls it .. then what's his level of tolerance for misinformation/disinformation/facts!

as an example(one of my fave channels) is Thunderfoot, and is analysis of Musks projects ... if Thunderfoot were to continue to provide content on Musks past present and future projects via Twitter .. you really think they won't be 'moderated' .. and that Musk would simply brush off any negative content directed at himself and his projects.

Maybe the reasoning behind Musks moves on twitter is aimed at the heavily censored Russian market to allow the people there to have some sort of free speech platform[bigwhistle]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trout1105

Whatever happens on twitter there are still legal ramifications under Australian law that will offer redress for false acusations and statements for those affected by them.[thumbsupbig]

---

Yes but only those with huge resource can take the action needed to hold some to account with very deep pockets. The Paparazi drivel and making up crap is funny or offensive? The defamation action by one over clearly fake FB advertising scams is a good example?

The tens of thousands in legal fees and risk your up for 100s of thousands in legal fees mean Free speech is very very expesive and untenable for the vast majority of us if Defamed.

Re Trouts thought of an ambulance required option.

After almost dying I do hate people trying to kill me again. If I call the police re a tosser clearly breaking law and road rulz on a pedestrian crossing or foot path I waste my time. If I did as I would like to ensure they understood driving very selfishly ingnoring rulz and normal ethics like shaking the **** out of them the Police would respond very quickly for the later and not at all for the former?

Mr Musk now possibly mr free speech Peado guy for a Thai diving hero is a very good example. "Elon Musk wins defamation case over 'pedo guy' tweet about caver"

His view of free speech and mine are in Differing universes[thumbsupbig] Cool bit is right back on topic and defamation example par excellence. ubber Rich and powerful win while normal people lose even if a hero like Mr Vernon Unsworth who is Diver and not a pedo guy I understand!

I have copped a few flogging in my time and haven't run off snivelling to the coppers about it.
I just put it down too bad I lost the round, Have to do better next time.

I have little regard for people that start trouble and when they come up short and get a fist in the angry button they run off crying to the police, Very un Australian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trout1105

People can call or accuse me of anything on line it doesn't faze me But if someone called me a pedophile to my face I would most likely have to call them an ambulance [biggrin]

Most people use their common sense and don't make wild accusations in a conversation or a debate, Those that don't do this are usually fringe dwellers and they can be ignored with ease.

Why are you so terrified of free speech?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trout1105

I have copped a few flogging in my time and haven't run off snivelling to the coppers about it.
I just put it down too bad I lost the round, Have to do better next time.

I have little regard for people that start trouble and when they come up short and get a fist in the angry button they run off crying to the police, Very un Australian.

---

Not suggesting you would - If you go to the local police station and listen for an hour or two or know a nice copper who has done some shifts on 000 you would know that "We do not see things as they are. We see things as we are" I always get surprised when some one cuts across three or more lanes from the right lane to turn left as I am sure most of us are :) One this morning and one more 30 minutes ago for me

Just an observation,
It would seem that many of those exposing "Free Speech" only do so on the proviso that your "Free Speech" agrees with their "Free Speech".
If not you are a loony fringe dweller.

BTW I don't think we have free speech simply because we are basically polite, try not to harm or upset people.
Hence we are constantly telling little lies & not saying what we really think.
Those that do lack self control, maybe?
Jonesfam

" ...like anything in life, you need to sort the real from the imaginary and i find it easier to pick the trolls and bots from real people on twitter

i used to do some work for a person who was in on a royal commission and they pointed me to some independent news sources that could be relied upon to report based on fact without opinion etc both here and abroad

most are still active thankfully. "

Back in the day, for a few years I was privy to one such 'interesting' news source, "Intelligence Digest".... Today, it would not only be censored but to possess such information would 'encourage' a late night visit from ASIO et al.
...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonesfam

Just an observation,
It would seem that many of those exposing "Free Speech" only do so on the proviso that your "Free Speech" agrees with their "Free Speech".
If not you are a loony fringe dweller.

BTW I don't think we have free speech simply because we are basically polite, try not to harm or upset people.
Hence we are constantly telling little lies & not saying what we really think.
Those that do lack self control, maybe?
Jonesfam

---

Nothing wrong with manners and being polite sir.
Saying what I think is fine unless its grossly offensive and nasty perhaps [thumbsupbig]

Good night all[thumbsupbig]

Mr Musk not allowed to teeter[thumbsupbig] "Elon Musk has lost a bid to get out of an agreement made with regulators requiring oversight of his tweets about his car firm Tesla.


The settlement was made after he tweeted he had "funding secured" to potentially take Tesla private despite a deal not being close.


The ruling comes just days after the world's richest person struck a deal to buy Twitter for $44bn (£35bn).


Mr Musk says he wants to make Twitter a bastion of free speech.


The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) accused Mr Musk of misleading investors with the 2018 tweet, which caused Tesla's share price to fluctuate.


Mr Musk's lawyers argued that the SEC's pursuit of him "crossed the line into harassment" and interfered with his right to free speech.



US District Judge Lewis Liman rejected those arguments as well as Mr Musk's request to stop a separate SEC investigation into tweets he posted last year regarding the sale of some of his Tesla stock."

Almost forgot about his twitter ban. His idea of a joke or free speech costing investors million or more where hysterical unless you lost a lot of money perhaps?