1ºShane Hadley
You need to pay attention to what actually took place. The previous owner / operator of Twitter took their orders from the DNC and mainstream media who decided what the narrative was on issues such as the origin and treatment of Fauci’s flu and the effectiveness of the experimental drug being passed as a vaccine and face masks. As long as you toed the party line you could Tweet to your hearts content. BUT, if you had a different opinion you were banned for a time and could be permanently suspended.
But now, Musk realizes that diversity actually means diverse opinions, and that Democrats and other leftists are going to have to learn they no longer control the narrative.
2ºShane is right. Hate speech, misinformation and lies serve no one. They should be banned whenever they are found. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech, but simply propaganda that can endanger lives. If it is not truth and proven facts, it serves no purpose.
We should all remember that the "freedom of speech" was created to be sure the truth was not suppressed. It was NOT created for the truth to be suppressed by lies, propaganda or misinformation.
The Supreme Court has determined that certain types of speech, such as fighting words, violent threats and misleading advertising, are of only “low” First Amendment value because they don’t contribute to a public discussion of ideas and suppress the truth, and are therefore not protected.
3ºBryce Stevens higher than 6th grade and don't worry about idaho. Just look at democrat ran places like Oregon that removed graduation requirements. That should make people smarter right? Also my education doesn't fully come from Idaho as I have lived in other States but of course you saw Idaho and just assumed. You have no idea what my education is so don't speak as if you do. Maybe I should also ask what is your reading level? By almost every metric Americans have gotten tumber since the inception of the Department of Education. That includes all States and not just one over the other. It is almost like they have actually been making people dumber for years And if it wasn't intentional then that just shows how crappy the government really runs things
https://www.oregonlive.co...k-about-it.html
4ºI have been waiting for a re-appeal review for a year now after being banned for saying something that turned out to be true, but wasn't popular at the time during loose rules when anything that went against the narrative was mislabeled as misinformation or hate speech. There is no proper support and you can't even use the site anymore otherwise because it keeps you logged in during the appeal without an option to log out while you are locked out of the account to at least log out so every Twitter link brings you to the appeal page instead of content you want to see. And if you don't agree with the appeal result you have nobody to approach with the only option being cancelling your appeal and accepting the punishment of a strike. Terrible service designed to make you give up using it.
5ºEdward Lebron Sanford I America is sending billions of dollars to Ukraine so why can't they use those billions of dollars to serve the American people? Why does it become a billionaire's job when the government itself has billions of dollars? Musk is not a voted for representative of this country whereas those in the government are so why are we expecting more representation from a billionaire than our own government? You do know that a lot of those people sleeping on the streets are American citizens right? Why does the American government seem to care more about Ukrainian citizens than their own American Citizens? If you're going to speak about how anyone should be spending billions of dollars maybe you should be more concerned about how the government is bidding our billions of tax dollars while not doing much for the American people
6ºRandy Rice I’m saying neither comment rises to the level of damage to an individual. “In order for a plaintiff to prevail in a defamation lawsuit, he or she must be able to show that the defamatory statement damaged him or her in some way. This may be expressed as demonstrating that the damage was significant, quantifiable and documented. This is usually accomplished by showing that the victim’s reputation has been damaged. If the person who was insulted online was running a business, damages may be shown by the loss of business or profit. Some statements are so inherently injurious that a victim may not need to show actual damages, such as statements accusing the individual of committing a crime, of being incompetent in his or her profession, of certain sexual conduct or of having an infectious disease. A common test to determine whether a person’s reputation has been damaged is if the comment would cause the individual’s peers to think less of him or her.” https://www.hg.org/legal-...me-online-34430
7ºDwight Huth You mean put sections against the same electric vehicles that government officials have been pushing in their big push For electric vehicles? If the government throws sanctions on a private company that they previously argued a private company can do what it wants what would they be doing other than acting out of a temper tantrum? Funny how beautiful musk people claim there was a private company that could do what it wants when it came to censoring people but now that musk owns it and wants to uncensor people apparently know it is issue. Clearly people just hate musk and the actual idea of uncensored free speech as free speech was intended