I fear for and pity those who need their information to be curated. — NOS4A2

It’s frightening and piteous that POTUS can only be trusted to speak and act in ways that are self-serving.

That's what happens when the leader of the Free World™ is a crybaby snowflake I guess.

Seriously, has there ever been a world leader as Snowflakely as Trump? The dude handles criticism like a child.

His speech is still there. He hasn't been censored. Someone else exercised their right to free speech by saying a particular comment isn't proved. It's all basic first amendment stuff.

Yeah, you might be right as far as “the right” is concerned. I don’t see why a president shouldn’t able to say what he wants. I’d be interested to hear your argument as to why he shouldn’t.

If I were Twitter I'd double down now with a warning under every tweet;

"Some people think the President is a total douche. Many state leaders don't take him seriously and we don't either. Take the above comment with a ton of salt and find independent corroboration of what he says. Btw, Fox News doesn't count."

And watch the meltdown.

Saying a comment isn’t proven is one thing, but an entity stamping their mark of approval on a comment is another.

No, it isn't. Moreover, it's not a stamp of approval it's a warning the comment might be false.

Sure it is.

I think what Twitter did was perfect. They didn't single Trump out with anything particularly exceptional. They called him out on bullshit like they might any other standard popular bullshit. It means people like NOS have to writhe like the intellectual maggots they are to try and cast it in a bad light - in this case, a hilarious appeal to free speech that demonstrates a total incapacity to understand what free speech is.

Right. Leave the legal stuff to the lawyers, buddy.

Nothing to do with law, pal.

I like demonstrating what "free speech" really means by taking it to the extremes in the way all the new racists "must protect our way of life", "protect cultural identity", "norms and values" people do all the time. They figured out how to skirt the law while still getting their racist messages across. We have a couple of them on the boards here as well.

"They don't have our norms and values and we should limit immigration because they'll change the fabric of society".

"Some people say they [eat babies/insert weird cultural practice]".

Sometimes it's the simple stuff that works. Like these idiots who appeal to free speech as a reason to, uh, shut it down. Let 'em 'free speech' for long enough and they spill all kinds of hypocritical vomit out of their faces.

You claim they did something they shouldn't do. What law did they break? I claim whatever they say about a particular comment, even if they downright lied themselves, is protected by the first amendment.

Take it to the extreme. If you say "A" and I say "A is false" and "A" stands for whatever you say, regardless of me verifying whether "A" is true, I'm entirely free to do so. That's how it works. And if I do this on the website I own, that you use for free to reach millions of people, you really have fuck all to say about what I do with my property as well.

Also

Personally, I’m an absolutist when it comes to free speech. I believe all speech should be allowed. — NOS4A2

Don't expect NOS to be consistent about anything - save his gargling of Trump's balls.

I never said twitter doesn’t have the right to do what they want with their property. I’m saying it’s wrong to alter someone’s expression and essentially violate their human right.

I’m saying it’s wrong to alter someone’s expression and essentially violate their human right. — NOS4A2

:rofl:

Trump got his human rights violated by being fact checked :lol:

I hope you're being handsomely compensated for embarrassing yourself like this.

How is commenting on someone else's comment altering someone's expression?

And if we're going back for a second to your "stamp of approval", this in fact would be a stamp of disapproval. Which Trump does all the time by calling certain media outlets critical of him "fake news". Or calling people he doesn't like frauds or liars.

And Trump isn't even called that, it just has a link that says: "Get the facts about mail-in ballots". Only after clicking it, will you get links to CNN, NBC, the Hill and WaPo and various other papers and experts.

Meanwhile, great distraction from the fact that he's been responsible for about 40,000 needless corona deaths and higher costs to contain it due to his inaction during February. Also, he's still a corrupt and sore loser.

Libertarian: I believe in free speech and will always defend it.
Non-libertarian: Bullshit.
Libertarian: Shut him down!!!

It’s not a comment. There are thousands of comments under his tweets. I would say it’s more like a warning label or addendum.

Libertarian: I believe in free speech and will always defend it.
Non-libertarian: Addendum: Bullshit.
Libertarian: Shut him down!!!

The form of speech is irrelevant. You just don't call it a comment now because it has a different form than "comments" in Twitter, which in fact are called tweets. It's not a tweet but both tweets and the link are speech. Go on... wriggle some more.

The worm continues to squirm...

One of the fun things about Trump's Twitter is that it's filled with people giving him shit. Like, if you pick a random Trump tweet and read the comments, the majority of people in there are those who calling him on his trash, with a few interspaced bootlickers every once in a while. His much vaunted following is largely a troop of people spectating the delirum of an imbecile shithead fucking up the country he's supposedly governing. Twitter simply made it a bit more official.

If it’s a comment then who made it?

Twitter, Inc.

And given that cooperations are people too... (thanks Capitalism!)

It’s a twitter comment. The doublespeak is profound.

Yup. This is the dystopian near future we're heading for: business men setting the political agenda in broad daylight. Gates is advising on healthcare and education. Twitter and Facebook define the limits and exercise of free speech to the extent it won't affect their bottom line. Google, Apple and Facebook advise us on privacy. Politicians just have their poles greased and holes lubed.

Let's not kid ourselves that Dorsey would roll out this feature if it would hurt them. At the same time this particular change is good for everyone as it broadens the discussions with references to facts and other opinions and breaks the echo-chamber. If it's exercised on both sides of the spectrum (in the Netherlands, anti-vaxxers are left wing, retro-hippy know-it-alls) it's a win for Twitter users to get informed.

On the whole though, all these billionaires need to fuck off out of the political decision making process.

I don't get what point you're making. What mental steps did you go through to reach an Orwellian classification like that?