You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
WTF dude? Did you even actually read what was written in the Meta letter?
While the 3 points that this House Judiciary GOP account mentioned were all factually true, the way they are presented together is clearly meant to mislead.
I don't have much to say about #1 since the remark is simply far too general to make any reasonable comment on. Depending on a lot of other contextual and background information, #1 could be spun into a good, bad, neutral thing, or anything in between.
#2 is kind of similar, although I would also say that FB pretty much did this since their early days, and if any FB user were to claim that they didn't know that's what FB did, they'd be idiots.
#3 is particularly meaningless. It happened because on FB's own accord, they were trying to fact check the news. IMO for a credible news / social media platform, presenting credible information is more important than delivering that new information at breakneck speed. And because of that, it isn't even about free speech.
Assuming that Twitter account is managed by official GOP staff, it's a shame that the GOP is intentionally trying to mislead people.
#3 is particularly meaningless. It happened because on FB's own accord, they were trying to fact check the news. IMO for a credible news / social media platform, presenting credible information is more important than delivering that new information at breakneck speed. And because of that, it isn't even about free speech.
Not sure how I forgot to mention this because it is something that I will always remember -- during the 2020 POTUS election, the majority of mainstream US media (which are more pro Democrats than pro GOP) have deliberately avoided reporting on Hunter Biden's laptop incident for well over a week -- something like 7 - 10+ days, I seem to remember) even though it really did occurred, and they did so because of the potential (negative) political impact it would have on the Biden campaign. This is extremely shameful, because even though news media could well have a political preference, they still have a fundamental duty to report on current and important news, regardless of whether the news supported their political bias or not. But they have failed to live up to this core value of news media.
WTF dude? Did you even actually read what was written in the Meta letter?
While the 3 points that this House Judiciary GOP account mentioned were all factually true, the way they are presented together is clearly meant to mislead.
I don't have much to say about #1 since the remark is simply far too general to make any reasonable comment on. Depending on a lot of other contextual and background information, #1 could be spun into a good, bad, neutral thing, or anything in between.
#2 is kind of similar, although I would also say that FB pretty much did this since their early days, and if any FB user were to claim that they didn't know that's what FB did, they'd be idiots.
#3 is particularly meaningless. It happened because on FB's own accord, they were trying to fact check the news. IMO for a credible news / social media platform, presenting credible information is more important than delivering that new information at breakneck speed. And because of that, it isn't even about free speech.
Assuming that Twitter account is managed by official GOP staff, it's a shame that the GOP is intentionally trying to mislead people.
Enlight me on what part was misleading?
Zuckerberg himself admitted that members of the administration "including the White House" pressured them into censoring content.
Now, regardless of what constitutes as disinformation or whatever... such suppression of voices, when you read this admission and watch this video
Where Kamala Harris focuses her campaign message on "freedom"... if that's not hypocrisy, I don't know what hypocrisy actually means. They are basically saying "you are free to say whatever as long as it fits our narrative." What kind of freedom is that? It's like what the Chinese official said during the British interview recently: "you can have an opinion on Chinese leader as long as it's positive."
If you listened to ANY of the DNC, every single speaker stressed ad nauseum about representing all Americans even if they don't agree politically.
Did a single person in the RNC say anything even remotely like that? I'll wait.
Your interpretation of someone's words isn't gospel, what you've written above is just your opinion of what she said with no factual or actualized basis.
If you listened to ANY of the DNC, every single speaker stressed ad nauseum about representing all Americans even if they don't agree politically.
Did a single person in the RNC say anything even remotely like that? I'll wait.
Your interpretation of someone's words isn't gospel, what you've written above is just your opinion of what she said with no factual or actualized basis.
I don't even care whatever that was said at DNC and RNC... but look at what they actually do.
Yes, RNC can be fucked up at times, but at least they mostly do what they say. You think they are a bunch of conservative and religious-nutjobs? Oh... I agree. But that's better than the hypocrites at DNC that does exactly what they are so up against. They said it's about freedom, and yet the basic freedom of speech seems to be the first thing they are up against. Censoring and suppressing META group is not something I say or some conspiracy theory that I believe in. META's own head honcho came out to say about that. And if you read through the letter, has the Republicans ever been mentioned?!
DNC said it's about democracy... what part of Kamala's nomination was democratic?! They basically handpicked her without giving a flying fuck about their nomination process.
Yes, RNC is not perfect and their policies can be fucked up, but ask yourself... would you rather have someone who does what they believe in or someone who doesn't do anything what they say they believe in? That's why I said "so much for integrity".... which is another one of the big words DNC like to use, and something they have absolutely nothing to show for.
Yes, RNC is not perfect and their policies can be fucked up, but ask yourself... would you rather have someone who does what they believe in or someone who doesn't do anything what they say they believe in?
I don't even care whatever that was said at DNC and RNC... but look at what they actually do.
Yes, RNC can be fucked up at times, but at least they mostly do what they say. You think they are a bunch of conservative and religious-nutjobs? Oh... I agree. But that's better than the hypocrites at DNC that does exactly what they are so up against. They said it's about freedom, and yet the basic freedom of speech seems to be the first thing they are up against. Censoring and suppressing META group is not something I say or some conspiracy theory that I believe in. META's own head honcho came out to say about that. And if you read through the letter, has the Republicans ever been mentioned?!
DNC said it's about democracy... what part of Kamala's nomination was democratic?! They basically handpicked her without giving a flying fuck about their nomination process.
Yes, RNC is not perfect and their policies can be fucked up, but ask yourself... would you rather have someone who does what they believe in or someone who doesn't do anything what they say they believe in? That's why I said "so much for integrity".... which is another one of the big words DNC like to use, and something they have absolutely nothing to show for.
So you'd like to be friends with some one who tells you they'd rape you in the ass and actually do it, because they got integrity and do as they say.
Hitler really believed in what he was doing and did exactly what he said he'd do too.
At what point was there ever anyone not named Trump who was a serious nominee for the Republican party? Like... for the last 8-ish years too. There have been 3 democratic nominees in that time... and they were not the party that refused peaceful transfer of power... but they're somehow less about democracy?
I think it's cuz some individuals back in the day were fail-bombing all the threads... it was requested from the userbase not Skinny just making a decree
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
.png "Y U NO...?")
