Shouldn’t Twitter Trolls = Fire in a public place

originally posted by: SocratesJohnson



Does this now mean that tech companies have more power to censor?

They've always had and have used their power to censor.

Does Twitter T&C override people’s 1st amendment rights?

1st Amendment only applies to government, I think you mean the right to free expression.

Can twitter block or remove me from twitter for saying something to a politician that, that politician cannot block me for?

Yes. Tech companies now have the ability to manipulate free expression. Which is horrifying.

So many use public forums to express themselves. We obviously do it. But when companies can determine what is said online and how it is said, then you have an opportunity to manipulate social dialogue.

Ideologically, it is nothing short of tyrannical.

As many have said here.

Trump is using his twitter in an official capacity.

1st amendment says.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The right to petition has been extended to all branches over the years.

Therefore he may not block people.

However SCotUS says.

Nothing in the First Amendment or in this Court's case law interpreting it suggests that the rights to speak, associate, and petition require government policymakers to listen or respond to communications of members of the public on public issues.

supreme.justia.com...

Trump is neither obligated to read or respond to mean tweets.

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

I was blocked from Trumps feed for asking a simple non insulting question about the wall he was supposed to build.

Why? I threw in a joke, it wasn't hurtful or insulting, I think I made a remark about the great wall being constructed quicker, it was a harmless joke but who knows who banned me. Trump has no sense of humor and methinks he takes himself too seriously and secretly has a inferiority complex, or there could be another player involved.

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

It’s political. Twitter accounts aren’t persons. Anyone without an account can still see the tweets. It is the stupidest ruling I’ve ever heard.

originally posted by: SocratesJohnson
To me if a politician wants to block a Trill, that’s the same as not allowing someone to yell fire in a theater.

Do people have a grudge against symbiots?

a reply to: intrepid

Its the spots on the neck that disconcert people, if you ask me.

That and the fact that you are often talking to more than one person, if discussing matters with a Trill

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: eNumbra

Actually that is not true. When Trump signed up for Twitter he accepted there T&C and as living in a country that we do and that Twitter adherents as to they can change policy as they please.
And no Twitter is not a government entity.

any company that becomes a monopoly has the ability to govern their corner of the market,

in this way twitter has most certainly become its own government