Rumble could be banned in the UK under new online safety laws

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Muldar

"Standards and rules are no evidence."

They are to most reasonable folk.

Simply, No!

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Muldar

I'll explain it as basic as I can for you,Youtube, like Rumble is a business and will not be independent or doesn't need to be by law, they have CEO's and share holders to answer to.

The BBC answer to Ofcom if and when they become impartial as they are a state owned but independent/seperate 'company' with a Chairman.
BBC regulation and Operating Framework...
www.ofcom.org.uk...

The Police Complaints Commision have a set of standards, regulations and codes of practice they must follow.
Here's an example..
www.legislation.gov.uk...#:~:text=The%20Police%20%28Complaints%20and%20Misconduct%29%20Regulations%202020%20These,complaint s%20about%2C%20and%20related%20matters%20concerning%2C%20the%20police.

But you're still parroting the official narratives. You don't even state your opinion. Only some sort of weird apology

You haven't provided any evidence (so I can deny it) So many pages because all OFCOM apologists are unable to provide anything in support of their claims.

So you're now claiming BBC and the Independent Police Complaint Commission are also independent?!

Do you see the irony in the name 'Independent Police Complaint Commission'?!

a reply to: Muldar

"Do you know what a circular argument is??!!"

I do. Yours?

So, is the IOPC not independent?

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Muldar

"Standards and rules are no evidence."

They are to most reasonable folk.

Simply, No!

That coming from someone who will believe two strangers online without any evidence whatsoever.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Muldar

"Do you know what a circular argument is??!!"

I do. Yours?

So, is the IOPC not independent?

I don't know.

But I cannot use their assertion as proof or evidence they are.

originally posted by: Kurokage

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Muldar

"Standards and rules are no evidence."

They are to most reasonable folk.

Simply, No!

That coming from someone who will believe two strangers online without any evidence whatsoever.

nickyw and teapot have disagreed with the assertions made by others OFCOM is independent. The burden of proof are to those who made these assertions in the first place.

I am not from the UK so I cannot take your reassurances and official lines you're parroting as evidence of anything.

The burden of proof is on you.

a reply to: Muldar

You don't know. Then why mention it?

Not just their assertion, how it is constituted, its code of conduct and all that sort of thing.

Cue your next circular argument....

a reply to: Muldar

But you're still parroting the official narratives. You don't even state your opinion. Only some sort of weird apology

You haven't provided any evidence (so I can deny it) So many pages because all OFCOM apologists are unable to provide anything in support of their claims.

So you're now claiming BBC and the Independent Police Complaint Commission are also independent?!

Do you see the irony in the name 'Independent Police Complaint Commission'?!

The only parroting going on is you and your belief of complete strangers online without a shred of evidence to prove their assertion.

I don't need to as the evidence on how these organisations are managed speak for themselves.

Please point to the Apology you claim to keep seeing? I think that my be your guilty conscience screaming out to you.

a reply to: Kurokage

Pages upon pages because the OFCOM apologists cannot give a single piece of evidence of why do they think the organisation is independent.

It's absurd to try to ask others to disprove your assertions or OFCOM's assertions.

Do you want us also to disprove the existence of gremlins?!

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Muldar

But you're still parroting the official narratives. You don't even state your opinion. Only some sort of weird apology

You haven't provided any evidence (so I can deny it) So many pages because all OFCOM apologists are unable to provide anything in support of their claims.

So you're now claiming BBC and the Independent Police Complaint Commission are also independent?!

Do you see the irony in the name 'Independent Police Complaint Commission'?!

The only parroting going on is you and your belief of complete strangers online without a shred of evidence

I don't need to as the evidence on how these organisations are managed speak for themselves.

Please point to the Apology you claim to keep seeing? I think that my be your guilty conscience screaming out to you.

You haven't provided any evidence (so I can deny it) So many pages because all OFCOM apologists are unable to provide anything in support of their claims.

Only parroting of official lines.

Any evidence they're independent??

a reply to: Kurokage

You said

It's clearly obvious you don't want to understand how Standards, quality systems and legal systems work to help an organisation like Ofcom remain impartial

Unfortunately the standards, policies, and promises, are not evidence for anything claimed in relation to being independent.

originally posted by: Muldar
a reply to: Kurokage

Pages upon pages because the OFCOM apologists cannot give a single piece of evidence of why do they think the organisation is independent.

It's absurd to try to ask others to disprove your assertions or OFCOM's assertions.

Do you want us also to disprove the existence of gremlins?!

You keep circling here with your refusal to ignore how an organisation is run and how it maintains it's impartiality and choosing to except 2 strangers opinon as fact.
I posted evidence of codes of practice and codes of conduct, something you don't seem to understand? Maybe in your country of orgin things were more corrupt?

originally posted by: Muldar
a reply to: Kurokage

You said

It's clearly obvious you don't want to understand how Standards, quality systems and legal systems work to help an organisation like Ofcom remain impartial

Unfortunately the standards, policies, and promises, are not evidence for anything claimed in relation to being independent.

Thats exactly what they are for, are you 12 or something.....

originally posted by: Kurokage

originally posted by: Muldar
a reply to: Kurokage

Pages upon pages because the OFCOM apologists cannot give a single piece of evidence of why do they think the organisation is independent.

It's absurd to try to ask others to disprove your assertions or OFCOM's assertions.

Do you want us also to disprove the existence of gremlins?!

You keep circling here with your refusal to ignore how an organisation is run and how it maintains it's impartiality and choosing to except 2 strangers opinon as fact.
I posted evidence of codes of practice and codes of conduct, something you don't seem to understand? Maybe in your country of orgin things were more corrupt?

I ask for evidence they're independent and not hoe they are run.

You could provide it but you have nothing...

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Muldar

"Do you know what a circular argument is??!!"

I do. Yours?

So, is the IOPC not independent?

I don't know.

But I cannot use their assertion as proof or evidence they are.

Very well.

Now, I have had actual dealings with the IPCC (as it was then called) in my professional capacity in respect of clients who pursued claims against Police.

From my direct and personal experience I am of the opinion that they are, indeed, independent.

How bout that then?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

originally posted by: Muldar

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Muldar

"Do you know what a circular argument is??!!"

I do. Yours?

So, is the IOPC not independent?

I don't know.

But I cannot use their assertion as proof or evidence they are.

Very well.

Now, I have had actual dealings with the IPCC (as it was then called) in my professional capacity in respect of clients who pursued claims against Police.

From my direct and personal experience I am of the opinion that they are, indeed, independent.

How bout that then?

That's your experience. Ok

But are they truly independent?
Is OFCOM independent?

originally posted by: Muldar

I ask for evidence they're independent and not hoe they are run.

You could provide it but you have nothing...

The evidence is in how they are run and how they are managed.

originally posted by: Kurokage
originally posted by: Muldar

I ask for evidence they're independent and not hoe they are run.

You could provide it but you have nothing...

The evidence is in how they are run and how they are managed.

That's not evidence.
It's so absurd to claim it is.
Do you see the problem with your argument??

a reply to: Muldar

Yes. My actual real life direct experience. The IPCC was truly independent. As evidenced by my clients claims having been successful.

Not good enough?

I have no direct experience of OFCOM but I see nothing to suggest that they are not.

a reply to: Muldar

As you are not a UK resident, i think i know more about what i stated and linked than you do.

Unless you really think OFCOM are lying when they state they are in fact independent.