Should misinformation be banned from the major platforms?

[Daedalus X]

For this topic misinformation is any information that promotes needle hesitancy or anti authoritarian approved information.

Here is an example of misinformation that can't be posted to YouTube, twitter, Facebook or any mainline medium. Is this good public policy?



This is a MUST WATCH.

https://www.therealanthonyfaucimovie.com/viewing/

[oldbadger]

Have you never read Colossians, Ephesians, Titus and Timothy?

Colossians 4:1 "You masters, treat your slaves in a righteous and fair way, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven."

Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. (1 Peter 2:18)

Ephesians 6:5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear

Colossians 3:22 Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything

Titus 2:9 Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them

1 Timothy 6:1-2 Let all who are under a yoke as bondservants[a] regard their own masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be reviled. 2 Those who have believing masters must not be disrespectful on the ground that they are brothers; rather they must serve all the better since those who benefit by their good service are believers and beloved.

I can't say that I have never read those verses, but it has been a while since I did.

Those verses may have been used by slave owners to justify slavery, but I don't see them as an endorsement of slavery anymore than the county department of health giving out free needles is an endorsement of drug abuse. The writers of the Bible lived in a society where slavery was the norm, and the idea of abolishing it was no more on there minds than abolishing the eating of meat is in our day. So their advice was just "this is the way world is, and this is the way to deal with it".

And so, if slavery became the norm again, would Christianity support it again?

[oldbadger]

I think that it was the same machines, but Hillary and all the pollsters were so confident the Hillary would win in a landslide that they felt the risk and effort to pull of a cheat was not going to be necessary.

How do you fiddle with those machines?
Maybe Republicans fiddled with them when they won?
Surely the USA can introduce a safe/secure system?

Watergate is an interesting story that the American press never investigated, beyond pinning it on Nixon. (he was the Trump of his day)
I still want to know what the plan was, did the burglars know what they were looking for or was this just a fishing expedition? Did it have anything to do with Nixon's involvement in the JFK assassination?
To be fair to Nixon, he did not do anything worse than Obama spying on the Trump campaign.

So Nixon was silly to resign? Do you think he should have insisted on a full trial with verdict?

Yes, it was, and that will be remembered as his biggest blunder along with the fact that he is still pushing the kill shot.

So it wasn't Biden that introduced vaccination, anyway.
Where I live a majority of the people have taken the vax including two more boosters. And almost all the people wore masks in shops, on buses, etc.
I guess that we think differently.

I would push the button, duty demands it.

Duty......

We killed Nazis for violating the Nuremberg code, it would be unfair to them if we do not execute our own politicians who committed the same crimes.

No we didn't. We executed Germans who committed millions of murders upon Jews, Gypsies, JWs, Masons, Blacks, Ukrainians, Eastern Europeans, Gays.
Mostly Jews and Eastern Europeans.

Not just a civil war, but WW3 also. And it is not like all the wars that came before, this is fifth-generation warfare.

Good Luck with that.

[Daedalus X]

How do you fiddle with those machines?
Maybe Republicans fiddled with them when they won?
Surely the USA can introduce a safe/secure system?

I don't know how those machines work, I am just supposed to trust them, it is what you call "faith in the system", no proof of honesty needed or even allowed. And questioning the system is just evil and not allowed.

We could introduce a better system, like a hand count where the only machines present would be cameras that record each ballot next to the tally of that ballot so that anyone could watch the video and see that the count was done right. Ballot custody would be important, where every sealed box would be carefully opened and documented by both sides. If banks can move large quantities of money around the world without a single penny being unaccounted for, we can surely move ballots around without some of them going missing or new ballots being introduced.

So Nixon was silly to resign? Do you think he should have insisted on a full trial with verdict?

Resignation was Nixons best and only move, a trial would have been ugly. A lot of secrets went to the grave with him, but historians may still figure out what it was all about.

Where I live a majority of the people have taken the vax including two more boosters. And almost all the people wore masks in shops, on buses, etc.
I guess that we think differently.

A lot of data is coming out on the safety and efficacy of the wax scene. Have you noticed how many athletes have dropped dead on the field from heart failure? UK data is better than US data and it shows that excess deaths is up a lot. Here is a clip from today, but don't take his word for it, do some fact checking on your own.

No we didn't. We executed Germans who committed millions of murders upon Jews, Gypsies, JWs, Masons, Blacks, Ukrainians, Eastern Europeans, Gays.
Mostly Jews and Eastern Europeans.

In my world even one murder is enough for the death penalty, and I don't care what faction the murder victim belonged to.
I guess that we think differently.

[oldbadger]

I don't know how those machines work, I am just supposed to trust them, it is what you call "faith in the system", no proof of honesty needed or even allowed. And questioning the system is just evil and not allowed.

Surely you and others who don't trust them would have investigated and know exactly how they work?
If you want to prove a deception then first you have to have intimate knowledge of how the deception is carried out.
To just claim its all a cheat, that isn't much good.

We could introduce a better system, like a hand count where the only machines present would be cameras that record each ballot next to the tally of that ballot so that anyone could watch the video and see that the count was done right. Ballot custody would be important, where every sealed box would be carefully opened and documented by both sides. If banks can move large quantities of money around the world without a single penny being unaccounted for, we can surely move ballots around without some of them going missing or new ballots being introduced.

Well you do need to agree on a system, but where citizens live, work or are stationed around the world then you'll need a system for them as well.
You mentioned 'Both Sides'.... that's sad because there are as many differing minds as there are people and where I live several people might stand for a single seat in our Parliament. Independent politicians are very important.

Resignation was Nixons best and only move, a trial would have been ugly. A lot of secrets went to the grave with him, but historians may still figure out what it was all about.

Well he resigned alright.

A lot of data is coming out on the safety and efficacy of the wax scene. Have you noticed how many athletes have dropped dead on the field from heart failure? UK data is better than US data and it shows that excess deaths is up a lot. Here is a clip from today, but don't take his word for it, do some fact checking on your own.

Lots of athletes dead on the field? More than usual? Could that possibly be because athletes feel so compelled to beat records, push gthemselves so far?
But when a person without credentials who can't name themself (Ethical Skeptic? !) splodges charts on to a private video....... I'd be cautious about that, certainly that video would not turn any opinion of mind right around.
Personaslly, I knew of several folks who died of Covid, but nobody who died from the vax.
Best thing for you is..... don't take medications that you don't trust, but don't bleat if an institution, club, hospital etc, won't let you in without those meds. You got rights, and so have they.

In my world even one murder is enough for the death penalty, and I don't care what faction the murder victim belonged to.
I guess that we think differently.

But the Nuremberg trials, verdicts and sentencing of convicts was all about war-crimes and mass murders of Jews, gypsies, gays, mason, JWs, blacks, Ukrainians and others. I was simply corrrecting your sentence, is all.

[Purple Knight]

Hang on....... Are you saying that if you were dictator you would insist on free and open speech/pics on all media websites, but that you would be prepared to kill lots of folks who moderated their private websites?

*shivers*

If I had to, yes. Obviously the best way is not to do that. But if we're talking about, what if people just keep doing it? Then I would go all-out for any policy I believe in. Honestly there's only one I believe in.

But let's take this conversation to another place, where people are equally forced to do not what they want, but instead what is fair, with their private property: Anti-discrimination law. Do you think anti-discrimination law is righteous? Or do you think that because Bob Nazi owns his bakery, he should be able to hire only white people? Serve only white people? Only let white people on their bread-themed forum? "Aryan Nations bakery, only pure snow-white bread here!"

I mean, it's a complicated issue because you can expect people to just change their treasured beliefs, but you can't expect people to change their race. Oh wait. You can.

[Daedalus X]

Surely you and others who don't trust them would have investigated and know exactly how they work?
If you want to prove a deception then first you have to have intimate knowledge of how the deception is carried out.
To just claim its all a cheat, that isn't much good.

These machines are black boxes protected by patents and proprietary secrets, nobody looks inside these. Begs the question, why would the government procure a machine that they can't inspect? But the burden of proof is not on the person who suspects deception, the burden is on the government to show that these machines and the voting procedure is honest and secure. They have not done that.

Well you do need to agree on a system, but where citizens live, work or are stationed around the world then you'll need a system for them as well.
You mentioned 'Both Sides'.... that's sad because there are as many differing minds as there are people and where I live several people might stand for a single seat in our Parliament. Independent politicians are very important.

Unfortunately we do have a two party dictatorship in this country, and that is not going to change anytime soon. Unless we manage to get a one party dictatorship.

Lots of athletes dead on the field? More than usual? Could that possibly be because athletes feel so compelled to beat records, push gthemselves so far?
But when a person without credentials who can't name themself (Ethical Skeptic? !) splodges charts on to a private video....... I'd be cautious about that, certainly that video would not turn any opinion of mind right around.
Personaslly, I knew of several folks who died of Covid, but nobody who died from the vax.
Best thing for you is..... don't take medications that you don't trust, but don't bleat if an institution, club, hospital etc, won't let you in without those meds. You got rights, and so have they.

When it comes to censorship, you can bet your bottom $1.13 (pound for you) that the side that is trying to hide information is the wrong side, and that would be the wax pushers. Nobody expects to turn an opinion of mind right around, but it would be prudent for all to do their own fact checking. These videos always tell you where the information comes from, like the NIH, CDC, WHO, Pfizer etc.

Why should anyone be denied access to anyplace for not getting the med? When they said the medicated can't spread the illness they were LYING. They had not even tested for that, and it turns out that the medicated are now more likely to get sick and spread it around as well.

But the Nuremberg trials, verdicts and sentencing of convicts was all about war-crimes and mass murders of Jews, gypsies, gays, mason, JWs, blacks, Ukrainians and others. I was simply corrrecting your sentence, is all.

The Nuremberg Code had to do with "Permissible Medical Experiments". One of the things medical personnel can't do is medical experiments on people without informed consent. Like secretly infecting a group of men with syphilis to see what the long term effects are (while withholding the penicillin that can cure them). This whole covid experiment was performed on billions of people without informed consent, which is far worse than what the Germans did during WW2.

[oldbadger]

Hang on....... Are you saying that if you were dictator you would insist on free and open speech/pics on all media websites, but that you would be prepared to kill lots of folks who moderated their private websites?

*shivers*

If I had to, yes. Obviously the best way is not to do that. But if we're talking about, what if people just keep doing it? Then I would go all-out for any policy I believe in. Honestly there's only one I believe in.

You would kill your citizens if they moderated content on their forms and websites?
But surely, if you believed such a thing so strongly you would refuse to join and forum that moderates content?
Isn't that some kind of political hypocrisy?

But let's take this conversation to another place, where people are equally forced to do not what they want, but instead what is fair, with their private property: Anti-discrimination law.

Do you want to change the subject of this thread? How will this help your position over moderation of the media?
Where I live there are indeed laws which moderate our behaviour, and there are certain controls over our property, and there is strong legislation to protect from discrimination (Equality Act 2010)

Do you think anti-discrimination law is righteous?

yes

Or do you think that because Bob Nazi owns his bakery, he should be able to hire only white people? Serve only white people? Only let white people on their bread-themed forum? "Aryan Nations bakery, only pure snow-white bread here!"

No..... We don't really want racist extremists here, and we definitely don't want far right nazis; obviously we do have some but they are few.

I mean, it's a complicated issue because you can expect people to just change their treasured beliefs, but you can't expect people to change their race. Oh wait. You can.

Nazi beliefs? Treasured? You're having a laugh, I think.
Where I live some people do want and need to change the nature of their bodies, but we do our best to promote racial, sexual, gender equality.

Look up the following people and see their pictures: UK Prime Minister. UK Home secretary. Two of the most powerful people in our land..... so we are getting somewhere with gender equality here. How about you?

[oldbadger]

[Daedalus X]

[Purple Knight]

You would kill your citizens if they moderated content on their forms and websites?
But surely, if you believed such a thing so strongly you would refuse to join and forum that moderates content?
Isn't that some kind of political hypocrisy?

Firstly, only if you see buying something as the same as producing it, morally. I don't think the people who throw blood on people for wearing fur are right. I don't think there's a moral obligation not to buy a product just because the people who produced it used immoral means. It scans fine when it's fur, but how about people faced with a choice between starvation and buying something really horrid to stay alive? I wouldn't have them starve. That, and I don't even believe people who moderate their forums are doing anything wrong. I just think that if they use that moderation to silence people for disagreeing with them, it makes a horrible world for everyone but bullies. Pollution makes a horrible world too but I think there should be laws that address the problem, rather than demonising people for buying laundry detergent and throwing away the containers.

I even acknowledge that on this forum, Osteng uses moderation to create a utopia. Because he's fair. I have acknowledged this before. You can look at the whole post if you're interested. It shows I'm being non-hypocritical.

I definitely agree. And it's thanks to fair and impartial enforcement of the rules.

The problem, as I see it, is that you give absolute power over private property, and some will be fair like Osteng. However, others will not be fair, they will cater to the 51% - the bullies - they will win on the free market, they will push the fair guys out of business, and then you will have only one ideology allowed. Not, to go to a specific bar, a specific forum, but to exist at all. Want a job? Have the correct ideology, or we won't hire you. It's not even that the restaurant owner is necessarily a bully. He's forced to be, because once you get a dominant ideology, those people will only patronise their ideology, while the loser ideology must patronise whatever they can get.

Let's say you have two political bars, one conservative, and one liberal. Each bar is only for those of that ideology. Let's say 70% of people become liberal. The first thing that will happen is the minority bar will start allowing liberals. The previous patrons of the bar will gripe, but where are they going to go? They have to accept this new status quo. Then, because of the majority, you get 80% liberals, some having changed their tune. Now the liberal bar is filled with 50 liberals, while the conservative bar is filled with 20 conservatives and 30 liberals. The 30 liberals have the power and they'll use it: They demand that the conservatives be kicked out of the everyone bar. If not, they will patronise the other bar. Rather than lose most of his customers, the bar owner caves. There's only one right move here: Choosing 30 customers over 20. In this way the free market creates a dominant ideology you have to hold, just to get along in society. Eventually you'll have to profess your loyalty to the correct ideology to get groceries.

Do you think anti-discrimination law is righteous?

yes

Or do you think that because Bob Nazi owns his bakery, he should be able to hire only white people? Serve only white people? Only let white people on their bread-themed forum? "Aryan Nations bakery, only pure snow-white bread here!"

No..... We don't really want racist extremists here, and we definitely don't want far right nazis; obviously we do have some but they are few.

So you also believe that people should be restricted, by the government, in what they can and cannot do with their own private property. Private property rights, but only if no racism. Private property rights are not absolute. They are limited within the scope of, don't be racist. Yet your entire argument against tyrannically enforced protection of ideas is, because it's their forum, they need to be able to moderate their own forum, as they see fit, full stop.

Now, I don't see you as wrong. In fact, if anything, you're in the right, because most people want it your way, and it's not an absolute moral issue like murder is. There is not an absolute universally agreed upon moral right answer to whether or not people should be able to believe what they want, and still get along, which is why it's in the realm of the political to begin with. In that vein, you can be correct and still be inconsistent.

It's just that, you don't have a particularly good case that people need to be able to moderate their own forums, that is moral, because property rights are moral, and it is immoral to impose limitations upon it. Not if you believe in anti-discrimination law. If you were in the minority you'd be just as wrong as I am now.