zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. ceejay+(OP)[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:53:36
Sure, and he has that privilege.

He's making rules he promised not to, and we don't have to pay for the privilege to criticize that hypocrisy.

replies(1): >>andrew+e2
2. andrew+e2[view] [source] 2022-12-16 04:08:44
>>ceejay+(OP)
It is disingenuous to argue that "free speech" includes all speech.

People making bomb or mass shooting threats get arrested all the time. You shouldn't have people fear for their lives.

replies(4): >>ceejay+z2 >>kevinm+14 >>lovich+w5 >>comte7+rg
◧◩
3. ceejay+z2[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 04:11:03
>>andrew+e2
> It is disingenuous to argue that "free speech" includes all speech.

Elon Musk himself argued this exact specific thing is included.

Nov 6, 2022, https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589414958508691456: "My commitment to free speech extends even to not banning the account following my plane, even though that is a direct personal safety risk"

◧◩
4. kevinm+14[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 04:19:52
>>andrew+e2
I missed it if the jet tracking accounts made threats
◧◩
5. lovich+w5[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 04:31:04
>>andrew+e2
What does the phrase “free speech absolutist” mean to you?

He’s described himself as one, and I can’t see a way to square the idea that he says he is a free speech absolutist with the excuse that free speech is hard to regulate in the real world. He’s either a moron or was incapable of understanding even first level consequences of his actions or he’s an actual moron

◧◩
6. comte7+rg[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 05:45:13
>>andrew+e2
The goalpost movers have logged on.
[go to top]