Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Should Amazon Web services remove Twitter?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Halbhh" data-source="post: 75679577" data-attributes="member: 375234"><p>Well, I got already (it was the original most interesting aspect to me in the thread) that of course there is shielding for sites that moderate if they are doing a good faith effort -- section (c)(2) -- regardless of whether they catch instances. Right?</p><p></p><p>Did you already agree with that c2 shielding requiring a good faith effort?</p><p></p><p>Do these cases you are listing involve what is "good faith", any of them? -- that would be interesting! -- and if you know which may, if you could single some out, I'd surely want to read on their interpretation of good faith, even if it's not quite the same situation as in Twitter/Parler/Facebook. I don't feel much interest in only reviewing instances of (c)(1) past a limited amount (though a really salient instance that is very much similar to Parler would be quite interesting even in a (c) (1) way), but my main interest was in sites that moderate, as aren't we really talking about Twitter here a lot, in this thread?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Halbhh, post: 75679577, member: 375234"] Well, I got already (it was the original most interesting aspect to me in the thread) that of course there is shielding for sites that moderate if they are doing a good faith effort -- section (c)(2) -- regardless of whether they catch instances. Right? Did you already agree with that c2 shielding requiring a good faith effort? Do these cases you are listing involve what is "good faith", any of them? -- that would be interesting! -- and if you know which may, if you could single some out, I'd surely want to read on their interpretation of good faith, even if it's not quite the same situation as in Twitter/Parler/Facebook. I don't feel much interest in only reviewing instances of (c)(1) past a limited amount (though a really salient instance that is very much similar to Parler would be quite interesting even in a (c) (1) way), but my main interest was in sites that moderate, as aren't we really talking about Twitter here a lot, in this thread? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Should Amazon Web services remove Twitter?
Top
Bottom