Flat Earthers and other regressions

[jelgate]

Suppose that social media starts doing that.

Who decides what gets the "BS warning"? There are many things which are not settled fact, such as mankind causing climate change. Who decides?

I would much rather see legislation requiring social media sites accept all posts, no censorship allowed, period. As a practical matter, social networking is the discussion forum of this country, and it shouldn't be up to the operators to censor speech.

The only censorship I could go along with would be pr0n, but the argument could be made that it would be better to ban those under 18 completely, too. I would actually prefer that, because social networking causes a lot of problems for youngsters as is.

Your delusional if Don't think the middle age have social networking problems

[magi877]

Suppose that social media starts doing that.

.

social media already censors posts, deletes posts and suspends or bans users

mostly those who slant right in their beliefs . so why not ban or put a warning up on this BS?

it is pretty basic what is BS and what is not. if you learned it in school and then someone is saying that the basic scientific facts you learned there--like round earth, gravity, evolution, etc--are not and cannot be true , like the flat earth 'theory', then it is BS

they should at least have a warning that 'the following video is opinion and is not based in accepted scientific fact'

i am telling you, ppl our age ( i am guessing that many of us here are somewhere north of 35?) group can normally detect what is BS and what is not. many young ppl and kids cannot. they have not been taught in school to be able to think and discern what is factual and what is not. they have mainly only been 'taught to the test (SAT, ACT, other standardized testing) and are all too willing to believe what they see on the net especially if it is produced and presented in a professional and 'education like' manner.

someone has to save the children!

[Annoyed]

Your delusional if Don't think the middle age have social networking problems

I never said they don't. But they are adults, able to manage their own affairs without oversight.

Children are a different matter. They need to be protected from things that they don't understand or can't cope with yet as much as possible. This includes social networking. Just as a standalone issue, far too many children have gotten in trouble with that. Under 18 ought to be banned for that reason alone.

But there is more.

Unfortunately, social networking is becoming the default conversation medium for local, state and national issues. This will unavoidably involve discussions unsuited for children. If this medium wants to be the national discussion forum, it ought to respect free speech. That means no censorship at all. This will result in topics unsuitable for children.

Just because the baby can't eat steak should not mean that the adults have to eat baby food.

[Annoyed]

social media already censors posts, deletes posts and suspends or bans users

mostly those who slant right in their beliefs . so why not ban or put a warning up on this BS?

it is pretty basic what is BS and what is not. if you learned it in school and then someone is saying that the basic scientific facts you learned there--like round earth, gravity, evolution, etc--are not and cannot be true , like the flat earth 'theory', then it is BS

they should at least have a warning that 'the following video is opinion and is not based in accepted scientific fact'

i am telling you, ppl our age ( i am guessing that many of us here are somewhere north of 35?) group can normally detect what is BS and what is not. many young ppl and kids cannot. they have not been taught in school to be able to think and discern what is factual and what is not. they have mainly only been 'taught to the test (SAT, ACT, other standardized testing) and are all too willing to believe what they see on the net especially if it is produced and presented in a professional and 'education like' manner.

someone has to save the children!

But they shouldn't censor. If they want to be the national discussion forum, they should respect free speech. And that means respecting ALL speech. As I wrote above, under 18 shouldn't be allowed into it at all, and adults who make poor choices are their own problem, I have no responsibility or concern for them. You can't fix stupid.

If you're gonna censor stuff to protect the stupid, maybe we ought to have an intelligence test for the voting booth?

[Chaka-Z0]

First off grandpa, kids don't use Twitter nor FB beyond the surface. They use Snapchat and IG, bc it's mainly picture oriented and fun.

FB is mostly used by middle-aged moms and dads who enjoy posting anything from cat pics to missing children notices and idiotic theories such as flat earth where they thrive due to peer confirmations.

I've grown in the 90s with social network that could be considered like an early FB. That's how I met my first GF, that's where we found our party pics, etc. Not a single thing about politics bc they don't care.

You're just mad because those that got banned espouse your PoV on many things, you support that militia convict. Rules are simple, speech that incite hate are not tolerated, simple as bacon. If I go full communist and start asking for capitalist scum heads ill be banned just as much as those jarheads promoting radical right ideas.

[jelgate]

I never said they don't. But they are adults, able to manage their own affairs without oversight.

Children are a different matter. They need to be protected from things that they don't understand or can't cope with yet as much as possible. This includes social networking. Just as a standalone issue, far too many children have gotten in trouble with that. Under 18 ought to be banned for that reason alone.

But there is more.

Unfortunately, social networking is becoming the default conversation medium for local, state and national issues. This will unavoidably involve discussions unsuited for children. If this medium wants to be the national discussion forum, it ought to respect free speech. That means no censorship at all. This will result in topics unsuitable for children.

Just because the baby can't eat steak should not mean that the adults have to eat baby food.

I call BS. Its just your ageism showing up again. Not to mention you want to censor people who Don't meet your age criteria

I'll take my hypocrisy bacon GF

[Gatefan1976]

Why am I always paying for the Bacon??
I suggest a time share for cost of said bacon.

[jelgate]

Because you have the rare Australian bacon

[Annoyed]

That would be 'roo bacon, I suspect.

[Annoyed]

I call BS. Its just your ageism showing up again. Not to mention you want to censor people who Don't meet your age criteria

I'll take my hypocrisy bacon GF

You have earned no bacon. Are you totally ignorant of the number of young people who have trouble or worse as a result of social networking? The modern definition of bullying is purely the result of kids calling each other names on social networks, something kids have been doing since there were kids. Never mind the number of kids who have been lured by preverts and the like. They aren't mature enough to handle it.

[Gatefan1976]

Because you have the rare Australian bacon

Our bacon is crap.
It's 5 star product cooked badly, whereas US or Canadian bacon is 3 star bacon cooked better. This is why I cook more Asian, Italian or Indian food, it's cared about more.
Australian cooking reflects our worldview to an extent, we have all this good stuff, but we waste it, cause chill out bro. No need to mix dark soy and light soy and oyster sauce and cooking wine (and 5 spice, and all of the rest of it) to make a good final product, just throw it on the grill and let it happen.
It can produce fantastic results, it can also produce really crappy ones when you don't pay attention.
I think you know what I am saying here.

[jelgate]

Of course I earn the bacon because you are being hypocritical again. Not only are you slowly changing the subject.but your narrative is based on a false premise. Such gullibility is not exclusive to just minors. Their are plenty of adults bullying others on the Internet

[Gatefan1976]

You have earned no bacon. Are you totally ignorant of the number of young people who have trouble or worse as a result of social networking? The modern definition of bullying is purely the result of kids calling each other names on social networks, something kids have been doing since there were kids. Never mind the number of kids who have been lured by preverts and the like. They aren't mature enough to handle it.

TV destroyed your generation.

[Gatefan1976]

That would be 'roo bacon, I suspect.

I suspect you don't know what you are talking about.
Kangaroo's lack the fat based skin to create what we would consider bacon.
It's lean meat, it's strong in flavour and for want of a better term "gamey". it's like duck. It's nice in limited doses, but not a very good staple diet (unless you have no choice, or like that flavour)
I CAN cook a duck to have skin, I have yet to see a recepie that includes kangaroo skin though.

[jelgate]

TV destroyed your generation.

I thought everything being handed to him destroyed his generation?