Red Mosquito

Bammer wrote:I thought the joke was maybe about FB getting sued and that’s why they shut down but anyway I am trending very tree-like in this thread right now so I will stop now.

Peeps wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:I do enjoy them hiding behind a, "its for the children!" justification. Naw, you just want to censor people. Kids spending too much time on social media sounds like a parenting issue, not a we need to redefine what speech and commerce are issue.

It’s really not censoring. If you go to a bar and call the bartender a fat hog with big tits you would get thrown out

Same thing with FB, Twitter etc. if you don’t follow their rules you don’t get to use it. It’s not an inalienable right to have a social media account t. You agree to the tos even if 99.9999999% don’t read what that is

Peeps wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:I do enjoy them hiding behind a, "its for the children!" justification. Naw, you just want to censor people. Kids spending too much time on social media sounds like a parenting issue, not a we need to redefine what speech and commerce are issue.

It’s really not censoring. If you go to a bar and call the bartender a fat hog with big tits you would get thrown out

Same thing with FB, Twitter etc. if you don’t follow their rules you don’t get to use it. It’s not an inalienable right to have a social media account t. You agree to the tos even if 99.9999999% don’t read what that is

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

Bammer wrote:I thought the joke was maybe about FB getting sued and that’s why they shut down but anyway I am trending very tree-like in this thread right now so I will stop now.

Bammer wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

Bammer wrote:I thought the joke was maybe about FB getting sued and that’s why they shut down but anyway I am trending very tree-like in this thread right now so I will stop now.

SO HORNY

simple schoolboy wrote:

Peeps wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:I do enjoy them hiding behind a, "its for the children!" justification. Naw, you just want to censor people. Kids spending too much time on social media sounds like a parenting issue, not a we need to redefine what speech and commerce are issue.

It’s really not censoring. If you go to a bar and call the bartender a fat hog with big tits you would get thrown out

Same thing with FB, Twitter etc. if you don’t follow their rules you don’t get to use it. It’s not an inalienable right to have a social media account t. You agree to the tos even if 99.9999999% don’t read what that is

Are you following this conversation at all? They are discussing creating a new federal entity that would oversee Facebook's TOS and moderation standards. The feds don't generally tell bars the criteria under which they must eject patrons.

Peeps wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:

Peeps wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:I do enjoy them hiding behind a, "its for the children!" justification. Naw, you just want to censor people. Kids spending too much time on social media sounds like a parenting issue, not a we need to redefine what speech and commerce are issue.

It’s really not censoring. If you go to a bar and call the bartender a fat hog with big tits you would get thrown out

Same thing with FB, Twitter etc. if you don’t follow their rules you don’t get to use it. It’s not an inalienable right to have a social media account t. You agree to the tos even if 99.9999999% don’t read what that is

Are you following this conversation at all? They are discussing creating a new federal entity that would oversee Facebook's TOS and moderation standards. The feds don't generally tell bars the criteria under which they must eject patrons.

honestly when i read your posts they kind of just blur together and i pick up key words. its too taxing to follow along with what you post

B wrote:I love when Zuckerberg makes public statements defending Facebook. Does he think anyone believes anything he says?

I saw the movie about his life. He was not the good guy.

Peeps wrote:

B wrote:I love when Zuckerberg makes public statements defending Facebook. Does he think anyone believes anything he says?

I saw the movie about his life. He was not the good guy.

in fairness i saw a movie where a beautiful wife called a plumber and he was there in 20 minutes and had adult relations with her. we all know thats not true either. no way a plumber shows up in 20 minutes

Peeps wrote:was that his sole idea or did those twins want in on that too?

B wrote:

Peeps wrote:was that his sole idea or did those twins want in on that too?

I don't know the answer to your question, but there's no answer that paints Zuck or Facebook in a good light.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

B wrote:

Peeps wrote:was that his sole idea or did those twins want in on that too?

I don't know the answer to your question, but there's no answer that paints Zuck or Facebook in a good light.

It wasn't his idea at all, right? He just stole it from them and made it happen? I don't remember now. The actor that played him in that movie really rubs me the wrong way.

BurtReynolds wrote: