Cont: Musk buys Twitter II

The wife of a Conservative councillor who was convicted for stirring up racial hatred on social media did not violate X's rules with the post.

Lucy Connolly, a childminder from Northampton, has pleaded guilty to publishing a social media post intending to stir up racial hatred after calling for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set alight.

X's rules, external explicitly prohibit "threats to inflict physical harm on others, which includes threatening to kill, torture, sexually assault or otherwise hurt someone".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn8ljjjmpg5o

A few days after her post, X rejected a complaint from a user who flagged the message to it.

The social media giant did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
 
Andy_Ross said:
The wife of a Conservative councillor who was convicted for stirring up racial hatred on social media did not violate X's rules with the post.

Lucy Connolly, a childminder from Northampton, has pleaded guilty to publishing a social media post intending to stir up racial hatred after calling for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set alight.

X's rules, external explicitly prohibit "threats to inflict physical harm on others, which includes threatening to kill, torture, sexually assault or otherwise hurt someone".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn8ljjjmpg5o

A few days after her post, X rejected a complaint from a user who flagged the message to it.

The social media giant did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
Click to expand...
Faux outrage.
 
Whenever I read stories about parents making their kids drink bleach or administer it anally, as has been recommended by antivaxxers etc., and pushed on X as a legitimate treatment ...
... I always wonder if it's not actually about destroying incriminating DNA evidence of child abuse.
 
Last edited:
Samson said:
Faux outrage.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. How could anyone think this was a threat of violence when it was merely incitement to violence?

What snowflakes people are, when they imagine an incitement to kill the out-group with arson attacks is any kind of real threat (at a time of high agitation when such arson attacks are in fact being attempted).

People are obviously just pretending to think inciting violent thugs to set buildings on fire to kill the people inside is a bad thing to do.
 
Last edited:
Samson said:
No platform allows free speech.
Here is an idea.
Randomly

Telegram
X
Facebook

How do we rank them?
Click to expand...

we don’t rank social media sites on how free the speech is. that’s where you keep going wrong. none of them are free speech platforms.

at any time you can start your own website and write anything you want. until then you’re at the mercy of whatever tos you agree to on someone else’s site.
 
Andy_Ross said:
Lucy Connolly, a childminder from Northampton, has pleaded guilty to publishing a social media post intending to stir up racial hatred after calling for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set alight.
X's rules, external explicitly prohibit "threats to inflict physical harm on others, which includes threatening to kill, torture, sexually assault or otherwise hurt someone".
Click to expand...

Samson said:
Faux outrage.
Click to expand...

There we have it. Samson can't believe any one would find anything outrageous about burning down a hotel with asylum seekers in it.

What was that you said about cults, Samson?
 
Samson, if Musk is such a free speech advocate why does he ban accounts when requested to by the authoritarian Indian government?
 
So TwiX has lost twenty million users and access to the SAm market with the greatest usage of SocMedia. Good news for Bluesky.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Samson, if Musk is such a free speech advocate why does he ban accounts when requested to by the authoritarian Indian government?
Click to expand...

Obviously the Indian leader is one of the 'high status' males that he thinks should rule.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom