French Hate Speech Law Declared Unconstitutional

[frm]

So much to address here while I was sleeping, and I agree with most of you, to include Threadloom (if they are aware of the legal repercussions that they face and accept them too), just not on the execution of it.

While he has every right as a forum to operate it as he sees fit within the boundaries of the law, he doesn't have every right to use software in violation of its license agreements. They (Threadloom) have every right to have whatever limitations they see fit. He doesn't own the software --- they do.

Every forum owner has the right to operate their forum in any manner they want. However, after this Trump administration, webmasters should be fully aware of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the hearings that Big Tech are facing for shadow banning, deleting posts, banning people, etc. on the sole purpose of political affiliation while enjoying the benefits of immunity if someone goes on the forum and does something else illegal and it's reported to the site as the site doesn't get in trouble, the user does... unless the site has been going against 230 which would essentially make the site a publisher and not a platform and the site should have caught this.

This makes it where if Threadloom wants to kick people off its platform for these non-transparent rules, as I've pointed out several times before, they are Community Standards that you are agreeing to when obtaining a license, without having the opportunity to see them.

Fine. Add them to the license and/or the ability to agree to both.

However, in doing so, and if you do ban people... Threadloom can now be scrutinized for any other content any other website publishes that is illegal.

For example, and "hate speech" aside: Section 9.2 of their ToS states that I am operating under California law, which marijuana is perfectly legal under. However, their community standards state "terrorism, sale of illegal drugs, human trafficking" as an example of illegal activities prohibited by the Community Standards. I believe this needs to be clarified, otherwise, Threadloom is essentially doing the same thing by claiming federal protection under 230 as they may be ignoring the fact that marijuana is not yet federally legal. I surely hope they cease service in that situation as it's contradictory to have state law apply while at the same time asking for federal protection just in case.

Question - where does someone with many highly fanatical followers fall into this when they...

I'm not even going to get into the Trump vs. anti-Trumper argument here. You can educate yourself on what he's actually done at www.magapill.com and www.thedonald.win in context, or go on with your life essentially ignoring that, supporting rioting of BLM & Antifa, all the while birdbox a real peaceful protest (Million MAGA March) while Antifa can show up and get away with literally all you say and support. This would speak volumes for you as you say it's not ok for the right, but the left can engage in it all they want--no, it's not okay for anyone.

Furthermore, it's not the argument of this conversation. As such, if you want to have a political debate on the administration and not the ToS/Community Standards/Threadloom, I'd be more than happy to... but not in this thread as I am trying to get answers and transparency because it's needed more than ever now.

it's different than when aimed at someone directly in person when "those personally abusive epithets which, when addressed to the ordinary citizen, are, as a matter of common knowledge, inherently likely to provoke violent reaction

No. It's not.

Everybody has free choice. I can call you a "big stupid dummy" over and over and you can get hurt because you know you're smart with your degree and you should use that smartness to walk away with your head held high. That is called being the bigger man.

If you let those words eat at you, then you are weak-minded and are one that would likely physically fight back which puts you at a legal risk over anyone else.

As you can see, I've essentially been called a racist or alluded to doing the illegal activity by, I believe, even you. This was an attempt to subvert the conversation. Guess what? I am here, still speaking my mind in a civil manner. I just ask that you don't bring "Orange Man bad" into it as it's irrelevant unless we go into 230 reform.

Governments shouldn't limit speech, but forums should if they think it helps them run a better community.

Forums, in the US at least, can definitely limit speech. However, they need to know the consequences of doing so. Section 230 would then apply to them and they would no longer be a platform, not legally accountable for what their users post, to a publisher, which could put them in hot water.

A website is private property and the forum owner is perfectly within their rights to enforce site rules that prohibit certain types of speech in any way they choose

See above.

That's true whether it's a social media giant such as Facebook or a small independent forum

Both Facebook and Twitter have been to hearing after hearing trying to justify their moderation. The usual answer is "I'm not aware" but there are also the nice "it was a mistake and after review, the content was restored" because they know that having protection under 230 and not is a very fine line that can cost them a lot of money in hiring moderators to clean the site of anything illegal, everywhere.

As much as I don't agree with censorship you're absolutely correct. Any privately owned company like Facebook, Twitter, google, TAZ or whatever can choose to decide what to allow.

This is incorrect under 230 if you want immunity for what does slip through.

I believe Threadloom is acting in a reasonable manner... in their shoes I would not want my products associated with the likes of Storm Front, for example, and would want those bases covered in the TOS/AUP

I've never argued this. I agree that they have the right to have a ToS and Community Standards policy. However, for transparency reasons, the ToS should state that they are also agreeing to the Community Standards in their license/ToS, otherwise, I don't think they hold a case for terminating service to anyone who violates their Community Standards as ti's not even mentioned in 2.1 or 8.2:

2.1 Software license. Subject to Customer’s compliance with the terms and conditions of this
Agreement, Threadloom hereby grants to Customer a limited, nonexclusive, nontransferable, revocable license,
during the term of this Agreement, to (i) install the Plug-in on Customer’s website; and (ii) to access and use the
Services via the Plug-in.

The only thing that covers them is Section 8.2's bolded catch-all, while they still go on and reference that breaking the Community Standards automatically terminates them... without actually notifying them of those standards:

8.2 Termination. Customer may terminate this Agreement at any time by destroying all copies of the
Software in Customer’s possession or control. Threadloom may terminate the Agreement at any time and for any
reason, without notice to Customer. The license granted by Threadloom to Customer under this Agreement will
automatically terminate, with or without notice from Threadloom, if Customer breaches any term of this
Agreement.

My only advice to Threadloom, which has raised quite a lot in Series A funding (telling me that they want a piece of social pie), is to get a new lawyer and to monitor which sites you are refusing service to for any reason. This is because it could be the next big topic at a hearing if that user feels their site is within guidelines and is systematically being censored because there are easier tip lines to get ahold of Senator Cruz now.

 

[Bionic Rooster]

Off-topic, you can go ahead and PM me that (as it looks like I can't PM you) and I'll join as another name so I'm not followed from here on over there (as you and I both know that's likely).

Sounds like a great place to have intellectual discussions.

NYCGuy76 me too please

 

[Jeremy8]

frm Threadloom isn't some giant company with some secret agenda. There are good reasons they might not want to be associated with some groups. If you're not sure if your forum meets their standards, but are interested in their products, why not talk to them and go over the kind of content your site contains and the rules you enforce?

edit: By the way, section 230 of the CDA doesn't affect Threadloom's terms in any way. They are free to have these rules with or without it, so I'm not sure how its relevant to your complaint.

Also, on this topic, you should know that even if governments can't bring down your website, other private companies can (hosts, software companies, advertising companies, donation platforms, etc.). This is actually what happened to a forum whose owner was a member of TAZ. It's their right to not associate themselves with certain people/groups.

 

[frm]

Threadloom isn't some giant company with some secret agenda

Don't know how you arrived at this conclusion from my argument, that has been repetitive, that the ToS should also include the Community Standards so that you are fully aware as to what you're agreeing to before obtaining a license.

There are good reasons they might not want to be associated with some groups

And what are the reasons to associate with what many would call domestic terrorists (Antifa and progressives) by implementing the same policies and only holding one side accountable?

You're telling me that your forum is squeaky clean in compliance with both Threadloom and eBay? I'll take my time to go through some threads to see if you unwittingly are in violation, but won't report you as the left would. Though, after that work, I'd expect you to stand by your word and clean up.

why not talk to them and go over the kind of content your site contains and the rules you enforce?

I've already emailed them with no response. None of my sites violate their ToS, but I, as it's my right, not going to unless they revise their Community Standards and/or detach them from their ToS as leftists boycott New Balance, Goya, My Pillow Guy, etc. for supporting Trump—I will boycott by not subscribing for enforcing progressive ideas and identity politics.

By the way, section 230 of the CDA doesn't affect Threadloom's terms in any way

You're completely right!

But, it makes them a publisher when they refuse service. This means, if they publish any content that slips through that is in violation of law, they can now be legally accountable for their actions.

They don't have as deep pockets as Facebook and Twitter, so unless they do another Series A round just for legal representation, find a pro bono lawyer, or get a GoFundMe going (as the left is more than welcome to raise funds for legal help), they could essentially be done.

It's something Threadloom should highly consider looking into as the previous customer that broke their ToS already set precedence that could potentially remove their 230 protection.

 

[MagicalAzareal]

This, along with wishful violence against the right, in particular, the President in the case below, is celebrated amongst the left without any penalty at all.

Case in point, a murder, that in your words pretty much says it's okay (along with VICE) to kill pro-Trumpers.


Too graphic to show the image here, and sure she got "punishment" the first time, but she re-tweeted it a second time just a couple of weeks ago which garnered 58,000 likes and 6000 retweets:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...oversial-Donald-Trump-severed-head-photo.html

So who do these rules apply to?

VICE isn't known to be a particularly high quality source for anything. I've found them peddling leftist fake news, or outright poor journalism on a number of occasions. If you want to read something which leans towards liberalism / leftism, but is of a higher quality, you might want to peruse The Atlantic or similar, although you will notice a notable slant against Trump.

VICE recently reported Australia enacting a law against "hentai", however no such law was actually enacted. To my knowledge, VICE relied purely on the word of online retailers who failed to follow the correct customs procedures to come to that conclusion.

VICE recently dug up low quality tweets by journalists on Twitter to source a claim that Silicon Valley investors are "scared of the media". Apparently, this passes as "news".

VICE recently wrote an incoherent article on the controversial and simply appalling subject of "pedophilia". The Atlantic is mostly capable of writing coherent articles, which strongly illustrate how abhorrent of a crime it is, however VICE jumps between several themes.

At one point in the article, they follow the progressive solution of giving all crimes a "social program solution" by vaguely suggesting to "decriminalise it". At another point, they proposed a solution which is less humane than throwing them in prison (and citing a paper which hadn't been independently reviewed and contradicted by other VICE articles where someone begs to face the death penalty than be "solved").

At another point in the article, they flutzed around that it "might make it worse". Unless, I'm some sort of psychopath, the idea it "might make it worse" is horrifying. What I could get out of it is they don't really want people to take personal responsibility for their actions.

Another incoherent buzzword "stigma" came up a number of times. The article was a trainwreck and was hard to parse. If VICE means letting all the child rapists out of prison by "decriminalise", they're completely insane.

VICE gives progressives a bad name. I don't think they even intend to be that bad, they just mindlessly parrot other people without understanding the context as to what they're saying. Please don't think VICE is a good representation of the left.

I'll note too that these are things I have seen people say. The hate speech bill mentioned in OP was really bad, and may force platforms to censor content beyond hate speech, as it forces platforms to remove it within 24 hours, and some content like terrorism / child pornography within a single hour.

I am not well acquainted with that particular incident you mentioned.

Completely disagree here. If this were true, GTA would entice people to carjack and LARP in real-life committing horrendous acts.

I do support it; I just want transparency.

Are they applying to some or all? Can I report the left for the same policies broken and will they take the same action they would against the right? I would assume, by your second sentence (which I disagree with), that you would. Otherwise talk about hating the President would lead to division and maybe even attempts, as we've seen, of real-life violence and murder against his followers. Right?

While the case of it encouraging carjacking is ridiculous, this would go back to the old adage that violent video games encourage violence.

Studies have shown they do not. While they might or might amp aggressiveness in the short term, they serve as a time sink for youths who might otherwise be out committing violent acts, therefore they reduce violence and crime.

There hasn't been much similar research done into hate speech. The ACLU likes to point at Skokie as a case where rationality prevailed over hatred. When sites hosting hate speech get taken down, actors tend to move to other sites, and it doesn't appear as if the web is much of a factor in hatred. The web is a reflection of the real world. This brings up another adage. You can't use technological solutions to solve social problems.

 

[Pete]

You want to talk about free speech but only cite propaganda, you tell me to watch right wing news but don’t watch left wing news yourself.

Since this is now how TAZ is, I guess it’s time to leave again, I have no desire to be around such people.

 

[frm]

You want to talk about free speech but only cite propaganda, you tell me to watch right wing news but don’t watch left wing news yourself.

How do you know? I guess if I don't take your side you can make up wild accusations about me to discredit my opinion. That is a typical progressive for ya...

I spend less time on mainstream media news as it's inherently biased on both sides, and has an agenda, than I do independent news sources. I watch Tim Pool, which is a self-proclaimed liberal, Joe Rogan, Steven Crowder, Conservative Twins, and Ben Shapiro. I used to watch The Young Turks, but I can't anymore with the hypocrisy they displayed after Trumps election (calling him a misogynist while knowing damn well Cenk Uygur would constantly talk to his, now ultra woke co-host, Ana, in ways that topped what Trump ever said on tape... for full segments). I am looking to balance it out by replacing TYT as it's more left-moderate to conservative-leaning now, but have not found an entertaining enough personality that also provides sources for their shows.

If it's a serious issue, I will read what both CNN and FOX (now Newsmax) has to say about it. Then, I will see independent sources and try to find as much on-the-ground information that I can before making up my mind.

I ultimately lean constitutional-conservative, but, I do so by making up my own mind with multiple perspectives speaking on the same topic.

Can you say the same for yourself?

Since this is now how TAZ is, I guess it’s time to leave again, I have no desire to be around such people.

Also a leftist tactic: Cry about it and storm off instead of having a rational conversation to find middle ground. Bye?

 

[Chemical]

Running the risk of being labelled sexist or misogynist, I think you're mostly a bunch of drama queens.

 

[frm]

Running the risk of being labelled sexist or misogynist, I think you're mostly a bunch of drama queens.

I don't see how this pertains to the conversation at all. Though you have your opinion and if it were on my board, I would not censor it. However, one could classify that as going against the community standards. If you use Threadloom, someone saying this on your board would put your site at risk of a license termination if they strictly stand behind the community standards being attached to the ToS.

They've yet to address the situation though.

 

[Chemical]

I don't see how this pertains to the conversation at all. Though you have your opinion and if it were on my board, I would not censor it. However, one could classify that as going against the community standards. If you use Threadloom, someone saying this on your board would put your site at risk of a license termination if they strictly stand behind the community standards being attached to the ToS.

They've yet to address the situation though.

What might be good to remember is all this talk of leftist (and conservative, right etc) is really a product of physically organising folks to the left or right in the National Assembly during the French Revolution. In practice, the extremes of both the present day left and right are very similar, and in reality the political spectrum should be viewed as a circle, with both ends touching shoulders with each other, rather than being positioned as either end of a line. With this in mind, if one is to talk without immediately segregating half of the entire audience, perhaps it's best if we talk of specific behaviours, rather than viewing them, wrongly in my view, as solely attributes of the left or right. Happy to discuss this with you in more detail as long as we avoid the left v right polemics that typically accompany posts of this type. FWIW, political economy, along with specific interests in Payne, Marx, Rousseau, and Trotsky's socialist ambitions in NY, are areas of special interest to me.

 

[NYCGuy76]

NYCGuy76 me too please

I don't mind posting it in public. Here you go... My forum is still new in the making so don't expect a whole active audience lol..

 

[frm]

What might be good to remember is all this talk of leftist (and conservative, right etc) is really a product of physically organising folks to the left or right in the National Assembly during the French Revolution. In practice, the extremes of both the present day left and right are very similar, and in reality the political spectrum should be viewed as a circle, with both ends touching shoulders with each other, rather than being positioned as either end of a line. With this in mind, if one is talk without immediately segregating half of the entire audience, perhaps it's best if we talk of specific behaviours, rather than viewing them, wrongly in my view, as solely attributes of the left or right. Happy to discuss this with you in more detail as long as we avoid the left v right polemics that typically accompany posts of this type. FWIW, political economy, along with specific interests in Payne, Marx, Rousseau, and Trotsky's socialist ambitions in NY, are areas of special interest to me.

I'd be more than willing to, in another topic (if politics are allowed here), or in a conversation, as you have a good point about left and right touching one another, because to an extent, they do. In reference to this thread, they don't and would be opposite of each other—like 9 and 3 on a clock—as it's not alt-right and alt-left, which share commonalities, that is being discussed here.

 

[NYCGuy76]

You want to talk about free speech but only cite propaganda, you tell me to watch right wing news but don’t watch left wing news yourself.

Since this is now how TAZ is, I guess it’s time to leave again, I have no desire to be around such people.

See Pete that's the wrong attitude. I speak for myself but I watch both right and left. My wife is a staunch leftist so I'm forced to watch CNN and even worse the Greek news from Greece which as far left as one can be without being an actual communist. With that being said I do make my wife watch News Max too. So as you can see I watch all types of media. Leaving Taz because you don't like the political views of some is pretty childish and sorry to say but a typical leftist trait.

 

[Chemical]

I'd be more than willing to, in another topic (if politics are allowed here), or in a conversation, as you have a good point about left and right touching one another, because to an extent, they do.

Not just to an extent. Extremism is extremism and in practice, extremist rarely confine themselves to what others (classifiers) might see as one particular style of ideological behaviour - hence why they tend to occupy the same part of the behavioural circle. Whereas two extremists, potentially from either ends of the perceived left right spectrum, could both be classified as sociopaths, having a tendency to maliciously disregard the needs of others. I say socio rather than pyscho as many of those exhibiting ruthless self centred behaviour, are corrupted during their lifetime as opposed to psychopaths having been born with the condition. Away from academic theory, in practice the 20th century had several examples of tyrants holding extremist views from both ends of the spectrum. Hitler with his national socialism and Stalin with his nationalist rhetoric dressed up as faux communism (Leninism).

In reference to this thread, they don't and would be opposite of each other—like 9 and 3 on a clock—as it's not alt-right and alt-left, which share commonalities, that is being discussed here.

Again, if we ignore classifiers and instead focus on behavioural attributes, I believe we can more easily follow individual arguments. As it is, I've found this thread very difficult to follow, perhaps because I tend to turn off when I see left bashing right and right bashing left. Without these labels I am pretty sure we'd all find more common ground.

 

[Oh!]

What might be good to remember is all this talk of leftist (and conservative, right etc) is really a product of physically organising folks to the left or right in the National Assembly during the French Revolution. In practice, the extremes of both the present day left and right are very similar, and in reality the political spectrum should be viewed as a circle, with both ends touching shoulders with each other, rather than being positioned as either end of a line. With this in mind, if one is to talk without immediately segregating half of the entire audience, perhaps it's best if we talk of specific behaviours, rather than viewing them, wrongly in my view, as solely attributes of the left or right. Happy to discuss this with you in more detail as long as we avoid the left v right polemics that typically accompany posts of this type. FWIW, political economy, along with specific interests in Payne, Marx, Rousseau, and Trotsky's socialist ambitions in NY, are areas of special interest to me.

Not just to an extent. Extremism is extremism and in practice, extremist rarely confine themselves to what others (classifiers) might see as one particular style of ideological behaviour - hence why they tend to occupy the same part of the behavioural circle. Whereas two extremists, potentially from either ends of the perceived left right spectrum, could both be classified as sociopaths, having a tendency to maliciously disregard the needs of others. I say socio rather than pyscho as many of those exhibiting ruthless self centred behaviour, are corrupted during their lifetime as opposed to psychopaths having been born with the condition. Away from academic theory, in practice the 20th century had several examples of tyrants holding extremist views from both ends of the spectrum. Hitler with his national socialism and Stalin with his nationalist rhetoric dressed up as faux communism (Leninism).

Again, if we ignore classifiers and instead focus on behavioural attributes, I believe we can more easily follow individual arguments. As it is, I've found this thread very difficult to follow, perhaps because I tend to turn off when I see left bashing right and right bashing left. Without these labels I am pretty sure we'd all find more common ground.

I think what you are describing there is 'horseshoe theory' - or a version of it, at least.

Horseshoe theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[zappaDPJ]

(if politics are allowed here)

In general political content has not been welcomed or allowed in the past because it falls outside of this forum's purpose and rarely ends well. Personally I don't have a problem with it if it remains within the context of the forum's aims and objectives which should be obvious.

During the last week or two a lot of what has been posted would have been removed under the previous management. The fact that it's been left to stand is due in part because TAZ is undergoing a transition period as it is now under new management.

I suggest in future any posts of a political nature are confined to issues relating to legislation and how they might affect our forums.

 

[Chemical]

I think you are describing there is 'horseshoe theory' - or a version of it, at least.

Horseshoe theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not bad

But it does pick up on a common theme amongst those that find it impossible to believe that they who are in the right can share common ground with those in the 'wrong'.

The horseshoe theory has been criticized by those from both ends of the political spectrum who oppose being grouped with those they consider to be their polar opposites

It's this which in my view continues the promotion of party aligned politics.

Edit, posts crossed. Please see below.

 

[Chemical]

I suggest in future any posts of a political nature are confined to issues relating to legislation and how they might affect our forums.

Sorry zappaDPJ, our posts crossed. Given then that I posted the previous post after your guidance, please do delete it if it falls short of what's acceptable.

 

[zappaDPJ]

Sorry zappaDPJ, our posts crossed. Given then that I posted the previous post after your guidance, please do delete it if it falls short of what's acceptable.

No need to apologize, your post is perfectly acceptable.

 

[frm]

I suggest in future any posts of a political nature are confined to issues relating to legislation and how they might affect our forums.

My original post is on topic regarding this as it's asking to add political affiliation to Community Standards under hate speech, removing it all together as ToS operates under California law, or to clarify that the ToS you agree to with Threadloom also makes you commit to Community Standards, which is not in the ToS (unless you refer to termination for any reason).

Because of this, every Threadloom customer is at fault because I'm sure if I looked into any customer's forum, I could find an issue. Threadloom is in essence acting as a publisher instead of its intended platform. Because they applied Community Standards to already cancel someone's license, openly stating so, this set precedence of such.

So while others are dragging this off in political ways, I want to know where Threadloom stands so it doesn't negatively impact me after investing in it, which I won't if they stand by progressive ideology.