Freedom to break the law and commit assault.

Lol way to win support for your cause.

And when Nazi’s don’t show up, attack the police or NBC reporters whilst calling them fascists.

You think capitalism and boycotts pushed Alex off of these platforms?  What evidence do you have to support this?  We have right wing watch vocally proclaiming that it was in fact them who succeeded in this movement.

The declaration refers to the governments ability to impede on speech.

People are and corporations are free to do many things that would harm their goals.  The ability to do so doesn’t mean one should do so.

Do you honestly believe that I think free speech is the right to get money thrown at you for what you say?

I have enjoyed this conversation. You did your best as well but haven't convinced me otherwise. Cheers

What if you were a content creator and your user base started bailing for another platform would this upset you?

Somewhat related in regard to my worries.

I fully agree with the free market solution as well. Whenever we see purges like this, alternative media sites grow massively. If your goal in deplatforming Alex, was to diversify social media. Then congratulations, this was a highly effective win toward your ends.

If it was just Alex Jones that had been deplatformed I would agree with you. However this is not an isolated case. It is perhaps the most blatant case of censorship to date, but it is by far the first. I can provide other examples if you request so, but you seem informed enough that this shouldn’t be necessary.…

You say that, and I hope it remains true. But the step between spoken and written word to banning someone is a far greater step than between banning and punching. Which is why I still do not consider actions to be a protectable means of communication.

The punch a nazi comment. I feel it is an apt comparison to make here is why.

Ok, yes, I agree that is the current situation. These platforms currently are not responsible for their content and have a vested interest to keep it that way.

Why do you think the picture is not true?

Spicy take homey. I bet it is far below your intellect to even engage beyond slinging insults.

Ok. If social media sites are to be held accountable for their content lets do that. Lets sue them everytime a antifa page is allowed to remain on the platform. Antifa is a terrorist organization after all.

Consider perchance the demographics of silicon valley, and contrast that to this team.

I think it is an important classification to make. It defines whether it is speech of the platform or speech of the individual. If the platform is responsible you see, they can be sued for the content on the services. However if the platform isn’t legally responsible for the content hosted upon it, then I would say…