FINDOM ENGAGEMENT GROUP🤍
I’m starting up a new engagement group w easy rules & all dommes are welcome as long as you’re age verified & active! if you’d like to be added, retweet this for exposure & drop an emoji in the comments, i will pm you the rules.😇
The fact that Sunrise made this request does not shock me in the slightest given their history.
What shocks me is that there are elected officials follow and lending credence to an environmental group w/ no environmental policy but to say back GND resolution.
A climate group pulled out of a voting rights rally, refusing to participate in an event including "Zionist" orgs
Not only was their statement in itself antisemitic, some of the groups involved are not Zionist or haven't taken any stance on Israel. They ARE all Jewish
Here's the latest in the Jan. 6 probes in Congress and the courts. With new reporting on one defendant who pushed all kinds of conspiracies at a "Justice for J6" rally attended by the Proud Boys, despite a court order to avoid the group. w/ @KFILE@emsteckcnn.com/2021/10/23/politics/…
I started a critique group w/ @coffeequills just before we retreated behind our screens. Tokyo has great workshops, but there wasn’t an Eng. language one for SF&F. We’re back at our first in-person meeting this week w/ members zooming in from HK. A small step, but it feels good.
That depends on your understanding. As mentioned in my other comment, twitter is far more analogous to a distributor than a publisher. §230 just clarifies that distinction to prevent bad actors overwhelming the courts with SLAPP suits.
If could somehow convince the courts twitter was a publisher, then yes, it could. It would be a terrible, terrible idea and effectively kill the internet as we know it, but legislation could be passed.
Aha, I thought you were arguing the other way. Again, twitter has no "special protection"; §230 covers everyone from twitter and facebook to you and me; it applies equally to every and anyone.
Nor it twitter a "publisher" in any traditional sense; the correct analogy...
...is to a distributor like a bookstore or newsstand, which does not review all content it hosts before making it available.
Distributors are almost never held liable for hosting third-party speech, barring some type of willful intent to defame (which removing content is not).
Some time ago I held an ARC group w/ students. We read the book together & then they would write reviews to post in the local bookstore & on my library shelf with the book. It’s been really hard to find ARC’s so I stopped, but would be honored to do so with your book!
Twitter is not a government entity, hard as that seems to be for certain people to understand. Outside of moderation decisions on the basis of protected classes (of which political leaning is not one), it has every right to moderate the speech it hosts as it sees fit.