If free speech truly is the enemy and we must restrict and censor the voices of people to keep our country safe then our country is already lost. If one man’s voice is a threat to our nation but his holding of the presidential office is not, than it is apparent the powers of the presidency are less powerful than a single voice. Why should any of us settle to giving up our rights to free speech? It’s clear that Facebook and Twitter believe the ends justify the means. They believe the American people are weak. They insult our founding fathers by suggesting Zuckerburg and Dorsey know what is best for us. Parler is not an arbiter of truth. We believe in you. We believe you are wise enough to decide for yourself and trust that given access to all information we can self govern. The solution is clear. If you believe in free speech, and our founding principles of our republic, then we must liberate others by promoting free speech Parler.
If free speech truly is the enemy and we must restrict and censor the voices of people to keep our country safe then our country is already lost. If one man’s voice is a threat to our nation but his holding of the presidential office is not, than it is apparent the powers of the presidency are less powerful than a single voice. Why should any of us settle to giving up our rights to free speech? It’s clear that Facebook and Twitter believe the ends justify the means. They believe the American people are weak. They insult our founding fathers by suggesting Zuckerburg and Dorsey know what is best for us. Parler is not an arbiter of truth. We believe in you. We believe you are wise enough to decide for yourself and trust that given access to all information we can self govern. The solution is clear. If you believe in free speech, and our founding principles of our republic, then we must liberate others by promoting free speech Parler. yanhren 发表于 2021-01-08 11:44
Inciting violence can’t get a free pass behind the cover of “speech freedom”. Devil words can kill people as we can see in 1/6 riot. Besides, neither Facebook nor Twitter are government media, they have same right as yours to set up their own rule as long as the don’t break law.
言论自由是指政府不能惩罚公民的言论。私人公司不在此限。这个早在高院就裁定了 https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-1702_h315.pdf 所以这些网络平台完全可以这么做，和first amendment不冲突。Twitter/FB禁了川普，他可以去Parler。 只有政府介入，才会像墙国一样。 FB/Twitter因为这么做如果掉粉是他们自己的决定, it is a business decision. 唯一问题是如果一个或几个social media一统天下，自然会有问题。所以我不反对twitter/FB 封这些账号，但我支持对这些社交平台的 antitrust lawsuit。
言论自由是指政府不能惩罚公民的言论。私人公司不在此限。这个早在高院就裁定了 https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-1702_h315.pdf 所以这些网络平台完全可以这么做，和first amendment不冲突。Twitter/FB禁了川普，他可以去Parler。 只有政府介入，才会像墙国一样。 FB/Twitter因为这么做如果掉粉是他们自己的决定, it is a business decision. 唯一问题是如果一个或几个social media一统天下，自然会有问题。所以我不反对twitter/FB 封这些账号，但我支持对这些社交平台的 antitrust lawsuit。
If free speech truly is the enemy and we must restrict and censor the voices of people to keep our country safe then our country is already lost. If one man’s voice is a threat to our nation but his holding of the presidential office is not, than it is apparent the powers of the presidency are less powerful than a single voice. Why should any of us settle to giving up our rights to free speech? It’s clear that Facebook and Twitter believe the ends justify the means. They believe the American people are weak. They insult our founding fathers by suggesting Zuckerburg and Dorsey know what is best for us. Parler is not an arbiter of truth. We believe in you. We believe you are wise enough to decide for yourself and trust that given access to all information we can self govern. The solution is clear. If you believe in free speech, and our founding principles of our republic, then we must liberate others by promoting free speech Parler. yanhren 发表于 2021-01-08 11:44
If free speech truly is the enemy and we must restrict and censor the voices of people to keep our country safe then our country is already lost. If one man’s voice is a threat to our nation but his holding of the presidential office is not, than it is apparent the powers of the presidency are less powerful than a single voice. Why should any of us settle to giving up our rights to free speech? It’s clear that Facebook and Twitter believe the ends justify the means. They believe the American people are weak. They insult our founding fathers by suggesting Zuckerburg and Dorsey know what is best for us. Parler is not an arbiter of truth. We believe in you. We believe you are wise enough to decide for yourself and trust that given access to all information we can self govern. The solution is clear. If you believe in free speech, and our founding principles of our republic, then we must liberate others by promoting free speech Parler. yanhren 发表于 2021-01-08 11:44
If free speech truly is the enemy and we must restrict and censor the voices of people to keep our country safe then our country is already lost.
If one man’s voice is a threat to our nation but his holding of the presidential office is not, than it is apparent the powers of the presidency are less powerful than a single voice. Why should any of us settle to giving up our rights to free speech?
It’s clear that Facebook and Twitter believe the ends justify the means. They believe the American people are weak. They insult our founding fathers by suggesting Zuckerburg and Dorsey know what is best for us.
Parler is not an arbiter of truth. We believe in you. We believe you are wise enough to decide for yourself and trust that given access to all information we can self govern. The solution is clear. If you believe in free speech, and our founding principles of our republic, then we must liberate others by promoting free speech Parler.
卑鄙的行为总是用最高尚的借口来justify, 你牛，你比规定言论自由的美国founding fathers还厉害，还高尚。
我为受到Trump和各路造谣败类妖言惑众而冲击国会死去的川粉感到不值。大统领立刻和他们作了切割，痛的只是家人，而且是永远的痛
你们赶紧注销，快速地
Inciting violence can’t get a free pass behind the cover of “speech freedom”. Devil words can kill people as we can see in 1/6 riot. Besides, neither Facebook nor Twitter are government media, they have same right as yours to set up their own rule as long as the don’t break law.
你赶紧回墙国，快速地
你的话就是😈的狰狞
您好好想想，川粉深受谣言所害，都已经死了人了，还能赞同这个ceo的观点。你们川粉的命还没有一个破ceo的瞎话重要？！
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-1702_h315.pdf
所以这些网络平台完全可以这么做，和first amendment不冲突。Twitter/FB禁了川普，他可以去Parler。 只有政府介入，才会像墙国一样。 FB/Twitter因为这么做如果掉粉是他们自己的决定, it is a business decision.
唯一问题是如果一个或几个social media一统天下，自然会有问题。所以我不反对twitter/FB 封这些账号，但我支持对这些社交平台的 antitrust lawsuit。
所以说白粉不是极坏就是极蠢，如果大家都去注销非死不可和推特账户，你们的主子没了用户就断了财路，估计会哭晕在厕所吧，想到这层了吗？
是的，现在几个社交媒体影响太大了。如果串通起来，一手遮天，左右民众的思想，也是非常不好的一件事。应该尽快出台制约这些社交软件巨头的法律了。
笑死，就那一小撮人，人家大公司看都不看你一眼
我没有主子，倒是你们主子已经众叛亲离，人人喊打
你应该希望这些大的社交平台倒掉吧？那赶紧销号啊！看看川粉们走了人家是不是还好好的 LOL
自由市场，自由选择，优胜劣汰，这就是民主的体现。
就是这句话。 我发现很多人对言论自由理解错误，以为就是我说什么都可以，没有人能够管我。就如我前面所说，这是指政府不能管你，私人公司管你没商量。你要不服，可以打官司告，可以用其它公司产品，可以跳槽。这是和墙国的最大区别。
哦，说明白粉真是极蠢，你提到了“一小撮”原来你们也是知道量是你们主子是否哭晕厕所的决定因素。如果不是一小撮呢？别在自己假定的意念里自嗨。愚蠢而不自知才是最可悲的。
一个亿+的川粉不给他们赏饭吃，你可以问问你们的主子会不会哭晕厕所。
对啊，走啊，看看你们走了人家倒不倒啊，咱俩都想看啊，目标一致啊
支持，手动点赞！
他们太不知道见好就收了，一个劲儿地疯狂胡闹
我们如何做就不劳 it 们操心了，it 的主子去性别化，it 还是欢呼下以后被统称 it 的“幸福”生活吧。
你看看你，就硬气到底发誓一定注销大网络社交平台的账号呗，转移话题干什么呢
这个事儿最搞笑是什么呢，忠心川粉盖了两百多页楼结果一表示悲观立刻在新楼被打成五毛川黑，没一会儿新楼被删了，然后这拨人又把脸一吗擦当没事儿人一样回去那个两百页楼继续聊。 各怀鬼胎，转进如风。 这就是小人同而不和。
其实他在自己起的老楼也被骂川黑了
哈哈哈，说得好形象！
和而不同和同而不和。希望川粉努力做到前者。
哈哈哈
赞一下小人同而不和
我跟你们这群只会发誓的it不同，但你没有资格了解我如何做。mind your own business!
不敢发誓说注销账号，ok，明白了
真是谎话，吹牛张口就来，要么就是天天幻想，还一个亿，啧啧啧。能有一万川粉删账号都算抬举了。话说回来，你们的主子自己还赖在twitter上没走呢
对啊，脑残粉们删了账号怎么follow老川呢。。。
wow，apple给力啊，让parler ceo蹭热点瞎说，这下被收拾了吧
时代的更替谁也阻挡不了
还有一个MeWe
说的挺好的，但是攻击竞争对手并不是太难得决定，毕竟站着说话不腰疼。
如果被apple和google封了分发渠道，ceo还能这么淡定的支持无边界言论自由，那我给他点赞👍