• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Elon Musk buys twitter

Grays_1890 said:
TBF though his last video on YT was not just to proclaim his innocence but to rally a crowd and incite anger within that crowd. Social media is proof that it worked. I would be hesitant to see that continue if I was the decision maker at YT. Thats not really a restriction of his rights to speak he can proclaim his innocence publicly via any other route he wishes without inciting a mob.
Click to expand...

one more monetisation attempt before YT turn that off too

there was an interview on the newsagents earlier in the week, one of the accusations is of sexual assault I believe
 
SpurMeUp said:
Not sure that point bears out. He's not doing striptease on his videos and providing date links. Very obscure approach. Why not put Brand in jail to stop him from meeting anyone at all?
Click to expand...
It's the fame that comes from the platforms that's the issue.

Without the fame, he'd be a junkie who had slept with a handful of women. Contributing to his fame could help cause serious damage.
 
Grays_1890 said:
TBF though his last video on YT was not just to proclaim his innocence but to rally a crowd and incite anger within that crowd. Social media is proof that it worked. I would be hesitant to see that continue if I was the decision maker at YT. Thats not really a restriction of his rights to speak he can proclaim his innocence publicly via any other route he wishes without inciting a mob.
Click to expand...

You might like China. Or Russia! Crowds, incite anger...turn him off! What a mockery of a free society.

In what way is it fair? I am totally with Rumble on this one. And it is quite shocking people think shutting down others freedom of speech is justified. When someone is free and still currently innocent.
 
scaramanga said:
It's the fame that comes from the platforms that's the issue.

Without the fame, he'd be a junkie who had slept with a handful of women. Contributing to his fame could help cause serious damage.
Click to expand...

By your justification why not lock him away now? And stop the press from printing any stories on him? Draconian.
 
SpurMeUp said:
You might like China. Or Russia! Crowds, anger, turn him off. What a joke.

In what way is that fair? Forget freedom of speech? I am totally with Rumble on this one. And it is quite shocking people think shutting down others freedom of speech is justified. When someone is free and still currently innocent.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between saying you are innocent and twisting stories into theories and conspiracy which may have consequences on the alleged victims.
 
Grays_1890 said:
There is a difference between saying you are innocent and twisting stories into theories and conspiracy which may have consequences on the alleged victims.
Click to expand...

That should be censored? Tut tut conspiracy theories. There is a job waiting for you in the Chinese Communist Party! Makes a mockery of free society.
 
Grays_1890 said:
Hahahaha, yeh because I am against free speech....behave
Click to expand...

TBF though his last video on YT was not just to proclaim his innocence but to rally a crowd and incite anger within that crowd. Social media is proof that it worked. I would be hesitant to see that continue if I was the decision maker at YT. Thats not really a restriction of his rights to speak he can proclaim his innocence publicly via any other route he wishes without inciting a mob.

If it was said by an autocrat in a Russian or Chinese accent...
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
TBF though his last video on YT was not just to proclaim his innocence but to rally a crowd and incite anger within that crowd. Social media is proof that it worked. I would be hesitant to see that continue if I was the decision maker at YT. Thats not really a restriction of his rights to speak he can proclaim his innocence publicly via any other route he wishes without inciting a mob.

It was said by an autocrat in a Russian or Chinese accent...
Click to expand...

Na just said by someone who can clearly read the room
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
Because not being locked up without a fair trial is a fundamental human right.

Being able to post nonsense on YouTube isnt.
Click to expand...

Guess you’re not the libertarian that you make yourself out to be. Free speech and free expression is not a right you espouse.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Guess you’re not the libertarian that you make yourself out to be. Free speech and free expression is not a right you espouse.
Click to expand...
Brand is free to say whatever he wants.

Google is not and should never be required to offer him a platform for it.
 
scaramanga said:
Brand is free to say whatever he wants.

Google is not and should never be required to offer him a platform for it.
Click to expand...

The premise of censorship is obviously not something you’re aware of. Or how totalitarian regimes control the media. There is nothing libertarian about censoring content. The idea that we should censor content that incites anger, crowds or mobs is straight out of Russia. Crazy to think that is occurring and advocated here.
 
Baleforce said:
YouTube haven’t even blocked him have they?

They have just turned monetisation off on his channel which is standard procedure in such situations.

They aren’t censoring him, just getting out of business with him.
Click to expand...

You can create a pile on to an alleged *struggle cuddle* victim, we are just not going to pay you to do it. Seems fair
 
Baleforce said:
YouTube haven’t even blocked him have they?

They have just turned monetisation off on his channel which is standard procedure in such situations.

They aren’t censoring him, just getting out of business with him.
Click to expand...

I think that is totally appropriate. What isn’t is a member of parliament writing to the media trying to cancel people who are innocent until proven otherwise. If people espouse state censorship of content (which is political content) then we are closer to Russia than we think.
 
Baleforce said:
YouTube haven’t even blocked him have they?

They have just turned monetisation off on his channel which is standard procedure in such situations.

They aren’t censoring him, just getting out of business with him.
Click to expand...


I bet yt are still getting ad money from it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back