[stale2002]

> Who said ISPs and the phones are "unmoderated"?

ISPs have to follow common carrier laws.

If social media platforms were subject to these same common carrier laws, then that is good enough for me.

That is what I mean by unmoderated. I mean, that they are following things such as common carrier laws, which have very significant requirements.

[triceratops]

> ISPs have to follow common carrier laws.

Firstly, you're wrong about that. This same FCC voted to remove ISPs from common carrier classification.

Also, what do you think common carrier means? It doesn't mean "completely unmoderated" as you appear to believe. As I already demonstrated, even common carriers perform network-layer moderation, since they provide the network layer. Social media provides the application layer, so why shouldn't they be allowed to perform moderation at the application layer?

[stale2002]

> Also, what do you think common carrier means? It doesn't mean "completely unmoderated"

Systems such as the phone network are pretty darn unmoderated. It is mostly unmoderated, even if common carriers are allowed to do a small amount, of highly restricted moderation actions.

> as you appear to believe

I have just clarified. It means that there are very strong regulations, that ban many forms of moderation.

> so why shouldn't they be allowed to perform moderation at the application layer?

I am saying that I would be fine if they were banned from doing most moderation actions, as is the case for common carriers.

And I am saying that I would be OK with them engaging in the very small amount of highly regulated moderation, that common carriers are allowed to do.

Common carriers have large restrictions on the amount of moderation that they are allowed to do. I want those same restrictions to apply to other media platforms.

[triceratops]

> Common carriers have large restrictions on the amount of moderation that they are allowed to do

Yeah, I don't think you know what common carrier actually means.[1]

The moderation that telecoms and ISPs perform relates to traffic that can negatively affect other users of those systems. Social media platforms can easily argue that their moderation already follows similar principles. It just happens that they deal with content, not raw bits, so they have to moderate content.

You also didn't address my other point, which is that ISPs aren't common carriers at all and this same FCC voted to make it so. So this seems pretty hypocritical behavior on their part.

1. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/153

[stale2002]

> Social media platforms can easily argue

Social media platforms are not currently subject to common carrier laws.

And I am saying that the law should be changed so that they are, or whatever needs it be done to make that happen.

Common carriers are absolutely restricted from engaging in certain actions.

Were you not aware that there are regulations that restrict what common carriers do?

[triceratops]

You're repeating the same things over and over with little logic, and no reference to anything I said. There's little point continuing this conversation.

[stale2002]

> with little logic

Do you disagree that common carriers are subject to certain restrictions?

I am not sure how you could possibly not recognize the fact that we have common carrier laws.

> You're repeating the same things

You are misphrasing the things that I am trying to say, so I have to slightly rephrase it so that you cannot misinterprete my statements.