|
|
|
|
|
by ImPostingOnHN
1080 days ago
|
|
your argument was summarized above, and it simply doesn't present a plausible scenario: the dude swearing at Facebook had no power to repeal section 230, no power to control the GOP Senate into doing so, and no plausible path to convincing the GOP to censor the sort of content in question (content the GOP itself supports, content they oppose censoring) in short: the "threat" you described isn't realistic or plausible, least of all by Facebook, and a claim of coercion requires that the threat be plausible, not imaginary and contrived |
|