Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 595 posts

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#11

Post by edgefield0 »

devmunchies wrote: post #9
edgefield0 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bogus argument. The protestors are advocating for behavior that will literally kill people, including medical personnel. The protesters are no different than those who call for deadly riots or civil war. They deserve to be shut down for jeopardizing public health and safety.

any decision can kill people, whether its motor traffic laws, junk food laws, or smoking laws, or quarantine laws. its all open for debate and should not be deplatformed for mere protest. There is a point where quarantine does more damage than good, especially when thinking big picture and government control.

[flagged]

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#12

Post by 0xy »

edgefield0 wrote: post #4
chrisco255 wrote: post #3

These are Americans exercising their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and assembly. Whether you agree with the protestors or not is irrelevant. Your rights are impacted, too, by this arbitrary platform bias. This cannot stand for long. We have to move away from centralized monopolies on the web.

This is a bogus argument. The protestors are advocating for behavior that will literally kill people, including medical personnel. The protesters are no different than those who call for deadly riots or civil war. They deserve to be shut down for jeopardizing public health and safety.

The deaths caused by the coronavirus will be nothing compared to the deaths caused by economic destruction.

A 30% unemployment rate will kill substantially more people than the coronavirus.

In fact, you could argue the protesters are advocating for behavior that would prevent people from dying (people who get laid off and are now in poverty).

As you should know, poverty carries a much higher mortality rate.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#13

Post by smitty1e »

SamWhited wrote: post #10
chrisco255 wrote: post #3

These are Americans exercising their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and assembly. Whether you agree with the protestors or not is irrelevant. Your rights are impacted, too, by this arbitrary platform bias. This cannot stand for long. We have to move away from centralized monopolies on the web.

This entire comment is a strawman. This is not the same as "arbitrary platform bias". This is not Facebook saying "we have a certain political view and we talked to the government and they agreed so no other views are acceptable". This is them stopping stupid people from killing a lot of other people. Also, your rights aren't affected. This is Facebook telling stupid people to shut up and stop spreading fud that coul…

This is the government suppressing speech by proxy.

Even if it survives legal review, this harms the spirit of the Bill of Rights, which is incorporated against the States.

Voters should reply in November with their ballots as appropriate.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#14

Post by LyndsySimon »

SamWhited wrote: post #10
chrisco255 wrote: post #3

These are Americans exercising their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and assembly. Whether you agree with the protestors or not is irrelevant. Your rights are impacted, too, by this arbitrary platform bias. This cannot stand for long. We have to move away from centralized monopolies on the web.

This entire comment is a strawman. This is not the same as "arbitrary platform bias". This is not Facebook saying "we have a certain political view and we talked to the government and they agreed so no other views are acceptable". This is them stopping stupid people from killing a lot of other people. Also, your rights aren't affected. This is Facebook telling stupid people to shut up and stop spreading fud that coul…

> not the government breaking up peaceful and legal assemblies

But the government is breaking up peaceful and legal assemblies. While I don't have the article handy, there have been arrests over the past few days for refusing to leave.

As for "legal" - the First Amendment is very clear on this matter. The federal government (and through the incorporation doctrine, the governments of the several states) is specifically denied the power to prohibit this.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#15

Post by 0xy »

SamWhited wrote: post #10
chrisco255 wrote: post #3

These are Americans exercising their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and assembly. Whether you agree with the protestors or not is irrelevant. Your rights are impacted, too, by this arbitrary platform bias. This cannot stand for long. We have to move away from centralized monopolies on the web.

This entire comment is a strawman. This is not the same as "arbitrary platform bias". This is not Facebook saying "we have a certain political view and we talked to the government and they agreed so no other views are acceptable". This is them stopping stupid people from killing a lot of other people. Also, your rights aren't affected. This is Facebook telling stupid people to shut up and stop spreading fud that coul…

This would only be true if coronavirus was more deadly than the dramatic increase in poverty that the resulting economic destruction of the shutdown will cause, which is extremely doubtful.

Unemployment is deadly. The mortality rate while in poverty is over 2.5x.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#16

Post by phakding »

chrisco255 wrote: post #3

These are Americans exercising their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and assembly. Whether you agree with the protestors or not is irrelevant. Your rights are impacted, too, by this arbitrary platform bias. This cannot stand for long. We have to move away from centralized monopolies on the web.

You should know that this is not a grass root movement rather someone astroturfing.

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2020/04/whos-behind-the-reopen-d...

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/salvadorhernandez/coron...

Also take a look at this Reddit comment

https://www.reddit.com/r/maryland/comments/g3niq3/comment/fn...

If you don't trust BuzzFeed you can go look at the domain registration information for open[enter state name].com domains.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#17

Post by edgefield0 »

0xy wrote: post #12
edgefield0 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bogus argument. The protestors are advocating for behavior that will literally kill people, including medical personnel. The protesters are no different than those who call for deadly riots or civil war. They deserve to be shut down for jeopardizing public health and safety.

The deaths caused by the coronavirus will be nothing compared to the deaths caused by economic destruction. A 30% unemployment rate will kill substantially more people than the coronavirus. In fact, you could argue the protesters are advocating for behavior that would prevent people from dying (people who get laid off and are now in poverty). As you should know, poverty carries a much higher mortality rate.

Not if a competent government provided leadership and managed the process, including the period of isolation and financial support for those in need. Instead we have the bumbling Trump administration and the GOP sycophants, which is providing no leadership and directing billions of dollars to those who least need it.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#18

Post by lovegoblin »

0xy wrote: post #12
edgefield0 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bogus argument. The protestors are advocating for behavior that will literally kill people, including medical personnel. The protesters are no different than those who call for deadly riots or civil war. They deserve to be shut down for jeopardizing public health and safety.

The deaths caused by the coronavirus will be nothing compared to the deaths caused by economic destruction. A 30% unemployment rate will kill substantially more people than the coronavirus. In fact, you could argue the protesters are advocating for behavior that would prevent people from dying (people who get laid off and are now in poverty). As you should know, poverty carries a much higher mortality rate.

> As you should know, poverty carries a much higher mortality rate.

But it needn't. They could be advocating for social safety nets, but instead they want the right to put others at risk.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#19

Post by phakding »

0xy wrote: post #12
edgefield0 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bogus argument. The protestors are advocating for behavior that will literally kill people, including medical personnel. The protesters are no different than those who call for deadly riots or civil war. They deserve to be shut down for jeopardizing public health and safety.

The deaths caused by the coronavirus will be nothing compared to the deaths caused by economic destruction. A 30% unemployment rate will kill substantially more people than the coronavirus. In fact, you could argue the protesters are advocating for behavior that would prevent people from dying (people who get laid off and are now in poverty). As you should know, poverty carries a much higher mortality rate.

You have no data to support this.

Re: Facebook says it has removed promotion of anti-quarantine events

#20

Post by 0xy »

phakding wrote: post #19
0xy wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The deaths caused by the coronavirus will be nothing compared to the deaths caused by economic destruction. A 30% unemployment rate will kill substantially more people than the coronavirus. In fact, you could argue the protesters are advocating for behavior that would prevent people from dying (people who get laid off and are now in poverty). As you should know, poverty carries a much higher mortality rate.

You have no data to support this.

Would you mind refuting specific points rather than disregarding my entire argument?
Post reply on HN