The first person who gets charged this fine could make a lot of money from publicity if they're smart about it. It's nice that this has been so widely circulated.
PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like
111–120 of 158 posts
Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like
#112Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like
#113I mostly used PayPal so I didn't have to get up off the sofa when ordering stuff on my phone to find my credit card. Given the threat of fines for wrong-think, that's not a compelling enough use case.
Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like
#114I mostly used PayPal so I didn't have to get up off the sofa when ordering stuff on my phone to find my credit card. Given the threat of fines for wrong-think, that's not a compelling enough use case.
Just tried to do it and apparently I have a mysterious "pending transaction" that is stopping me closing my account. How convenient.
Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like
#115Feels like only a month ago when Paypal were claiming that this change was an innocent mistake and not to read anything into it being leaked.
...shocked picacho face...
Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like
#116The first person who gets charged this fine could make a lot of money from publicity if they're smart about it. It's nice that this has been so widely circulated.
The first person they fine will be someone so undesirable that no one will like them or care to defend them. It's the same way the government commonly builds precedent into questionable laws -- start out for years to decades persecuting only extremely unlikeable persons who no one wants to defend, then after years of precedent and slowly boiling the frog unleash it on the greater populace.
Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like
#117This is neither shocking, nor new. A decade ago I remember a friend who had a small business selling some niche collectors items. One day, he was scammed. The guy reported that the package was never delivered and, without even investigating, Paypal banned my friend's account and awarded the buyer their money back. Paypal has always, and will always be a shit company. Charging people $2,500 for wrongthink is simply as…
> woke politics being mainstream
That's not even a requirement here - they just have to continually adjust their principles to be whatever happens to be most fashionable at the moment, just like most everybody else does.
Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like
#118The Grit Daily article cited in the linked-to tweet is fake news. It alleges that PayPal's proposed misinformation clause and associated $2500 penalty, which was cancelled by PayPal earlier this month, has been quietly "added back into the terms of service with equally ambiguous language." This can be proven wrong with a quick check of PayPal's acceptable use policy in the WayBack Machine. The $2500 fine that the art…
Oh, I guess there's no problem since it has been in there for a year. Thanks for clearing that up!
Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah just like how the 5th amendment prevents your funds from being stolen by law enforcement for baseless suspicion. Those amendments are iron-clad, water-tight, and applied evenly to all citizens!
Vote for constitutional judges then. Like Clarence Thomas. He doesn’t give a flying $&! what people wants. He votes what the constitution says.
You can't vote directly for supreme court justice. At best you have to temper guessing when the next one is gonna croak and deciding whether you want to vote for the candidate who will nominate/confirm the justice you want, or vote for the candidate that better fits your position in the event none of them croak.
Re: PayPal restores to its TOS $2,500 charge for any post they don't like
#120The first person who gets charged this fine could make a lot of money from publicity if they're smart about it. It's nice that this has been so widely circulated.
The first person they fine will be someone so undesirable that no one will like them or care to defend them. It's the same way the government commonly builds precedent into questionable laws -- start out for years to decades persecuting only extremely unlikeable persons who no one wants to defend, then after years of precedent and slowly boiling the frog unleash it on the greater populace.
This might be true, but I wonder if there's really anyone so unlikable that they couldn't find an audience in the long tail. Extremism unfortunately seems to be able to find a way despite deplatforming. See examples like Nick Fuentes who recently attracted some of the most prominent politicians to his conference.