Comments by "" (@TheHuxleyAgnostic) on "Silicon Valley Shouldn't Be Judge and Jury for Content" video.

The first amendment has little to do with this. A private property owner's right to have you removed from their private property has always trumped the non right to be on their private property saying stuff. If you want first amendment rights, want an actual public square, then it's the private ownership that's the problem.
7
Porky P Iggy Telephone lines are akin to the internet, not the websites on the internet, and both of those (internet and phone lines) have been at least partly funded by the government. Every private number you call, though, has the right to hang up on you. Also like how you can use the public roads to get to others' private property, but you still don't have the right to go on their private property. Why do you have the right to be on someone else's privately owned servers? They could start charging membership fees tomorrow if they wanted. They could decide they've made enough money and pull the plugs on their servers.
1
Porky P Iggy The invitation came with rules for membership. Break the rules, lose your membership. Pretty simple concept. If Trump has his gym membership revoked for walking into the women's change room too many times, so what? People have been having memberships revoked since the dawn of memberships. If you want a public square, argue public ownership.
1
Porky P Iggy Sure, and it's the owner's interpretation that decides. These social media sites don't generally have these moments, like with Trump cultists, where a bunch of staff is actively looking for something specific to delete or block. They, generally, just let the program handle some things, and depend on other users reporting on other things. Sometimes it takes just one asshole to report a specific video, that separates it from other similar videos.
1