Facebook

[Tisme]

Since the ABC made FB their only point of contact for us unwashed, I use it occasionally, but under a pseudonym as in this Forum.

Twatter available and so far you can amp up your responses compared to sanitised farcebook

 

[Darc Knight]

I've been thinking of just getting a Twitter account to stalk. If I get a "twatter" account, will you be my friend there too @Tisme ?

 

[Tisme]

I've been thinking of just getting a Twitter account to stalk. If I get a "twatter" account, will you be my friend there too @Tisme ?

you "follow" on twatter.

 

[Darc Knight]

I like the idea of having a voice. Facebook is disgraceful imo. Is Twitter any better for giving individuals a voice?
Trump and Clementine Ford would just ignore or block me

 

[mullokintyre]

For those who still have a facebook account, it would pay to read the decision by the High Court in the Dylan Voller case.
It has found that the owner of a facebook account is liable for anything defamatory, libellous, racist, homophobic, anti trans or anything else for which you may be found liable, which is posted as a comment to your account.
This also applies to twitter, Instagram etc, indeed anything that allows others to post.
The alternative is troll your social media and delete or block content that may be assumed to fit the above criteria.
Another reason to ditch social media.
Mick

 

[wayneL]

For those who still have a facebook account, it would pay to read the decision by the High Court in the Dylan Voller case.
It has found that the owner of a facebook account is liable for anything defamatory, libellous, racist, homophobic, anti trans or anything else for which you may be found liable, which is posted as a comment to your account.
This also applies to twitter, Instagram etc, indeed anything that allows others to post.
The alternative is troll your social media and delete or block content that may be assumed to fit the above criteria.
Another reason to ditch social media.
Mick

A couple of more months to build my professional profile here in Perth, and I'm off FaceAche forever (word of mouth is by far more effective Vince established anyway).

I'll keep tw@tter, gettr and gab etc, for observation, face to face communication is it going to become far more critical in the coming months and years... IMO

 

[mullokintyre]

In a somewhat surprising admission in court filings, Facebook as admitted that its "fact Checks" are indeed nothing more than opinions.
It is going to make it rather difficult to pretend that it is acting on "the science", rather than just pushing a particular opinion.


From WUWT

As we have previously reported, journalist John Stossel is suing Facebook after Facebook’s ‘fact checkers’ labeled climate change information that Stossel posted as “false and misleading”. In the middle of all this is the nefarious website “Climate Feedback” which has a bunch of climate zealots that write up what they claim are “fact checks” for articles, videos, and news stories they disagree with.

Facebook just blew the “fact check” claim right out of the water in court.

In its response to Stossel’s defamation claim, Facebook responds on Page 2, Line 8 in the court document (download it below) that Facebook cannot be sued for defamation (which is making a false and harmful assertion) because its ‘fact checks’ are mere statements of opinion rather than factual assertions.

 

[wayneL]

In a somewhat surprising admission in court filings, Facebook as admitted that its "fact Checks" are indeed nothing more than opinions.
It is going to make it rather difficult to pretend that it is acting on "the science", rather than just pushing a particular opinion.


From WUWT


View attachment 134325

*Everybody knew that already, but the left just tried to weaponize that.