Poll Do you think the Trump insurrectionists have blown their wad?

[Hornet]

I have not looked at this thread for a long time.

A question for those who know more than I do: is there any legal risk with some of what is posted here? Are boundaries being pushed or have they been exceeded? I love this website and want to see it stick around.

There is no legal risk to you. But, the website owner, the Admin and Stripfan are at risk

Have a read here as they are trying to make Bill C-63 stricter.

An Overview of Canada’s Online Harms Act | TechPolicy.Press

Mandy Lau digs into the specifics of Bill C-63, Canada's proposed Online Harms Act.

www.techpolicy.press

That being said, it is the website owner and the Admin that have the Duty of Care to stomp out the Hate Speech. The Admin is probably some Indian guy in Bangalore so chasing him would be difficult. Assuming the owner is in Canada, his ass would be in a sling if the Admin didn’t do his job and stomp out Hate Speech. Stripfan is likely not even located in Canada and is just some international Troll.

 

[Hornet]

Can U show a screenshot w that control?

I had a look on my own threads… Im not seeing it

I couldn’t find it either on one of my threads.

 

[stripfan]

There is no legal risk to you. But, the website owner, the Admin and Stripfan are at risk

Have a read here as they are trying to make Bill C-63 stricter.

An Overview of Canada’s Online Harms Act | TechPolicy.Press

Mandy Lau digs into the specifics of Bill C-63, Canada's proposed Online Harms Act.

www.techpolicy.press

That being said, it is the website owner and the Admin that have the Duty of Care to stomp out the Hate Speech. The Admin is probably some Indian guy in Bangalore so chasing him would be difficult. Assuming the owner is in Canada, his ass would be in a sling if the Admin didn’t do his job and stomp out Hate Speech. Stripfan is likely not even located in Canada and is just some international Troll.

View attachment 426160View attachment 426161View attachment 426162View attachment 426163View attachment 426164

All of that is subject to interpretation. Why doesn't the government shut down twitter, which is where I get all my stuff from. I'm just telling the truth by supplying real information. It's too bad for you if you don't like it. I have never incited violence.

 

[stripfan]

Do you think Margaret Atwood is a nazi?

Margaret Atwood warns of Trudeau’s “Orwellian” Bill C-63

One of Canada’s most renowned authors, Margaret Atwood, is among the concerned voices, joined by Elon Musk and Russell Brand, criticizing the dystopian future that might arise from the introduction of the Online Harms Act, also known as Bill C-63.

tnc.news

 

[stripfan]

There is no legal risk to you. But, the website owner, the Admin and Stripfan are at risk

Have a read here as they are trying to make Bill C-63 stricter.

An Overview of Canada’s Online Harms Act | TechPolicy.Press

Mandy Lau digs into the specifics of Bill C-63, Canada's proposed Online Harms Act.

www.techpolicy.press

That being said, it is the website owner and the Admin that have the Duty of Care to stomp out the Hate Speech. The Admin is probably some Indian guy in Bangalore so chasing him would be difficult. Assuming the owner is in Canada, his ass would be in a sling if the Admin didn’t do his job and stomp out Hate Speech. Stripfan is likely not even located in Canada and is just some international Troll.

View attachment 426160View attachment 426161View attachment 426162View attachment 426163View attachment 426164

Thanks for bringing this up. It seem we're all safe with free speech until Bill C-63 passes, which hopefully will never happen.

 

[Hornet]

I have not looked at this thread for a long time.

A question for those who know more than I do: is there any legal risk with some of what is posted here? Are boundaries being pushed or have they been exceeded? I love this website and want to see it stick around.

While Bill C-63 is being introduced, here is what is in place today

Online Hate and Canadian Law

Traditional government responses to online hate have been to police cyberspace as an extension of the state’s territory, ignoring the online/offline divide.

mediasmarts.ca

 

[jimmyd]

Stripfan is a parasite. He’ll just infest some other thread

Don’t you have him on ignore?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jimmyd]

I have not looked at this thread for a long time.

A question for those who know more than I do: is there any legal risk with some of what is posted here? Are boundaries being pushed or have they been exceeded? I love this website and want to see it stick around.

[mention]snoopdoggie [/mention] has called for the death of people on multiple occasions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jimmyd]

There is no legal risk to you. But, the website owner, the Admin and Stripfan are at risk

Have a read here as they are trying to make Bill C-63 stricter.

An Overview of Canada’s Online Harms Act | TechPolicy.Press

Mandy Lau digs into the specifics of Bill C-63, Canada's proposed Online Harms Act.

www.techpolicy.press

That being said, it is the website owner and the Admin that have the Duty of Care to stomp out the Hate Speech. The Admin is probably some Indian guy in Bangalore so chasing him would be difficult. Assuming the owner is in Canada, his ass would be in a sling if the Admin didn’t do his job and stomp out Hate Speech. Stripfan is likely not even located in Canada and is just some international Troll.

View attachment 426160View attachment 426161View attachment 426162View attachment 426163View attachment 426164

Classic [mention]Hornet [/mention] to want to censor speech he doesn’t like. So pathetic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[vandisney]

“Hate speech isn’t free speech” is a ridiculous argument because “hate” is a constantly moving goalpost and subjective to whoever is offended.

What’s “hate” for one person is truth to another.

 

[stripfan]

“Hate speech isn’t free speech” is a ridiculous argument because “hate” is a constantly moving goalpost and subjective to whoever is offended.

What’s “hate” for one person is truth to another.

It should be called truth speech.

 

[stripfan]

This is why they're letting them walk through the border. Truth speech, not hate speech.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776711034671161810

 

[Hornet]

 

[Hornet]

Oh Bobo

 

[stripfan]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1777319523466555569

 

[testingcat]

“Hate speech isn’t free speech” is a ridiculous argument because “hate” is a constantly moving goalpost and subjective to whoever is offended.

What’s “hate” for one person is truth to another.

Indeed intriguing question. Complicated one, right?

Wrong!

One doesnt base the observation on one post. It is simple, actually.

Take participants of the original Trump / Biden discussion, for example.

Do they like each other - No.
Are their posts always factual based with the link to source? - No.

Do they often insult each other ? Yes

Do they have the tendency to try and find a common for the problem rather than stress the differences? - No.

But!
Do you feel they actually hate each other?
I do not! Dislike yes, but not hate.

Read stripfan posts, bunch of them.
Consider selection, consider where his quotes are from, tags on Twitter he follows.

The guy is a pure hate and nazi

Posting many times during the day, around the clock... like no life.

I was thinking he is Russian hired Troll (there are many) as not once he has shown
Putin simpathy...

Maybe Palectinian decendant? No, those are more Israel targeted and there are Jews in Canada supporting them. They can not be so dumb.

No, he is exactly like nazi, targeting Jews whenever they are, not as individuals, but as "the kind," praising Hitler "final solution" not once.

To conclude:
Arguing - ok, promoting hate - not ok, and yes, can be prosecuted even in the current law. He and those like him.

 

[stripfan]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1777311727022960681

 

[stripfan]

Indeed intriguing question. Complicated one, right?

Wrong!

One doesnt base the observation on one post. It is simple, actually.

Take participants of the original Trump / Biden discussion, for example.

Do they like each other - No.
Are their posts always factual based with the link to source? - No.

Do they often insult each other ? Yes

Do they have the tendency to try and find a common for the problem rather than stress the differences? - No.

But!
Do you feel they actually hate each other?
I do not! Dislike yes, but not hate.

Read stripfan posts, bunch of them.
Consider selection, consider where his quotes are from, tags on Twitter he follows.

The guy is a pure hate and nazi

Posting many times during the day, around the clock... like no life.

I was thinking he is Russian hired Troll (there are many) as not once he has shown
Putin simpathy...

Maybe Palectinian decendant? No, those are more Israel targeted and there are Jews in Canada supporting them. They can not be so dumb.

No, he is exactly like nazi, targeting Jews whenever they are, not as individuals, but as "the kind," praising Hitler "final solution" not once.

To conclude:
Arguing - ok, promoting hate - not ok, and yes, can be prosecuted even in the current law. He and those like him.

So people should just look at what your kind have been doing in the world favorably, is that right?

Can you honestly say that jews acting as a group have not been doing anything lately that would get an unfavorable reaction from people?

What about those people demonstrating with Palestinian flags? They clearly look at you as a group.

 

[stripfan]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776968743408578743

 

[stripfan]

New info about 9/11. This is real news item, not something I made up.