Re:Facebook's internal rulebook on sex, terrorism and violence
by delinka on Sunday May 21, 2017 @04:42PM
(#14389153)
Do you have any legal citations about any party being compelled to listen to another such that the other's right to free speech is preserved?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Facebook's internal rulebook on sex, terrorism and violence
by pottersbasilisk on Sunday May 21, 2017 @05:19PM
(#14389313)
I havent heard of the right to be heard, but most people know of free speech.
So where are you getting the idea of the right to be heard ?
Is it a legal idea, your personal idea, a philosophical idea ?
Re:Facebook's internal rulebook on sex, terrorism and violence
by henrikschroder on Sunday May 21, 2017 @05:41PM
(#14389401)
Are you trying to derail, or are you seriously not understanding that there is no right to be heard, it's a thing GP made up on the spot to illustrate what free speech is not?
Re:Facebook's internal rulebook on sex, terrorism and violence
by pottersbasilisk on Sunday May 21, 2017 @07:44PM
(#14389912)
Look Im not lawyer.
But I do know free speech is something extraordinary legalistic in america so Im asking for clarification.
http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-res...
https://www.thefire.org/free-speech-includes-the-right-not-j...
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/11/12/opinion/who-is-entitle...
A google search showed tons of different opinions and views on what I originally thought was a simple view.
So no its not as simple as people are claiming or saying