Antiochus Wilson
@antiochuswilson.bsky.social
Democrats as in the party leaders or democrats as in the voters? If you're talking about the first one, then sure. If you're talking about the second, I think you really underestimate the anger toward party leadership right now.
December 15, 2025 at 5:05 PM
Democrats as in the party leaders or democrats as in the voters? If you're talking about the first one, then sure. If you're talking about the second, I think you really underestimate the anger toward party leadership right now.
When you put it like that, sounds a lot like Trump.
December 15, 2025 at 2:11 AM
When you put it like that, sounds a lot like Trump.
Ugh. And HPD just announced this fucker was selected to redevelop its headquarters into a massive 3,700 unit complex.
December 14, 2025 at 11:36 PM
Ugh. And HPD just announced this fucker was selected to redevelop its headquarters into a massive 3,700 unit complex.
You can be a genius in one area and a complete delusional idiot in many others. You can be a genius and a monster at the same time. I don't think Galloway's insights are all that profound, but I also think people are reading way too much into what he says.
December 14, 2025 at 1:55 AM
You can be a genius in one area and a complete delusional idiot in many others. You can be a genius and a monster at the same time. I don't think Galloway's insights are all that profound, but I also think people are reading way too much into what he says.
Yes, please tell me what I really meant. I understand 230 doesn't protect an individual from being sued over their posts. So if that doesn't change whether 230 is in place or not, what is the relevance?
December 13, 2025 at 7:53 PM
Yes, please tell me what I really meant. I understand 230 doesn't protect an individual from being sued over their posts. So if that doesn't change whether 230 is in place or not, what is the relevance?
You must be real fun at parties
December 13, 2025 at 7:44 PM
You must be real fun at parties
No, but it sure is satisfying to see the right's hypocrisy shoved down their throat in real time.
December 13, 2025 at 6:11 AM
No, but it sure is satisfying to see the right's hypocrisy shoved down their throat in real time.
The all caps should have alerted you that i was using sarcasm to make a point.
December 13, 2025 at 6:06 AM
The all caps should have alerted you that i was using sarcasm to make a point.
No, United93 is right on this one.
December 13, 2025 at 6:04 AM
No, United93 is right on this one.
So what you're looking for is a federal anti-Slapp law. That I would support
December 13, 2025 at 6:02 AM
So what you're looking for is a federal anti-Slapp law. That I would support
Section 230 isn't what prevents the government from censoring things. That would be the 1st Amendment.
December 13, 2025 at 5:58 AM
Section 230 isn't what prevents the government from censoring things. That would be the 1st Amendment.
So replace 230 with a federal anti-SLAPP law.
December 13, 2025 at 5:55 AM
So replace 230 with a federal anti-SLAPP law.
That's neutral. Where you post falls in a thread in a thread is based solely on when you post compared to other posters. It in no way promotes or suppresses a type of post or point of view.
December 13, 2025 at 5:52 AM
That's neutral. Where you post falls in a thread in a thread is based solely on when you post compared to other posters. It in no way promotes or suppresses a type of post or point of view.
Which corporations are supporting 230's repeal? To the extent that corporations have an online presence dependent on posters/commenters, those corporations have greatly benefited from 230.
December 13, 2025 at 5:48 AM
Which corporations are supporting 230's repeal? To the extent that corporations have an online presence dependent on posters/commenters, those corporations have greatly benefited from 230.
"But oh my God the Internet will be a hellscape..."
It already kind of is.
It already kind of is.
December 13, 2025 at 5:44 AM
"But oh my God the Internet will be a hellscape..."
It already kind of is.
It already kind of is.
Last I checked, the right wing is already dominating the online juggernaughts
December 13, 2025 at 5:41 AM
Last I checked, the right wing is already dominating the online juggernaughts
Counterpoint: He won't. At least not because of a lack of 230 protections.
December 13, 2025 at 5:38 AM
Counterpoint: He won't. At least not because of a lack of 230 protections.
You're right. If Section 230 is revoked, Trump will suddenly be able to the NYTimes and Jimmy Kimmel.
December 13, 2025 at 5:29 AM
You're right. If Section 230 is revoked, Trump will suddenly be able to the NYTimes and Jimmy Kimmel.
Trump had greatly benefited from Section 230. Just look at X and Facebook.
December 13, 2025 at 5:27 AM
Trump had greatly benefited from Section 230. Just look at X and Facebook.
Wow, what an intelligent take. Imagine calling someone stupid by posting the most sub-literate post possible
December 13, 2025 at 5:25 AM
Wow, what an intelligent take. Imagine calling someone stupid by posting the most sub-literate post possible
Isn't he kind of doing that now with legacy media? Hasn't he cowed Facebook and other social media platforms to stop their own monitoring of inappropriate posts?
December 13, 2025 at 5:23 AM
Isn't he kind of doing that now with legacy media? Hasn't he cowed Facebook and other social media platforms to stop their own monitoring of inappropriate posts?
So tweak/replace 230. Include language that platforms can't be sued to the extent that posts/comments are presented without any kind of algorithmic boosting/suppression . Propose a federal anti-SLAPP. Does no one have any fucking imagination ? Can't anyone think past a binary choice?
December 13, 2025 at 5:19 AM
So tweak/replace 230. Include language that platforms can't be sued to the extent that posts/comments are presented without any kind of algorithmic boosting/suppression . Propose a federal anti-SLAPP. Does no one have any fucking imagination ? Can't anyone think past a binary choice?
"Companies" is s bit broad. "social media platforms" is a bit more precise. And frankly, looking at the shit show that social media has wrought, i don't think a little bit more censorship is sick as bad thing.
December 13, 2025 at 4:38 AM
"Companies" is s bit broad. "social media platforms" is a bit more precise. And frankly, looking at the shit show that social media has wrought, i don't think a little bit more censorship is sick as bad thing.
MY GOD! HOW WERE THEY ABLE TO BRING A SUIT AGAINST HIM WHILE 230 WAS THE LAW OF THE LAND? I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT 230 WAS FOR?!?!?!
December 13, 2025 at 4:33 AM
MY GOD! HOW WERE THEY ABLE TO BRING A SUIT AGAINST HIM WHILE 230 WAS THE LAW OF THE LAND? I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT 230 WAS FOR?!?!?!
Once again: to the extent that we are talking about constitutionally protected speech, 230 is unnecessary. Repealing 230 does not repeal the 1st amendment.
December 13, 2025 at 4:28 AM
Once again: to the extent that we are talking about constitutionally protected speech, 230 is unnecessary. Repealing 230 does not repeal the 1st amendment.