We can fight each other or we can align against those who think people shouldn't be allowed to make their own choices. Do we want to repeat the mistake that got us into the mess Trump's getting us out of?

@amat3urhuman @reddit_lies Having a viewpoint is not even evidence of bad faith much less bad faith. Calls to violence are generally legal. Guidelines are just that and courts have no business trying to decide if editorial decisions are "fair" because unfair speech is just as protected as fair speech.

I should just ignore this, but I think it's worth pointing out that this is complete nonsense for three completely different reasons: 1) The argument you were trying to defend was that websites have a privilege no other media has. Baking a cake has nothing to do with media. 2) You responded with an example that neither supports your claim nor weakens or refutes mine. If you claim something does not exist, showing one example where the thing is not present does not support your claim at all. 3) The baker won the case. So you did the equivalent of the following: You: No crows are over ten pounds. Me: Here's a twelve pound crow. You: Well here's a crow that's nine pounds. Except the thing you showed wasn't even a crow and wasn't under ten pounds.

@Maddy4Truth @KashPatelX So censorship is bad when you disagree with it but good when you agree with it. That's what everybody thinks. That's NOT a defense of free speech at all. That's a defense of editorial judgment.

@KhaledElawadi @bottles38 @RipBullWinkle Every transaction from an account that applies in a ledger claims a fee.

@Tater958639721 @NoCapMediaa It was unavoidable. The car making the illegal turn across the double yellow line was heading towards him. Stopping faster would not have avoided a collision.

@barryeisler We can choose appeasement or non-proliferation but not both. If we choose appeasement, we get a world where every non-nuclear power's top priority becomes getting nuclear weapons because it could be next on the chopping block.

@blake658117 @topazzcrapazz @AutismCapital Yes. Weight is not just mass times gravity. You have to subtract buoyancy.

@CodeMageMerlin @SergioVengeance @Rememdiums @Grummz So if a bookstore refuses to carry porn, removes books they find objectionable from their shelves, and prominently features some books over others, they're liable if a book they sell contains something defamatory? Oh wait, they're not.

@xxxpunk13 @DuchessOfDeFi Maybe, but I assure you that the troubles in his life are very real. Largely of his own making, but still real.

@topazzcrapazz @AutismCapital So a helium balloon in air has negative mass? It will reduce the measured weight of something you attach it to and weigh it with.

@AleksandrSolzh4 @AutismCapital Wrong. Suppose you have a pound of bricks on a scale and then you add a full helium balloon to it. The mass goes up but the weight read by the scale goes down.

@iMaXiMiiZe @AutismCapital Equal weight but not equal mass.

@bottles38 @RipBullWinkle (To be precise, they can do other incidental "housekeeping" functions beyond just claiming a fee. For example, if they encounter an expired offer, that offer will be removed. But they didn't accomplish what you would expect their primary purpose to be.)

Definitively failing a transaction that can't succeed so the issuer is not in limbo is just as important as definitively confirming a transaction that fully succeeds. People are free to submit transactions that produce all kinds of results as they please and XRPL doesn't discriminate against any transaction that it can understand and that can pay a fee.

@marcorandazza You jumped from "they assert are false" to "a false post". You definitely shouldn't make bogus legal threats to chill truthful, critical speech to make people afraid to speak against you.

@smithkl42 @TPCarney You get similar results in cases involving public libraries. You can't carry every book, so government gets leeway in deciding not to offer books whose content it does not think valuable, but much less leeway if it decides to remove a book based on its content.

@anOrdoLiberal @JBSDC The problem is, the SEC's argument applies precisely equally well to things that definitely aren't securities, like the first few paintings made by a new artist.