All other debates are just special cases of it.

The 1A debates are hyper-legalized proxies for it, either arguing (correctly) that 1A means the rules can't be enforced by the government, or railing against that (usually, but not always based on the expectation the govt would side with your view)

The 230 debates are a (usually poorly informed) hyper-legalized instrumentation to that.

The shadowban/algorithm debates is -- "who sets the algorithm?" as a proxy for "who sets the rules / decides"

@Pwnallthethings

A handy link for the 230 impaired...

https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act/

@karstenbondy @Pwnallthethings @mmasnick

I'm just 1 "human" sociopath, my job was posting the DuckSauce video every time the Streisand Effect was mentioned because I feel it needs a theme song for greater penetration into the public consciousness.

That and sometimes I enjoy the fractal wrongness some people employ to make themselves looks even dumber than I thought they were to begin with.

<-- not a well person

@karstenbondy @mmasnick @Pwnallthethings

He even tweeted with Mike Godwin discussing the pitfalls of trying to get paid for making a thing...

(I had a screenshot somewhere)