> . If you do zero moderation, you are not liable for user generated content period
Ok sure, whatever. But the point would be to put facebook in a position where they are only doing moderation that a user is requesting that they do. We can use common carrier laws, or we can use some different legal precedent. Thats that goal. The specific method, or process, isn't really the main point.
> you're suggesting a strict reduction in moderation tools, and claiming that this will solve everything the way everyone wants.
I am suggesting that users should be allowed to have voluntary choices about what moderation they want to have, as it relates to them, without facebook forcing those decisions on the user.
> All of the options you want are already available
No, users still are forced to accept facebooks choosen moderation preferences. That can't choose to opt out of Facebook's censorship or moderation, if they voluntarily choose to subscribe to certain content.
> solve everything the way everyone wants.
It will solve what a lot of people want. Sure, I am sure that there are people who are just explicitly pro-censorship, and want the 1st amendment to be removed, and want the government to ban all opposing political opinions.
But there are also a lot of people who don't want facebook to be forcing users to accept certain moderation, and instead want users to be in control of what they see.
> how does your approach address coordinated misinformation campaigns?
If something is so bad, that it needs to be censored, then that is what the government is for. Terrorist threats are already illegal, for example.
Backdoor censorship isn't the way to go. If you really believe that mis-information is so bad, that it needs to be stopped, by these types of methods, then the onus should be on you to gather enough support, to get around the protections of the 1st amendment.
Checks and balances are difficult to get around for a reason. And if you can't get around these checks and balances, well thats the point of those checks and balances.
> I haven't done anything illegal
Well thats life. You are trying to backdoor your way to try to get stuff censored, because you aren't able to convince the government to do it. We don't need this backdoor method of supporting censorship.
> Spam is a much larger problem on my phone than anywhere else
There is nothing illegal about phone companies offering additional, voluntary methods, of allowing users to choose more things to be moderated for themselves.
Such problems could be solved that way. By facebook, or whoever, offering voluntary programs, to block certain types or categories of things, if the user chooses to opt in to that form of moderation.
> Ben Shapiro can post whatever he wants on Facebook
You don't have to listen to Ben Sharpiro if you don't want to, in this situation. Instead, you could just voluntarily choose to subscribe to a "ban right wingers" block list, or whatever voluntary algorithm that the user opts in to.