use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~1 user here now
It's All Politics
T-Mobile actively blocks incoming "thedonald.win" texts from Verizon.
submitted 3 years ago by Orangutan from streamable.com
view the rest of the comments →
[–]Tarrock 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago (8 children)
Contact their corporate office. I can guarantee you someone lower leveled did this and once corporate hears about it, they'll do something since it puts them at risk.
[–]xv_xx 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago (7 children)
It doesn't. They're a private company. Free speech is protected from the government, not from private companies.
[–]Tarrock 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago (5 children)
This isn't a fucking free speech issue. TMobile doesn't have section 230 protection either. It is literally illegal for telecomms to be blocking sites. There was a huge shitstorm when AT&T blocked 4chan a decade ago, even though they did it temporarily due to a DDOS attack.
[–]xv_xx 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago (4 children)
It isn't illegal for them to block sites.
[–]Tarrock 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago (3 children)
It is :)
Source: I work in the industry.
[–]xv_xx 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago (2 children)
Well, I did look up whether it was illegal and I couldn't find anything. Can you point me to the right laws?
[–]Tarrock 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago (1 child)
I don't know the exact law, but it's related to older laws preventing Telecomm companies from blocking phone numbers without your consent, since it would start restricting information. There's a reason why the whole robocall thing took so long to even start being addressing that issue since laws had to be amended to even do something about it.
Btw, do you want your phone company to have the power to restrict your communication? Someone like me could decide you're an undesireable and restrict anyone from calling you. Good luck getting a job when no one can call you.
[–]xv_xx 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago (0 children)
It's a bit of a leap a telecomm blocking me specifically as opposed to preventing the dissemination of material that is controversial at best and seditious at worst. And there are a number of federal laws that do apply to blocking websites, so it is not impossible. But I would like to read the law you mention myself.
[–]insta 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago (0 children)
Libertarianism is useless.
view the rest of the comments →
[–]Tarrock 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (8 children)
[–]xv_xx 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (7 children)
[–]Tarrock 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - (5 children)
[–]xv_xx 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (4 children)
[–]Tarrock 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (3 children)
[–]xv_xx 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–]Tarrock 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)
[–]xv_xx 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)
[–]insta 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)