It's too bad the alleged Antifa false-flaggers didn't bother to false flag their faces. Twitter detectives have already doxed the lot and they're getting arrested, much the way the Boogaloos who burned down Minneapolis police precincts were arrested by the FBI.
I think we'll be aware of their allegiances soon enough.
A single poorly made unworkable Molotov Cocktail and (I think) a gun replica was enough to cause vast pearl clutching and mass condemnation of the 2014 protests of the shooting of Michael Brown
But pipe bombs in the US Capitol left by violent white insurgents are somehow no big thing.
Go onto 4Chan/b and take a look at some of the freest speech around. If you like you can participate.
They moderate for very few things. Commercial spam mostly. Also child porn. I think some categories (Furry porn, MLP -- porn or otherwise) are restricted to hours and zones.
And yet, they too have to moderate.
There are some places that exist that are very near free-speech zones, and they illustrate why more popular platforms moderate.
But people like you still have a platform.
Heck, 4Chan/b was a rallying center for Trump's base in 2016. Some still like him. More are critical than before.
Indulge my lack of imagination, then, what specific speech are you angry at social media for censoring?
I'm not as well versed at LGBT in Iran as I am dissidents behind the Great Firewall of China, whose blogs I encounter, as well as news of their arrest.
Curiously they're telling a truth suppressed by the government.
Twitter is censoring Trump based on lies confirmed by facts to the contrary from multiple sources (having been thoroughly examined by dozens of judges in dozens of courts).
I'm quite aware of what censorship looks like. When books in public libraries and school curricula are challenged, when people are imprisoned for releasing information embarrassing to the administration, when media is rated outside what will be offered by resellers. Heck, when Apple decides that a book or game is outside its acceptable parameters (the iOS environment being an actual walled garden)
Go on. Present your case. I am so far unimpressed.
Something tells me this Iranian political dissident is banned from communicating on all platforms not because there's some massive deep-state conspiracy to silence him but because all he says is bigoted vitriol and no one can stand to be with him for five minutes.
You haven't demonstrated either a) that you or Trump or whoever is banned from all platforms except obscure ones, just your favorite three which are far, far removed from monopolies (there are plenty of others, and you embarrass yourself not knowing how to find them) or that b) you or Trump have anything worthwhile to say and can do so without being an antisocial git.
Something tells me those boys who are a wee bit brighter come quickly to realize the Proud Boys don't have many qualities actually worthy of pride.
At the same time, there are some traditional warrior codes of honor that require every footman to ignore the battle plan and simply charge the biggest, baddest enemy they can find. (Which might explain why Rome effectively rampaged through Europe) and the Proud Boys may just be very traditional.
Wow, I'd like to assume that Trump supporters aren't all so eager to wish ill will on others when they dare challenge the dogma of Trump, but so far, all the examples I've encountered don't bear that out.
Your facts aren't obvious to us. Feel free to cite sources, though.
It sounds to me you are very much determined to believe a very narrow, specific (and from here, absurd) narrative.
There are many conclusions here and I really cannot imagine how you came to them, like you live in a box and only get news as interpreted by your five-year-old as he watches UAN.
Feel free to explain yourself, but I doubt you are capable of doing so.
PS: In 2000 the Democratic candidate (and his voters) totally got cheated out of the presidency, which is now history laid plain. And we just sucked it up.
At this point, considering what happened the last two times, a GOP candidate is voted in by Electoral College (and not by popular vote) I hope Americans take to the next one the way they respond to post-9/11 would-be airplane hijackers.
Because for two out of two (in a row!) they have caused immeasurable and irrecoverable damage to the United States.
I doubt they're going to decide that a given ideology is bad. We already moderate for a number of very specific kinds of speech:
Obscenity and vulgarity (in family friendly forums)
Hate speech
Incitement to violence
Copyrighted material (e.g. Beatles tunes)
Dangerous recipes (e.g. bomb-making)
State secrets (actionable operational intelligence)
Conservative speech that doesn't fit into these categories (e.g. military adventurism, arguments for small government) generally doesn't get moderated out.
Conservative speech that does (e.g. religious homophobia, white man's burden) will be more susceptible to moderation.
However large speech platforms like Facebook and Twitter rely on a large amount of automation and triage, which doesn't treat all cases equally (and often not very well.) But this effect doesn't have a conservative bias, and screws everyone with the same level of consistency.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Analogies
A better analogy would be to think of Twitter as a highway-side billboard company.
And Trump as a pharmaceutical company selling bleach injections to cure COVID-19.
One injection and never worry about 'Rona again!
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
"Not narrow at all"
That's not explaining yourself.
But your willingness to dismiss the US as even trying to be a democracy does inform me of your position.
Perhaps you think might should be the deciding factor that determines who rules. It's preferred by big guys and guys who can afford to hire armies.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Hypocrisy
I switched to double standard only to find they just don't care for rule of law.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
BLM/Antifa/Biden -- CNN, CNBC, NBC, MSNBC
Wow! You know all the words to the song!
🎺🎵Build the wall!🎶🎵
🎶Lock her up!🎵
🎵🎶No Collusion!🎵
All the hits. Want to call us snowflakes?🎶
📯
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
"1000 percent censorship"
Another shining example of the kind of insightful argument we can expect from Trump-supporters.
Perhaps you should stay off the internet until you come to your senses.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Not man enough to own up...
I don't think it's a masculinity thing, but processing that
So often I've heard:
Real Christians wouldn't...
Real Americans wouldn't...
Real Republicans wouldn't...
In fact, oh yes, they totally would.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Antifa false flaggers
Is this about the Corvo / Soviet tattoo?
It's too bad the alleged Antifa false-flaggers didn't bother to false flag their faces. Twitter detectives have already doxed the lot and they're getting arrested, much the way the Boogaloos who burned down Minneapolis police precincts were arrested by the FBI.
I think we'll be aware of their allegiances soon enough.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
"delusional"
You mean cats and porn are no longer the (vast) majority of the web?
Do you have a source for this assessment? Or is this #NotIntendedToBeAFactualStatement?
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Pipe bombs
A single poorly made unworkable Molotov Cocktail and (I think) a gun replica was enough to cause vast pearl clutching and mass condemnation of the 2014 protests of the shooting of Michael Brown
But pipe bombs in the US Capitol left by violent white insurgents are somehow no big thing.
Double standards.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Libertarian
Go onto 4Chan/b and take a look at some of the freest speech around. If you like you can participate.
They moderate for very few things. Commercial spam mostly. Also child porn. I think some categories (Furry porn, MLP -- porn or otherwise) are restricted to hours and zones.
And yet, they too have to moderate.
There are some places that exist that are very near free-speech zones, and they illustrate why more popular platforms moderate.
But people like you still have a platform.
Heck, 4Chan/b was a rallying center for Trump's base in 2016. Some still like him. More are critical than before.
Enjoy!
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
"a lack of imagination"
Indulge my lack of imagination, then, what specific speech are you angry at social media for censoring?
I'm not as well versed at LGBT in Iran as I am dissidents behind the Great Firewall of China, whose blogs I encounter, as well as news of their arrest.
Curiously they're telling a truth suppressed by the government.
Twitter is censoring Trump based on lies confirmed by facts to the contrary from multiple sources (having been thoroughly examined by dozens of judges in dozens of courts).
I'm quite aware of what censorship looks like. When books in public libraries and school curricula are challenged, when people are imprisoned for releasing information embarrassing to the administration, when media is rated outside what will be offered by resellers. Heck, when Apple decides that a book or game is outside its acceptable parameters (the iOS environment being an actual walled garden)
Go on. Present your case. I am so far unimpressed.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
"Only hate filled monsters."
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
How many racists do you think are out there....?
By last count, at least 73 million in the US.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Re: Re: Facebook; Twitter; YouTube
Something tells me this Iranian political dissident is banned from communicating on all platforms not because there's some massive deep-state conspiracy to silence him but because all he says is bigoted vitriol and no one can stand to be with him for five minutes.
You haven't demonstrated either a) that you or Trump or whoever is banned from all platforms except obscure ones, just your favorite three which are far, far removed from monopolies (there are plenty of others, and you embarrass yourself not knowing how to find them) or that b) you or Trump have anything worthwhile to say and can do so without being an antisocial git.
On the post: Identifying Insurrectionists Is Going To Be Easy -- Thanks To Social Media And All The Other Online Trails People Leave
Acts of terrorism don't make it true.
If your zombie army is big enough (think millions) then yeah, you can write the history books to say whatever you want.
Sadly, Trump is not that good a necromancer.
On the post: Identifying Insurrectionists Is Going To Be Easy -- Thanks To Social Media And All The Other Online Trails People Leave
They are Proud Boys, not Smart Boys
Something tells me those boys who are a wee bit brighter come quickly to realize the Proud Boys don't have many qualities actually worthy of pride.
At the same time, there are some traditional warrior codes of honor that require every footman to ignore the battle plan and simply charge the biggest, baddest enemy they can find. (Which might explain why Rome effectively rampaged through Europe) and the Proud Boys may just be very traditional.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Facebook; Twitter; YouTube
And yet you are here using none of those, and still being heard.
And I am here and I don't use any of them, and you and I are having a conversation.
No, I don't think your assertion is adequately demonstrated.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Cursing mothers
Wow, I'd like to assume that Trump supporters aren't all so eager to wish ill will on others when they dare challenge the dogma of Trump, but so far, all the examples I've encountered don't bear that out.
Your facts aren't obvious to us. Feel free to cite sources, though.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Re: Tech circle
It sounds to me you are very much determined to believe a very narrow, specific (and from here, absurd) narrative.
There are many conclusions here and I really cannot imagine how you came to them, like you live in a box and only get news as interpreted by your five-year-old as he watches UAN.
Feel free to explain yourself, but I doubt you are capable of doing so.
PS: In 2000 the Democratic candidate (and his voters) totally got cheated out of the presidency, which is now history laid plain. And we just sucked it up.
At this point, considering what happened the last two times, a GOP candidate is voted in by Electoral College (and not by popular vote) I hope Americans take to the next one the way they respond to post-9/11 would-be airplane hijackers.
Because for two out of two (in a row!) they have caused immeasurable and irrecoverable damage to the United States.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Conservative Views
I doubt they're going to decide that a given ideology is bad. We already moderate for a number of very specific kinds of speech:
Obscenity and vulgarity (in family friendly forums)
Hate speech
Incitement to violence
Copyrighted material (e.g. Beatles tunes)
Dangerous recipes (e.g. bomb-making)
State secrets (actionable operational intelligence)
Conservative speech that doesn't fit into these categories (e.g. military adventurism, arguments for small government) generally doesn't get moderated out.
Conservative speech that does (e.g. religious homophobia, white man's burden) will be more susceptible to moderation.
However large speech platforms like Facebook and Twitter rely on a large amount of automation and triage, which doesn't treat all cases equally (and often not very well.) But this effect doesn't have a conservative bias, and screws everyone with the same level of consistency.
Next >>