Switch Theme:

US & NA Politics Thread  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Battlewagon Driver with Charged Engine




Between Alpha and Omega, and a little to the left

Whaaaaaat? Are you saying right wing pundits lie, shove words into other peoples mouths, and claim conspiracy at literally everything, including and especially when they finally suffer consequences for breaking the rules? impossible.

Want to help support my plastic addiction? I sell stories about humans fighting to survive in a space age frontier.
Lord Harrab wrote:"Gimme back my leg-bone! *wack* Ow, don't hit me with it!" commonly uttered by Guardsman when in close combat with Orks.

Bonespitta's Badmoons 1441 pts.  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




North Carolina

 whembly wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Wait so advocating for violence is enough to get you thrown off these platforms, and rightly so, I assume this will be applied across the board then?

Otherwise they run the very real risk of appearing biased in favour of one side over another.


I don't think they care too much about that. Nor do I think anyone cares about Alex Jones, that has an IQ over 85.

Meh... he has his own websites.

Until Alphabet, Twittah, Facebook, et. el. becomes the gatekeepers to public speech, government shouldn't do anything to restrict how these companies want to operate.

I get that there’s a line and a slippery slope... but, I can’t gin up a lot of outrage over infowars. But, then again, it's never the rights of nice people we should be concerned about... I dunno... would Voltaire disapprove?


For the longest time, they didn't really cinch down on anything, nor did they really have an incentive to, as they had/have no business model beyond dealing in user data.

I don't think this stuff with Twitter specifically is really part of The Great Right Purge. I believe it's really part of a bigger thing, where they were unmoderated for so long while their platform gained a position of prominence in our cultural zeitgeist, and 2016 was more or less the same bursting in that Twitter was really spotlighted by their specific susceptibility to exploitation given enough resources and while that was going on people were also like "Oh, and there's also a LOT of pieces of gak here that you've done nothing about."

So, now they're playing catch up. Not only are they having to learn how to moderate, which is something they've avoided having to do since their inception but they're having to catch up to platforms with much mature moderation practices and established norms, as well as wade through billions of accounts and root out non-human (bots.) AND human (Trolls and hate speech.) related content for culling.

What I'm getting at is that there's going to be a lot of collateral involved no matter how they handle the situation. YouTube is going through something similar, as they're attempting to moderate content that is physically impossible for humans to inspect, which leads to historic education videos being demonitized because they discuss swords or whatever YouTube drama is happening this week.

And the collateral is going to largely be sustained by the right because that happens to be the end of the spectrum they're having to most heavily moderate due to societal pressure. (And we're seeing non-hate related accounts get zapped because at some point either a minimum wage temp employee, Amazon automated Turk, or emotionless algorithm has to deal with that account being reported and where they fall on the political spectrum.)

The big thing is no social media platform is being transparent with what's going on regarding their moderation processes. I think it's probably because what they're trying to do is impossible and they don't want to admit that, and that they don't want any policy written in stone because they make it up as scandals keep popping up. Think, Jake Paul videoing himself with the body of someone who just committed suicide or Alex Jones who continuously incites his viewers to harass the families of shooting victims. Honestly, I wouldn't want to be in the position of anyone who had to deal with this because I have no clue what the answer should be other than "Feth it, let's not do any of it." (Cue dystopian social media wasteland wandered by nothing but Russian bots and AnCaps.)

Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
 
   
Made in gb
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle





 Formosa wrote:
Wait so advocating for violence is enough to get you thrown off these platforms, and rightly so, I assume this will be applied across the board then?

Otherwise they run the very real risk of appearing biased in favour of one side over another.



Do you have any evidence that rules are not being applied equally, or is this just a loaded question because you want to push an adjenda whilst hoping no one will call you out and trying to insist it is a “genuine question” when someone does?

 insaniak wrote:
Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons...
 
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Earth

 Steve steveson wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Wait so advocating for violence is enough to get you thrown off these platforms, and rightly so, I assume this will be applied across the board then?

Otherwise they run the very real risk of appearing biased in favour of one side over another.



Do you have any evidence that rules are not being applied equally, or is this just a loaded question because you want to push an adjenda whilst hoping no one will call you out and trying to insist it is a “genuine question” when someone does?



I don’t need to provide evidence for an asssersion I have not made, based on the rest of your statement I can clearly see what camp you fall into though.

Here’s an important life tip, not everything has a double meaning or hidden meaning, and don’t assume you know someone’s mind before making an attack to try and reinforce your own position based upon a misconception.

You should apologise for such a cynical comment, I know you won’t though...
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut




Building a blood in water scent

 Steve steveson wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Wait so advocating for violence is enough to get you thrown off these platforms, and rightly so, I assume this will be applied across the board then?

Otherwise they run the very real risk of appearing biased in favour of one side over another.



Do you have any evidence that rules are not being applied equally, or is this just a loaded question because you want to push an adjenda whilst hoping no one will call you out and trying to insist it is a “genuine question” when someone does?


Randoms with triple digit twitter follows saying nonsense like 'white people are trash' is exactly the same as a celebrity with millions of followers doxxing and calling for the harassment of grieving parents of murdered children, didn't you know?

We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” 
   
Made in se
Longtime Dakkanaut




 warhead01 wrote:

Have you heard the wonderful things Sarah Leong has to say about white men?


You mean Sarah Jeong, who wrote that white men should live underground like goblins because she kept getting far worse racist rape and death threats from white men.



 Formosa wrote:
 Steve steveson wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Wait so advocating for violence is enough to get you thrown off these platforms, and rightly so, I assume this will be applied across the board then?

Otherwise they run the very real risk of appearing biased in favour of one side over another.



Do you have any evidence that rules are not being applied equally, or is this just a loaded question because you want to push an adjenda whilst hoping no one will call you out and trying to insist it is a “genuine question” when someone does?



I don’t need to provide evidence for an asssersion I have not made, based on the rest of your statement I can clearly see what camp you fall into though.

Here’s an important life tip, not everything has a double meaning or hidden meaning, and don’t assume you know someone’s mind before making an attack to try and reinforce your own position based upon a misconception.

You should apologise for such a cynical comment, I know you won’t though...



We remember when you claimed to be a leftist while propagating the far right conspiracy theory of Cultural Marxism infecting universities in an attempt to gain power and wealth. So when you act very concerned about Alex Jones, an infamous far right conspiracy monger and fraud, being finally booted off social media due to his harassment campaign against people who had their children murdered and hoping that this standard should apply to "the other side", well, it has got a context to it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/07 20:50:31


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




North Carolina

 Asherian Command wrote:
 AduroT wrote:
Asbestos is perfectly safe and any concerns that it’s dangerous are just a conspiracy by the mob.

*puts on a monocle*
Indoubtedly. I cannot believe the masses would believe Abestos to be frankly deadly, there is no proof that Abestos causes respiratory diseases, impossible.

Yes, Indeed let those peasents learn!


Even the article you just posted points out that there is a big difference between the dangers of spray on asbestos fiber insulation and non friable asbestos products. Dangerous asbestos insulation has been banned for decades, nonfriable asbestos products are still legally produced today. We've been importing tons of asbestos for years and it's been used for safe and legal purposes. Hyperbolic fear mongering doesn't change the relevant facts of an issue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 feeder wrote:
 Steve steveson wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Wait so advocating for violence is enough to get you thrown off these platforms, and rightly so, I assume this will be applied across the board then?

Otherwise they run the very real risk of appearing biased in favour of one side over another.



Do you have any evidence that rules are not being applied equally, or is this just a loaded question because you want to push an adjenda whilst hoping no one will call you out and trying to insist it is a “genuine question” when someone does?


Randoms with triple digit twitter follows saying nonsense like 'white people are trash' is exactly the same as a celebrity with millions of followers doxxing and calling for the harassment of grieving parents of murdered children, didn't you know?


Literally nobody in this thread made that argument. If social media platforms like Twitter actually publicized the criteria they were using to ban accounts it would help clarify the issue. Right now Twitter just cleans house based on whatever internal criteria they want to use (which is there right and I don't object to it but it's a very opaque process) and people only hear about it when famous or infamous people get banned which gets publicity but doesn't make the process any more transparent leaving it ripe for partisan complaints.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/07 20:53:32


Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
 
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Earth

Rosebuddy wrote:
 warhead01 wrote:

Have you heard the wonderful things Sarah Leong has to say about white men?


You mean Sarah Jeong, who wrote that white men should live underground like goblins because she kept getting far worse racist rape and death threats from white men.



 Formosa wrote:
 Steve steveson wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Wait so advocating for violence is enough to get you thrown off these platforms, and rightly so, I assume this will be applied across the board then?

Otherwise they run the very real risk of appearing biased in favour of one side over another.



Do you have any evidence that rules are not being applied equally, or is this just a loaded question because you want to push an adjenda whilst hoping no one will call you out and trying to insist it is a “genuine question” when someone does?



I don’t need to provide evidence for an asssersion I have not made, based on the rest of your statement I can clearly see what camp you fall into though.

Here’s an important life tip, not everything has a double meaning or hidden meaning, and don’t assume you know someone’s mind before making an attack to try and reinforce your own position based upon a misconception.

You should apologise for such a cynical comment, I know you won’t though...



We remember when you claimed to be a leftist while propagating the far right conspiracy theory of Cultural Marxism infecting universities in an attempt to gain power and wealth. So when you act very concerned about Alex Jones, an infamous far right conspiracy monger and fraud, being finally booted off social media due to his harassment campaign against people who had their children murdered and hoping that this standard should apply to "the other side", well, it has got a context to it.



That’s funny as I remember you purity testing and pulling an aunt Sally.

It truelly amuses me that you all look for hidden subtext when there is none so you can then virtue signal to each other, the funniest thing of all is that I was wondering if they would end up removing other extremists and blatantly false news outlets, but hey, keep pretending everything is about identity politics and all that malarkey, don’t want to get in the way of your narrative eh


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Prestor Jon hit the nail on the head.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/07 20:57:21


 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar





Rosebuddy wrote:
 warhead01 wrote:

Have you heard the wonderful things Sarah Leong has to say about white men?
You mean Sarah Jeong, who wrote that white men should live underground like goblins because she kept getting far worse racist rape and death threats from white men.


Racist abuse justifies a racist response?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/07 20:57:47


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




North Carolina

Rosebuddy wrote:


 Formosa wrote:
 Steve steveson wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Wait so advocating for violence is enough to get you thrown off these platforms, and rightly so, I assume this will be applied across the board then?

Otherwise they run the very real risk of appearing biased in favour of one side over another.



Do you have any evidence that rules are not being applied equally, or is this just a loaded question because you want to push an adjenda whilst hoping no one will call you out and trying to insist it is a “genuine question” when someone does?



I don’t need to provide evidence for an asssersion I have not made, based on the rest of your statement I can clearly see what camp you fall into though.

Here’s an important life tip, not everything has a double meaning or hidden meaning, and don’t assume you know someone’s mind before making an attack to try and reinforce your own position based upon a misconception.

You should apologise for such a cynical comment, I know you won’t though...



We remember when you claimed to be a leftist while propagating the far right conspiracy theory of Cultural Marxism infecting universities in an attempt to gain power and wealth. So when you act very concerned about Alex Jones, an infamous far right conspiracy monger and fraud, being finally booted off social media due to his harassment campaign against people who had their children murdered and hoping that this standard should apply to "the other side", well, it has got a context to it.


You're reading a lot into that post. When Twitter bans somebody like Alex Jones but doesn't offer much if any explanation it leaves the questions of did Twitter ban Jones because they think he's a horrible person (a common and easily supported view) or because he did X and violated a term of the service agreement? If Jones is banned for being wretched then what is Twitter's wretchedness standard and will anyone else who meets it be banned? If Jones is banned for committing X violation then will anyone else who does X also be banned? It's Twitter's sandbox the rest of us just get to play in so they get to make the rules but without clarity and consistent enforcement Twitter can easily create a confusing mess that can open opportunities for competing services and damage their market share.

Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
 
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut




Building a blood in water scent

Prestor Jon wrote:Literally nobody in this thread made that argument.


From last page. It's ok, this clusterfeth of a thread moves quickly so I don't blame you for missing it

warhead01 wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Wait so advocating for violence is enough to get you thrown off these platforms, and rightly so, I assume this will be applied across the board then?

Otherwise they run the very real risk of appearing biased in favour of one side over another.



I doubt it will. It's not now and I don't see that changing.
Have you heard the wonderful things Sarah Leong has to say about white men?
I'm guessing all of these ban only apply to some people and not others for "reasons".
But I couldn't guess what those reasons might be.



We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” 
   
Made in us
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

I can't feel bad for Jones. He still has his own site, still can reach his audience, his content is still available on multiple platforms, and Jones/InfoWars had been warned multiple times over their shennanigans on multiple platforms and really had to go out of their way to earn such bans, and I just cant feel bad for them. Perhaps we'll see a shift in tone, but I doubt it. Nothing of value will be lost with Jones' bannings, but nobody has infringed his rights either.

At the same time, there's a valid point about Jeong, Twitter is a voluntary platform and has blocking and reporting features, nobody forced her to read or respond to online filth, nobody forced her to make those statements, and the NYT attempting to handwave it as "imitation" or other outlets like Verge and Splinter attempting to say "its not racist when she does it" or that it was all responses to harrassment, especially when many of her tweets were unprompted statements that were not responses to other posts, that just doesnt fly and she should face the consequences others have for such statements.

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in se
Ferocious Black Templar Castellan






Sweden

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 warhead01 wrote:

Have you heard the wonderful things Sarah Leong has to say about white men?
You mean Sarah Jeong, who wrote that white men should live underground like goblins because she kept getting far worse racist rape and death threats from white men.


Racist abuse justifies a racist response?


You have to understand that she's frustrated though. Sure, it's a gakky reply, but I have it from a very good source that people who are frustrated, afraid or otherwise under pressure make dumb decisions, and that we should show understanding towards such people.

For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back. 
   
Made in us
Water-Caste Negotiator




orem, Utah

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 warhead01 wrote:

Have you heard the wonderful things Sarah Leong has to say about white men?
You mean Sarah Jeong, who wrote that white men should live underground like goblins because she kept getting far worse racist rape and death threats from white men.


Racist abuse justifies a racist response?


You have to understand that she's frustrated though. Sure, it's a gakky reply, but I have it from a very good source that people who are frustrated, afraid or otherwise under pressure make dumb decisions, and that we should show understanding towards such people.


she just ate too much junk food the night before

are you going to keep talking about it, or do something already? 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 warhead01 wrote:

Have you heard the wonderful things Sarah Leong has to say about white men?
You mean Sarah Jeong, who wrote that white men should live underground like goblins because she kept getting far worse racist rape and death threats from white men.


Racist abuse justifies a racist response?
Can't take a joke? People are really getting PC about humour these days. I hear growing a thicker skins helps?
   
Made in se
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Formosa wrote:

That’s funny as I remember you purity testing and pulling an aunt Sally.

It truelly amuses me that you all look for hidden subtext when there is none so you can then virtue signal to each other, the funniest thing of all is that I was wondering if they would end up removing other extremists and blatantly false news outlets, but hey, keep pretending everything is about identity politics and all that malarkey, don’t want to get in the way of your narrative eh .


You have plainly never been a leftist and hold no leftist sympathies now either. You keep using right-wing terms like "virtue signaling", too, which just further betrays your lack of understanding of what leftists believe and why they do so. You lie about who you are. This is apparent to anyone who understands leftism. My secret knowledge gives me the power to see through you, haha.

Prestor Jon wrote:

You're reading a lot into that post. When Twitter bans somebody like Alex Jones but doesn't offer much if any explanation it leaves the questions of did Twitter ban Jones because they think he's a horrible person (a common and easily supported view) or because he did X and violated a term of the service agreement? If Jones is banned for being wretched then what is Twitter's wretchedness standard and will anyone else who meets it be banned? If Jones is banned for committing X violation then will anyone else who does X also be banned? It's Twitter's sandbox the rest of us just get to play in so they get to make the rules but without clarity and consistent enforcement Twitter can easily create a confusing mess that can open opportunities for competing services and damage their market share.


Alex Jones is a real late wakeup call to Twitter's opaque nonsense policies. You try getting shadow banned because you posted "thank you" or suspended because you told a nazi to feth off while they're allowed to spread propaganda.

Most likely he was thrown out due to the lawsuit tipping him over from adding profit to subtracting profit.



 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 warhead01 wrote:

Have you heard the wonderful things Sarah Leong has to say about white men?
You mean Sarah Jeong, who wrote that white men should live underground like goblins because she kept getting far worse racist rape and death threats from white men.


Racist abuse justifies a racist response?


If what she did was bad then what has been done to her and will continue to be done to her is worse and should be kept in mind when judging her actions. Forums user "warhead" did not do this, for some reason.
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Earth

 feeder wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:Literally nobody in this thread made that argument.


From last page. It's ok, this clusterfeth of a thread moves quickly so I don't blame you for missing it

warhead01 wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Wait so advocating for violence is enough to get you thrown off these platforms, and rightly so, I assume this will be applied across the board then?

Otherwise they run the very real risk of appearing biased in favour of one side over another.



I doubt it will. It's not now and I don't see that changing.
Have you heard the wonderful things Sarah Leong has to say about white men?
I'm guessing all of these ban only apply to some people and not others for "reasons".
But I couldn't guess what those reasons might be.




Just looked and was gonna say ban too... but...


Here’s the thing, both of these people are clearly terrible, both say horrible things and both sides will defend their respective person, whatever, doesn’t matter.

What matters to me is this, who is deciding who gets banned, on what grounds are people banned, all these sites need to make it very clear.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




North Carolina

 feeder wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:Literally nobody in this thread made that argument.


From last page. It's ok, this clusterfeth of a thread moves quickly so I don't blame you for missing it

warhead01 wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Wait so advocating for violence is enough to get you thrown off these platforms, and rightly so, I assume this will be applied across the board then?

Otherwise they run the very real risk of appearing biased in favour of one side over another.



I doubt it will. It's not now and I don't see that changing.
Have you heard the wonderful things Sarah Leong has to say about white men?
I'm guessing all of these ban only apply to some people and not others for "reasons".
But I couldn't guess what those reasons might be.




I did miss that. It would have been easier if you had quoted that post instead of the others.

Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Vaktathi wrote:
I can't feel bad for Jones. He still has his own site, still can reach his audience, his content is still available on multiple platforms, and Jones/InfoWars had been warned multiple times over their shennanigans on multiple platforms and really had to go out of their way to earn such bans, and I just cant feel bad for them. Perhaps we'll see a shift in tone, but I doubt it. Nothing of value will be lost with Jones' bannings, but nobody has infringed his rights either.

At the same time, there's a valid point about Jeong, Twitter is a voluntary platform and has blocking and reporting features, nobody forced her to read or respond to online filth, nobody forced her to make those statements, and the NYT attempting to handwave it as "imitation" or other outlets like Verge and Splinter attempting to say "its not racist when she does it" or that it was all responses to harrassment, especially when many of her tweets were unprompted statements that were not responses to other posts, that just doesnt fly and she should face the consequences others have for such statements.


There's a lot of narcissism inherent in social media. People really don't need a window into your stream of consciousness and most likely your tweets are oversharing. So many tweets that get people in trouble come across like the people who tweeted them thought that twitter was just like a group text with their friends. DM that joke to your friends or make that comment as a text to your buddy but don't just put it on Facebook or Twitter to be judged by the world.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/07 21:31:12


Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
 
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut




Building a blood in water scent

Prestor Jon wrote:
[
Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.


Feth yeah. The world needs more Ferris Bueller

We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” 
   
Made in se
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Formosa wrote:
Here’s the thing, both of these people are clearly terrible, both say horrible things and both sides will defend their respective person, whatever, doesn’t matter.

What matters to me is this, who is deciding who gets banned, on what grounds are people banned, all these sites need to make it very clear.


Alex Jones was banned from Twitter for directing harassment campaigns against people whose children were murdered. Sarah Jeong has done nothing comparable.

Again, you are real damned late to the notion that perhaps it's not great that massive, faceless, irresponsible corporations get to decide who is given a platform and who is not. But this is something that has already trouble vulnerable groups more than it has Alex Jones. You try putting up a video on youtube about how it's ok to be gay, that there are support structures and that your family members who hate gay people are wrong only to have it taken down because "gay" is a sexual term and is it's inappropriate to make gay videos for children.

It is telling that the moment you chose to come to this realisation is Alex Jones getting thrown off social media while an asian woman was allowed to keep her twitter account despite saying one whole bad thing about white men. That you paint these two as equals belonging to just "two sides" in the abstract is yet further proof that you aren't a leftist. Your analysis is critically lacking in materialism.
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Earth

Rosebuddy wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Here’s the thing, both of these people are clearly terrible, both say horrible things and both sides will defend their respective person, whatever, doesn’t matter.

What matters to me is this, who is deciding who gets banned, on what grounds are people banned, all these sites need to make it very clear.


Alex Jones was banned from Twitter for directing harassment campaigns against people whose children were murdered. Sarah Jeong has done nothing comparable.

Again, you are real damned late to the notion that perhaps it's not great that massive, faceless, irresponsible corporations get to decide who is given a platform and who is not. But this is something that has already trouble vulnerable groups more than it has Alex Jones. You try putting up a video on youtube about how it's ok to be gay, that there are support structures and that your family members who hate gay people are wrong only to have it taken down because "gay" is a sexual term and is it's inappropriate to make gay videos for children.

It is telling that the moment you chose to come to this realisation is Alex Jones getting thrown off social media while an asian woman was allowed to keep her twitter account despite saying one whole bad thing about white men. That you paint these two as equals belonging to just "two sides" in the abstract is yet further proof that you aren't a leftist. Your analysis is critically lacking in materialism.



Reads own post, reads again to make sure.


Hmm there you go again, making assumptions, did I equate the two, nope, just said they were both terrible people, I mean sure if you want to put words in my mouth to once again push your narrative crack on, your only hurting yourself, not me, I don’t mind at all

I’m not late to the notion by the way, just discussing it, like a rational person does, but I know you and yours don’t like discussion that doesn’t fit into your version of the world, you only claim I’m not a leftist because I’m not as far left as you, proving my point once again.

As for the gay story, what’s your point here? You tube has been doing things like that for a while now to both left and right, it’s not right and then they demonetised a lot of political videos and even removed notifications and followers from a lot of those blogs, you don’t need to convince me that you tube has been pretty shady as of late.

Alex jones deserved to be taken down, and as a half Asian man I resent that you bring her race into it (joking, just showing how absurd this could get), and finally, YOU have made the assertion that these two people are of equal guilt, which is pretty bad don’t you think, projection is such a nasty thing Rosebuddy also keep up the purity testing, next you will call me a Nazi again eh

Ok ok, I know i should probably take what your saying seriously, but I can’t help but mock you, your comments and so absurd and lack a lot of self awareness and if I started to debate you on your level this would get ugly pretty fast and likely end in a thread lock.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 skyth wrote:
The Alt-right is in a tizzy after Alex Jones got kicked off Youtube and Facebook. Of course they're claiming it's because of his politics. News flash...being a horrible human being is not a political position.



The delicious delicious irony of their impotent rage is that they are so often all about the "free market". . . but totally fail to realize that YT and FB are not the government, they are manifestations of the free market.
   
Made in us
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

Prestor Jon wrote:


There's a lot of narcissism inherent in social media. People really don't need a window into your stream of consciousness and most likely your tweets are oversharing. So many tweets that get people in trouble come across like the people who tweeted them thought that twitter was just like a group text with their friends. DM that joke to your friends or make that comment as a text to your buddy but don't just put it on Facebook or Twitter to be judged by the world.
Aye, a lot of people dont get that. In some ways I find these platforms to be something of a great social filter, weeding out those who lack judgement and foresight. It's one thing to make an offensive joke or statement in private company in a specific context, its another to shout it out to the world emblazoned with your name and face.

Twitter is especially bad, as that entire platform is basically set up to literally just shout into cyberspace. It's a terrible, nonfunctional platform for actual meaningful dialogue, it's really mostly a platform for ranting almost more than anything else, little of value would be lost if it disappeared entirely tomorrow

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

I think there's a lot of narcissism inherent in people. Social media just makes it obvious.

   
Made in us
Nasty Nob




Crescent City Fl..

Rosebuddy wrote:


If what she did was bad then what has been done to her and will continue to be done to her is worse and should be kept in mind when judging her actions. Forums user "warhead" did not do this, for some reason.


well I take exception to the "castrate men on their birthday".
As far as considering what's been said or done to her. No. I didn't think about that. Why would I. Just as no one but here is responsible for her own actions. Maybe she needs a therapist and not a twitter account?
Your reply also almost seems to indicate two wrongs make a right. I do not agree. But at least she's honest about how she feels. I'm sure somewhere someone is taking notes.
I'm all for character development in the sitcom, maybe she'll do something amazing one day.

Edit. Sorry for tagging the wrong person in the quote the first time.
Also added the word almost so it didn't sound as rude.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/07 22:33:13


The rewards of tolerance are treachery and betrayal.

Remember kids, Games Workshop needs you more than you need them.  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Prestor Jon wrote:

And the collateral is going to largely be sustained by the right because that happens to be the end of the spectrum they're having to most heavily moderate due to societal pressure.


Or maybe it's because the Right has shifted so far to the extreme that the gakstains are mainstream in it...
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Earth

 skyth wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:

And the collateral is going to largely be sustained by the right because that happens to be the end of the spectrum they're having to most heavily moderate due to societal pressure.


Or maybe it's because the Right has shifted so far to the extreme that the gakstains are mainstream in it...



Nah this fella was never mainstream, and if we’re gonna be honest with each other both the far left and the far right over the last 5 years has become totally bonkers and for pretty much the same reason.

Both are playing the identity politics game, both doxx, both de podium, and the insanity of it all is that they both want authoritarianism, happily people push back at the far right, unhappily people are not pushing back (this is changing) against the far left, and if we’re talking mainstream here, how many right wing tv shows are there, how many right wing totical shows etc. The left totally dominates the media, and rightly so, a lot of those people have earned those positions, lefties are generally better at such things, so if we’re honest.. the left is THE mainstream when it comes to media, now sadly the far left is encroaching upon it and has become mainstream, I don’t know about you but I don’t want ANY extreme political ideology being in charge of anything.
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

Cool, we're still doing that stupid "both sides are equally bad" nonsense. Let's never, ever stop doing that.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




North Carolina

 Ouze wrote:
Cool, we're still doing that stupid "both sides are equally bad" nonsense. Let's never, ever stop doing that.


They may not be equally bad but they’re both still bad. The lesser of two evils is still evil. They don’t have to be equally bad for neither of them to be worth voting for. Both Bush43 or Obama may be better than Trump but I didn’t vote for any of the 3 and I wouldn’t today either.

Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
 
   
Made in au
Hooded Inquisitorial Interrogator





Australia

Rosebuddy wrote:
Alex Jones was banned from Twitter . . .

Um, I do hate to come out of lurking for what is probably a minor point; but I'm seeing this repeated at lot here. And; as far as I can tell; Twitter is the one social media platform that has not (yet) banned Alex Jones & Infowars.

Am I wrong about this?


Also: see my Deviant Art for more. 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: