*yawn* OK Boomer

sounds like you don't even remember what you said lmao

you defended discriminating americans of chinese origin because of the coronavirus

that's called racism

let's get back on topic...Gimmick raises an interesting point.

Is Twitter too large of a platform to have full sovereignty?

Meaning should the government intervene if the website sensors politicians like Trump & deletes his account for dubious reasons? Should the SJW Twitter mods be cancelled- no, at worst face fines & penalties?

If he's not dead by the end of January, justice doesn't exist

After he was forced to give a shit speech then immediately went back to twitter terrorism

After he used the platform to incite a riot

Twitter has a rightist agenda and always had but you have to shutdown literal nazis inciting insurrections in the capitol to save face

He does. Damn shame him having to devolve to feeble insults when it's clear he can't argue against what I say, though. I remember being for stricter quarantines and security checks early on when this thing started out and saying Trump's travel ban was half-baked, at best. I'm pretty sure he's misremembering. Or maybe my support for Taiwan is racist or something.

Also, Uncle Tom is a hero. My thanks, Gimmick - but I'm not worthy of such an esteemed title yet.

-

Twatter's moderation is excessively biased. They're okay with people on 'the right side of history' making death threats, engaging in gangstalking of individuals and they only go after people they think they can get away with harassing, but stay clear of irking truly dangerous individuals with 'fact checks' and 'suspensions' with the sort of money, power and ruthlessness to mount an actual terrorist attack against their corporate assets. I believe that failbook and twatter banning old man Trump and apple threatening to delist parler, etc etc are only taking these actions now when they know there's no risk of regulatory retaliation from the next congress and president.

Also, twitter's in hot water because of a feature they hocked to users. Long story short, they let users post gifs via an integrated system that picks out gifs by search terms, then DMCAlocks their accounts for it.

Ok, Twitter is biased- but the ultimate question is, as a massive albeit private business should they be allowed to operate in such a manner? Should the the government intervene when large platforms that serve the entire populace excessively act in bad faith?

source? I thought anything he did to incite a riot was before his 12 hour ban.

how so

Sure, leftists use the platform a lot. But try posting ANYTHING extremist with a leftist slant. You have to Trump for 4 years to catch the same deplatforming a liberap does in his first week of edge posting. Sane goes for fb and instagram.

For example; if a private business hacked into the emergency message service and falsely claimed that north Korea had launched ICBMs at the US mainland, they should be held responsible for the chaos that ensued. Them being a private company does not protect them when they do something illegal.

On a similar vein, I believe the government should reduce entry barriers to running such a business to foment healthy competition by passing clear laws instead of the purposefully vague garbage they pass today with bipartisan support, and regulate clearly bad-faith attempts to create such a monopoly, as they did with Ma Bell back in the day. And when twitter moderation ignores and even enables illegal activities such as gangstalking and mass-flooding with illegal sexual materials, the government should enforce harsh interventions because such things are against the law.

And twatter and/or their corporate owners decide what's false or misleading now - not facts, not studies, not evidence. Very convenient for an entity trying to manipulate public opinion, isn't it?

Well, these are clear examples of illegal activity. I don't think it directly pertains to the question I posed, but I may just not be fully understanding you.

Organizing a violent conspiracy or gangstalking on a private website is illegal.

Banning a user on a private website, without reason, isn't illegal AFAIK.

The latter may seem harmless but may have grand implications when it's a site that services the entire populace and is used by vetted public officials.

Should the government intervene in situations like this, independent from the illegal activities you mention?

Oh, okay. I misunderstood the question. Sorry 'bout that.

In my opinion, government officials shouldn't even be using something run by individuals who engage in discriminatory policing, openly permit calls for violence against who they deem 'political undesirables' and see themselves as 'arbiters of truth'. I agree that banning a user on a private website, at its base isn't 'a federal crime' worthy of government intervention. However, using vague rules and discriminatory reasoning to locking users out of their own accounts over an arbitrary decision is a sleazeball move - especially if the user has no recourse to data recovery or even appeal this decision. This is particularly dangerous - a private company should not be censoring government officials due to political bias. This is wrong even if a (AU?)right-wing twitter purposefully censors a left-leaning president's account just because their right-wing moderators don't like 'left-leaning individuals'.

That's why the government should be using their own, open-source system with clear public access - and allow a proper free market to operate by reducing entry barriers to people seeking to run such alternatives without fear of being driven off the 'net by mass fraud campaigns organized on twitter/facebook/other social media or embargoes on financial transactions put into placed by politicized banking services.

They even banned his Neopets account.

Except it wasn't non-violent, oops!

lmao and that rules

look at this pathetic defender of ghouls getting what he deserves

please don't crush my internal organs!

Can we really be sure he isn't on there already

Oh,nice... the google play style has suspended the Parlor app... What social media platforms does he have left?

Newgrounds.

As an opponent of both Trump and suicide prevention, I must criticise this.

Yeah, some spook tried to fire at armed police but since we all know they're chickens who can't shoot people who can shoot back, he went for the unarmed individual. Hey, if government-sponsored death squads summarily executing citizens for wrongthink are now a thing, I can see how it can start off a violent chain-reaction in an otherwise peaceful protest.

Also, at ~18% approval rating, thats the sort of numbers that gets angry mobs on the front door of the government in my politics simulations. I'm glad they weren't as brutal as the media's making them out to be. I was thinking they'd shoot down the escape choppers with makeshift bolos, guillotine those career politicians and pour all the tea in Congress into the Boston harbor for absolutely no reason.

Stop your fucking gaslighting. I'm referring to this post, more specifically this section:

The travel bans were called 'an outrage!', attempts at initial safety precautions were mocked, and the list goes on.

"initial safety precautions" such as:

• avoiding chinatown specifically because China
• discriminating against people of chinese origin
• discriminating against chinese owned businesses
• targeting chinese people

Sure. Fuck off.

I removed it because I misunderstood the definition of the term uncle tom, not because I regretted calling you that. My intention was more of a term that referred to "that racist uncle everyone has", and I mistakenly assumed that the "tom" in "uncle tom" refers to that person. Shame on me for not knowing US history fully.

I'd appreciate it if you quoted me rather than mentioning offhandedly so my silence makes it look like I have no way to counter, when in actuality I don't follow any threads and cba to check up on the majority of threads with no direct replies

Please give me an example of these people they let get away with making death threats. And I'm not talking about your average Joe Nobody in rural Fuckwit County. Which person of prominence has made death threats, incitements of violence, etc. and gotten away with it?

Not even Trump, because he's been banned. Did it take far too long? Abso-fucking-lutely. Did he get away with it? No.

And who are these 'truly dangerous' individuals? Trump?

Lemme guess, iTs AnTiFa

Yeah because they're not going to be dealing with a manchild in charge of the country who lashes out against private companies.

Reminder that this is the guy whose party lives for "small government", trying to interfere in private businesses. I guess libertarians on that side of the aisle only like small government when it benefits them.

ironically MySpace...which is opened by Fox

Your political heads called it xenophobic and racist with these unjustified claims, then when proved wrong - agreed that more should have been done. You stop gaslighting. Or parroting CCP propaganda.

Yeah, learn some history and stop following whatever the trendsetters do. Good call. Huehuehuehue.

The subject was changed by someone willing to debate honestly, and I really thought you really weren't worth my time.

Nice goalpost moving. So it seems certain people DO get away with breaking twitter laws if they're a 'certain group' that you arbitrarily decide on, huh? Real interesting.

Its on them for becoming the very fascists they claim to hate. They're the equivalent of taking selfies on a spyphone while engaging in rape and murder, then whining about it when they get caught. State-sponsored terrorists become rather easy to take down when their finances run dry. Even BLM is slowly realizing this - those "#resistance" chumps were had by an establishment that thrives on causing war. And if you're gonna parrot their lies, you're just another brick in the blood-spattered wall.

Maybe private companies shouldn't be discriminating against people, 'lashing out' and judging them by their own political beliefs and selectively enforcing their own laws while pretending to be arbiters of truth. People have the right to boycott, and start alternative services without big corporate lobbyists stopping them. Or, are you one of those people who claim corporations should have higher-level access to human rights than actual human beings?

Surprise surprise, racism is called out as racism.

Or is it racism only when the people you disagree with do it?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. I looked up "uncle tom" on google, saw a concise definition on wikipedia, misunderstood the meaning from the concise form, looked it up and saw that it was the opposite. Are you trying to say people shouldn't make mistakes? Or that it's wrong to admit to a mistake? Because you don't seem to have the werewithal to admit to making mistakes, just tossing snark around like a fucking cave troll.

So why are you still replying to me?

You're a fucking dumbass. Let me know when you can force private companies to root out such views from its platform without resorting to expensive mass surveillance. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts you think the CCP's surveillance is bad too.

I can't be bothered to read your alternative-reality trash. Legitimate sources or gtfo.

So I take it you want the government to have a say in what private businesses can do on a whim.

Okay commie.

And nobody's stopping them now are they? Corporations aren't obligated to provide a platform to everyone.

You sure sound like one, with your calls for enforcing rules on select sets of the population but not others.

Can we hunt the mad lad or mad lassie who pulled this off and give him or her an award oh wait no some people would take that too seriously

I understand the private companies can do whatever they want within the confines of their websites but it seems incredibly fucked up that sites as large as Facebook and Twitter, which essentially function like the town squares of yesteryear, can just arbitrarily choose to silence whoever they want

I guess you believe that a travel ban to give time for proper quarantine procedures is racist. Your politicians needed money, and called any reasonable effort to stop a pandemic 'racism' and any talk about what was emerging from Wuhan as a 'racist boogeyman conspiracy theory'. It seems your definition of racism is whatever you make up that makes you feel comfortable as a self-appointed 'arbiter of facts'.

Now don't try that shit in Taiwan, lol.

Neither. I was just asking you to stop being a vapid trend-follower. It makes you look stupid when you try to act tough on the internet. Oh, and do be careful when you try to champion the character of Uncle Tom as a hero. You might get called a 'racist'. huehuehuehuehue

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

No need for it. Your private corporations should not be immune to government intervention when they're enabling crime and looking the other way when 'certain people' do it. And when you try to sound tough on the internet, I know your argument's running thin. Keep at it.

Useful idiots get discarded first, as BLM proved. Live in your world of denial if you must, but when organizations like that enable real-world crimes... well, don't whine when those naive, wannabe corporate stooges get thrown under the proverbial bus by genre-savvy politicians who use and discard people like them with ease.

I guess you can't even read my prior responses to S3C's questions and need to sling insults because that's all you got. Oh, and if a private business does hack into the emergency broadcast system to broadcast a hoax that causes panic buying and other chaos, they should be held responsible and the government should have a say in how they should be punished.

I see you have no idea what lobbyists are doing in your country with their consolidated monopoly system.

Which is what twitter staff are doing. Go ahead and deny it if you like, but that's reality.

Well, you stay in your li'l reality bubble and keep denying the real world while reality itself marches onwards. Just remember - once your orange-colored boogeyman is 'unpersoned', the #resistance'll start eating their own in a comical, self-destructive purity spiral while they get culled by their leash-holders. Now that's gonna be good fun to watch.

I agree. Furthermore, private companies have no business trying to police individual opinion spoken offsite.

It's an incredibly fucked up world where people think that silencing anyone is a good thing. Fucking morons.

You could silence people of yesteryear in town squares, infact, they did. Women got branded as witches if they were to vocal about a subject that upset the power structure, it wasn't because they actually believed in witchcraft, it was a way to get rid of problematic people.

Did you just compare silencing people today to burning witches? You must suffer from brain trauma.