Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 91
  1. #31
    NBA Legend UK2K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    18,196

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    Quote Originally Posted by Dunaprenti
    I like how you are throwing me into the Obama and Clinton crowd without any reason whatsoever. IF you have read my previous post you will see that I wasn't "OK" with the government demanding information from Facebook. On the other hand I don't really care what a private company does with the platform it has created. Picking on the word "spin" shows your inability to debate properly, but let me paraphrase "Every news outlet spins and suppresses news stories.", arguing which one does it the most and which one I like or don't like is irrelevant.
    One of the reasons Trump is so popular is because of the constant hate he gets from the liberal media.

    My personal advice to you is: Don't assume you know what the other person is thinking. If you are curious about my opinion or if you haven't understood a statement I've made - just ask me.
    I didn't throw you into anything. I didn't claim you were a Clinton or Obama supporter. I just wondered, out loud, if your reaction would be the same.

    And no, not every news outlet 'suppresses' news. They may not report on news, but when your 'trending news' list isn't actually what's 'trending news', that is called suppression.

    Fox59 can choose not to report on a story. That's fine. They can't report on every story.

    Facebook advertised their 'trending news' section as trending news when it wasn't. Their own algorithms prove it. They had 'trending news' that didn't make the 'trending news' list because it was a positive story on a conservative figure.

    Furthermore, they inserted non-trending news (like BLM protests) into their 'trending news' list despite it not trending at all. Nobody cared, and yet, there it was, shown on the list as if people did care.

    So they removed trending news about conservatives, and inserted news nobody cared about. And... you're cool with that? How can you claim it's 'trending news' when it's obviously not?

    I don't think what they did was illegal, but what they did was obviously dishonest given their response, and was ethically wrong. Which they seem to agree with.

  2. #32
    You are amazing SexSymbol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kaunas, Lithuania
    Posts
    5,966

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    The funny thing is what he wrote wasn't even that bad.

  3. #33
    Not airballing my layups anymore Dunaprenti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    126

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    Quote Originally Posted by UK2K
    I didn't throw you into anything. I didn't claim you were a Clinton or Obama supporter. I just wondered, out loud, if your reaction would be the same.

    And no, not every news outlet 'suppresses' news. They may not report on news, but when your 'trending news' list isn't actually what's 'trending news', that is called suppression.

    Fox59 can choose not to report on a story. That's fine. They can't report on every story.

    Facebook advertised their 'trending news' section as trending news when it wasn't. Their own algorithms prove it. They had 'trending news' that didn't make the 'trending news' list because it was a positive story on a conservative figure.

    Furthermore, they inserted non-trending news (like BLM protests) into their 'trending news' list despite it not trending at all. Nobody cared, and yet, there it was, shown on the list as if people did care.

    So they removed trending news about conservatives, and inserted news nobody cared about. And... you're cool with that? How can you claim it's 'trending news' when it's obviously not?

    I don't think what they did was illegal, but what they did was obviously dishonest given their response, and was ethically wrong. Which they seem to agree with.
    Ok, lets say this was a misunderstanding.
    But I do believe that "every", or at least the ones I've seen, media suppresses in one way or another. I'm not defending Facebook, I actually wasn't aware of this trending thing and it is obviously wrong. I mentioned the sharing information with the government part, in my first post about Facebook.
    The fact that they changed it proves my initial point - the power is in the customers hands. They did not change because they thought they were wrong, they changed because every conservative AND many others made a big deal out of it.
    All I'm saying is let Twitter show how stupid it could be and it will destroy itself.

  4. #34
    A humble prophet Dresta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Medina
    Posts
    9,854

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    Quote Originally Posted by FillJackson
    I think you're just playing with semantics here, but MY was a repeat offender.

    Look at this imbecile comparing a provocative political commentator to ISIS supporters.



    I also know for a fact that the accounts of ISIS sympathisers were given free reign for years on twitter, because I would check their accounts to see how they were reporting events in Syria. If you don't think this politically motivated then you are a fool.


    He also did none of the things that are given as justification in that message, which is basically holding him directly responsible for whatever racist abuse was sent to that woman (an absurd standard that no person could meet). The reason he was banned was because of a coordinated propaganda campaign by organised social media leftists to ban him, and which blamed him for the abuse that god-awful actress received. That he undoubtedly receives endless abuse of his own apparently doesn't matter. These people seriously have nothing better to do other than lobby twitter all day with reportings and complaints and slanderous insinuations--they are pathetic.

    Quote Originally Posted by ROCSteady
    What exactly did he say, like verbatim?
    He wasn't banned for what he said, but for what other people said--accusations of "incitement" without any evidence actually provided, which is rather convenient.

  5. #35
    Valancais for RoY Bourne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    In da club bangin
    Posts
    2,087

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    Quote Originally Posted by Dresta
    Look at this imbecile comparing a provocative political commentator to ISIS supporters.



    I also know for a fact that the accounts of ISIS sympathisers were given free reign for years on twitter, because I would check their accounts to see how they were reporting events in Syria. If you don't think this politically motivated then you are a fool.


    He also did none of the things that are given as justification in that message, which is basically holding him directly responsible for whatever racist abuse was sent to that woman (an absurd standard that no person could meet). The reason he was banned was because of a coordinated propaganda campaign by organised social media leftists to ban him, and which blamed him for the abuse that god-awful actress received. That he undoubtedly receives endless abuse of his own apparently doesn't matter. These people seriously have nothing better to do other than lobby twitter all day with reportings and complaints and slanderous insinuations--they are pathetic.


    He wasn't banned for what he said, but for what other people said--accusations of "incitement" without any evidence actually provided, which is rather convenient.
    Watch the Paul Joseph Watson video linked to earlier in this thread - the actress has done the EXACT thing that Milo was banned for (not) doing.

  6. #36
    Local High School Star west_tip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,383

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    Tangential to the issue of censorship that this issue brings up I must admit I've never cared for or seen the appeal of twitter. I set up an account and tweeted once or twice, thought it rather pointless and never bothered with it afterward.

    People might say insidehoops and other message boards are similarly pointless but I'd say you can facilitate a much better quality debate on this type of forum than you can where your posts are not limited to 140 characters. I also like the "community" feel that message boards have. Just curious, what would posters who use that platform on here say are its biggest selling points?

  7. #37
    A humble prophet Dresta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Medina
    Posts
    9,854

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    Quote Originally Posted by west_tip
    Tangential to the issue of censorship that this issue brings up I must admit I've never cared for or seen the appeal of twitter. I set up an account and tweeted once or twice, thought it rather pointless and never bothered with it afterward.

    People might say insidehoops and other message boards are similarly pointless but I'd say you can facilitate a much better quality debate on this type of forum than you can where your posts are not limited to 140 characters. I also like the "community" feel that message boards have. Just curious, what would posters who use that platform on here say are its biggest selling points?
    Well, if you get involved in political journalism you pretty much have to have a twitter account these days; almost everyone has one. I agree with you, though, that its format doesn't really encourage constructive dialogue, but rather simplistic black and white thinking. It's character limit doesn't really leave much space for nuanced argument.

  8. #38
    Please clap. Real Men Wear Green's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    28,776

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter


  9. #39
    A humble prophet Dresta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Medina
    Posts
    9,854

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    Quote Originally Posted by Real Men Wear Green
    You actually have to be completely deluded to think that even remotely relevant here.

  10. #40
    Reign of Error BoutPractice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,298

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    I don't think there should be an absolute right to free speech on a specific internet platform.

    Twitter is just like any forum: there are internal rules, your posts can get deleted etc. It's often arbitrary, and often infuriating, but that's the way it is.

    If you want perfect free speech, there are certain platforms out there already, or you can create your own, with your own rules. The barriers to entry are very low, too.

    So I don't have any problems with this in principle, although I do also wonder why it took them so long to get around to banning the comparatively more dangerous terrorist accounts.

  11. #41
    Please clap. Real Men Wear Green's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    28,776

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    Quote Originally Posted by Dresta
    You actually have to be completely deluded to think that even remotely relevant here.
    The topic is about Twitter, a business, not the government, barring someone from using it. It specifically applies to this topic, something you would realize if you thought for 2 seconds before posting. If a business that allows people to post their own thoughts through it was not allowed to censor what people say through that business's mediums a messageboard like, say, Insidehoops couldn't have moderators. I'm pretty sure this forum has a few moderators, however lax they may be about moderating.

    Now if you can prove that Obama ordered Twitter to ban this twit then you have a point and I will shut up. But if you can't show that his ban was the result of government interference then you in fact don't have any idea what you're talking about.

  12. #42
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    California of America
    Posts
    18,184

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    They unfairly banned Milo when we have people tweeting some horrible things.

    Also, free speech means you can't get in trouble or thrown into jail for what you said.

    At the same time, you can't go around saying whatever the hell you want. You cannot preach freedom of speech and go tell your boss to ****k off and claim you were falsely fired.

  13. #43
    Local High School Star west_tip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,383

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    Quote Originally Posted by Dresta
    It's character limit doesn't really leave much space for nuanced argument.
    Agreed.

    Thinking about this particular case further I watched an interview that Billy Corgan gave a couple months back where he said that when he deleted his twitter account someone from Twitter corporate HQ contacted him and tried to get him back on. I must admit it raised my eyebrows that they would be so proactive in trying to keep him an active user of their platform.

    As he observed their business model obviously depends very heavily on having celebs with x number of followers. Their intervention in this instance is probably motivated by the same business related reasons, can't have celebs leaving twitter when they are your bread and butter.

  14. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    California of America
    Posts
    18,184

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    The same applies for message boards.

    Notice how you can never really delete your account?

    You can only deactivate it because they want all your posting history in their databases.

    I don't think ISH would want to suddenly erase all 20k of my work.

  15. #45
    A humble prophet Dresta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Medina
    Posts
    9,854

    Default Re: The End; a portend: Milo Yiannopoulos Banned from Twitter

    Quote Originally Posted by Real Men Wear Green
    The topic is about Twitter, a business, not the government, barring someone from using it. It specifically applies to this topic, something you would realize if you thought for 2 seconds before posting. If a business that allows people to post their own thoughts through it was not allowed to censor what people say through that business's mediums a messageboard like, say, Insidehoops couldn't have moderators. I'm pretty sure this forum has a few moderators, however lax they may be about moderating.

    Now if you can prove that Obama ordered Twitter to ban this twit then you have a point and I will shut up. But if you can't show that his ban was the result of government interference then you in fact don't have any idea what you're talking about.


    WTF are you talking about dude? Who is talking about Obama? Who has said anything about "free speech" in this thread exactly? No-one is making the argument you claim to be rebutting, but you're too much of a smug shit who likes the smell of his own farts to even notice. But yeah, you came in the thread, tugging at your own cock, and posting a moronic picture as if you'd put everyone in their place, without even realising that you were arguing with an invisible person, because no one made the argument you are alluding to.

    This is about double standards and hypocrisy, not free speech, you utter, utter, utter cretin. Not to mention that you have destroyed your own arguments regarding the serving of gays: apparently twitter has the "right" to refuse service on the basis of political disagreement, but cakemakers do not; again, this absurd hypocrisy is what is pissing people off: very few people think this is a 1st Amendment matter, but for you, it is the entire argument. It's that these arguments, constantly used to censor and hound others, only ever work in one direction.

    You no more choose your political opinions than you choose to be homosexual--they are both entirely determined by your genetics and the environment in which you were raised. If twitter has a right to refuse service based on political opinion, then so do bakers have a right to refuse service to homosexual weddings. No consistency, constant hypocrisy and double-standards: these things are generally irksome, and smarmy rubbish like that silly picture you posted only shows that you've completely failed to understand the problem in any way whatsoever.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •