Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mainiac]

It's still Twitter violating neutrality

Neutrality isn't a goal with these things, it's a means to an end.  They want to create a product, a means of communication.  His ilk stands in the way of that.  The old line from Monroe:

I can't remember where I heard this, but someone once said that defending a position by citing free speech is sort of the ultimate concession; you're saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your position is that it's not literally illegal to express.

There are these people who dont want honest discussion of ideas.  They want to use these platforms as a means towards making speech harder.  You will never learn anything from them, you'll just avoid being exposed to anything else.  They are, conversationally worthless.

We protect free speech because we dont want to throw the baby out with the bathwater not because there is anything worthwhile towards this sort of "discourse".

[Loud Whispers]

Well, he did abide by the specific terms and conditions of behavior.  Somewhat arguably, but I think he did.  I don't think it was obvious that he would be banned for this.  And even if it was obvious to him, it doesn't really change anything.  It's still Twitter violating neutrality (which they have no legal obligation to maintain).

I looked up the tweet that got milo banned

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Ahahahahahahaha
This is what Jack cited as a targeted abuse

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

This was what Jack defended as compliant with twitter's policies

Gonna burn this rep with cheeky roast 

There are these people who dont want honest discussion of ideas.  They want to use these platforms as a means towards making speech harder.  You will never learn anything from them, you'll just avoid being exposed to anything else.  They are, conversationally worthless.

Trust me, you would have missed nothing: Reject these voices, let them grow silent, they are... Conversationally... Worthless.

[mainiac]

Once upon a time, to be a troll required effort.  Trolls weren't supposed to just express shitty views and then claim that they were joking or being edgy when people judged them by the content of their character and found them to be lacking.  Shitty people just like seeing other people express the same prejudices they do.

[Rolan7]

@LW
IIRC he also called her illiterate, but yeah.
I mean
She did make lots of mistakes in her words

[TempAcc]

mfw neutrality doesn't matter when it benefits the people I call trolls~
Just like the working class doesn't matter when they don't vote for me~

[Rolan7]

mfw neutrality doesn't matter when it benefits the people I call trolls~
Just like the working class doesn't matter when they don't vote for me~

In our defense, I'm defending this person I call a troll!  He shouldn't have been banned!
Not every progressive is regressive, some of us respect discussion.

[mainiac]

mfw neutrality doesn't matter when it benefits the people I call trolls~
Just like the working class doesn't matter when they don't vote for me~

So you saw an idea that you didn't liked because it was an attack on people you support and you immediately rejected the notion of people disagreeing with you.  You didn't make a defense of the principles "neutral" free speech you rely on.  You didn't educate yourself or reflect upon why we care about free speech and come up with a thoughtful response.  You just came up with a label and applied it.

You didn't even do it in a neutral way.  You didn't say "well I think these are important principles and I think you are cavalier."  You applied a partisan lens to dismiss arguments from one side out of hand.

Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm full of shit.  But when confronted with a different idea, you went straight to rejection.  And ironically you claim to do so in the very name of free speech.  So why do you give a shit about free speech?  You aren't using it.

[inteuniso]

I mean, I get frustrated and my posts' quality go down when I'm having to deal with their firestorm raining down upon me.

No one here has seemed to mentioned Leslie Jones' DMs. Sure the public messages didn't seem so bad (and certainly not banworthy, maybe a suspension) apparently the DMs were blood-spewing disease-ridden boil-bursting brigades from a TOR relay (I just made that one up, seems more in line with our sub-noosphere)<e.g. she got a picture of herself DM'd to her. It was covered in semen. You can dig up the tweet of her saying she got it>.

The jars of jenkum that the internet likes to jarate around are no joke, particularly to people who have no idea what words like jarate or jenkum mean.

[Loud Whispers]

Once upon a time, to be a troll required effort.  Trolls weren't supposed to just express shitty views and then claim that they were joking or being edgy when people judged them by the content of their character and found them to be lacking.  Shitty people just like seeing other people express the same prejudices they do.

Awwwww, did poor baby get hurt that someone disagreed with you on the internet?

@LW
IIRC he also called her illiterate, but yeah.
I mean
She did make lots of mistakes in her words

And she actually broke Twitter ToS whilst insulting far more people and calling for targeted abuse, Milo does nothing but gets reported by Lesley and Jack has the cheek to pretend he was impartial - WikiLeaks' reaction is fucking hilarious here, I want to find the tweet where they're all "We're not defending Milo, fucks sakes we're defending free speech against feudal moderation." Classy

mfw neutrality doesn't matter when it benefits the people I call trolls~
Just like the working class doesn't matter when they don't vote for me~

I find it funny when anti-corporatists support corporate rights when corporations give a little service to them; Lord knows why China, Egypt or Turkey even bothers controlling social media, they could just privatize their efforts and still retain the same social control xD

[inteuniso]

Lord knows why China, Egypt or Turkey even bothers controlling social media, they could just privatize their efforts and still retain the same social control xD

Shhhhhh(ilary confirmed)! That's a United States' State Secret!

[mainiac]

Is Jarate a bad word now?  I always was a fan of Jarate.  Literally better then the freakin' rifle.

[Orange Wizard]

And she actually broke Twitter ToS whilst insulting far more people and calling for targeted abuse, Milo does nothing but gets reported by Lesley and Jack has the cheek to pretend he was impartial - WikiLeaks' reaction is fucking hilarious here, I want to find the tweet where they're all "We're not defending Milo, fucks sakes we're defending free speech against feudal moderation." Classy

I wonder if we could get a decent lawyer to twist this around at anti-discrimination laws

[inteuniso]

Is Jarate a bad word now?  I always was a fan of Jarate.  Literally better then the freakin' rifle.

My belief is that there are no bad words, just clean and grungy/nasty ones.

Language is fluid, and is one of biology's most useful genetic technologies. One simply has to try conversing with other species to witness how quickly efforts will be made to bridge barriers that exist.

[Rolan7]

No one here has seemed to mentioned Leslie Jones' DMs. Sure the public messages didn't seem so bad (and certainly not banworthy, maybe a suspension) apparently the DMs were blood-spewing disease-ridden boil-bursting brigades from a TOR relay (I just made that one up, seems more in line with our sub-noosphere)<e.g. she got a picture of herself DM'd to her. It was covered in semen. You can dig up the tweet of her saying she got it>.

I don't know what "DM" means but yeah, she was certainly harassed!  Pretty shameful, reflects poorly on her opponents.  The movie being bad didn't justify that shit.

I just don't think Milo incited or participated.

[TheBiggerFish]

Direct messages, probably.

@LWpost:Seriously, that got him banned?  What