Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

from the eavesdropping dept

This week, both our winners on the insightful side come in response to our post about Twitter banning the Krassensteins, despite the ongoing accusations of anti-conservative bias at the platform. In first place, it's Stephen T. Stone responding to an old, tired, incoherent argument that banning people violates "common law":

Maybe you can answer this question for once.

Let’s say Twitter admins announce tomorrow that Twitter will no longer host a specific type of content. The content is legal and people can post that content anywhere else. But Twitter admins say “we don’t do that here” and ban that content from Twitter anyway.

What law, statute, or “common law” court precedent says Twitter must host content its admins don’t want to host?

(Spoiler: they did not "answer this question for once".)

In second place, we've got an anonymous comment pretty well summing up the situation:

It's a bad time to be a popular internet platform.

You're damned if you moderate any accounts ("censorship").
You're damned if you don't moderate accounts.
You're damned if you fail to moderate the correct accounts according to diametrically opposed opinions.

You're just all-around damned.

For editor's choice on the insightful side, we start out with a comment from any moose cow word in response to China's latest move to use America's IP obsession against it:

If IP was truly as invaluable as companies claim, they'd keep their manufacturing close to home where they can maintain the upmost control over it. Instead, they keep sending it to lowest bid manufacturers in countries that don't care about their IP. They want cheap labor and tight IP control, but they can't have their cake and eat it too. After decades of offshoring, it's clear that they value cheap labor FAR more than their IP. Apparently it's worth less to them than the paper a sweatshop laborer's pay stub is printed on.

In second place, we've got a simple anonymous response to the German politician seeking to take action after a bunch of YouTubers told their fans not to vote for her party:

Would she have been as upset if someone saying vote for her party gained as many views on YouTube?

Over on the funny side, our first place winner is another anonymous response to the post about China:

China is stealing our ideas..

..about how to use the fake idea of "intellectual property". Something must be done!

In second place it's yet another anonymous commenter, this time on our post about the long copyright saga of Bittersweet Symphony and Richard Ashcroft, responding to a commenter who was "surprised they didn't buy Ashcroft a dog and shoot it too":

I think the police hold the copyright on that one...

For editor's choice on the funny side, we've got a quick exchange from the post about the latest Twitter bans. First, Stephen T. Stone got somewhat confused:

Huh.

This reads like Twitter moderates activity and not political beliefs. But that can’t be right. Alex Jones said he was targeted for his political beliefs. If we can’t believe him, who can we believe~?

But an anonymous commenter replied and cleared everything up nicely:

It proves his master plan is working. His agents have replaced the chemical in the airplane fumes from the one made with babies to one made with barbecue, so the frogs that Twitter moderators eat at dinnertime are no longer gay.

It's the only logical explanation for this.

That's all for this week, folks!


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Stephen T. Stone (profile), 2 Jun 2019 @ 12:06pm

    Of course they didn’t answer my question.

    It would be nigh-impossible for them to answer it with anything but “there isn’t one”. 😁

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 3 Jun 2019 @ 6:12am

      Not quite

      It would be nigh-impossible for them to honestly answer it with anything but 'there isn't one', but given the individual in question that would hardly be an impediment.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 2 Jun 2019 @ 1:39pm

    freedom of speach

    Its interesting..
    That the Corp idea that Everyone has to have their product, or they are loosing money..
    Is the Same as idiots declaring They are being censored because 1 SMART person isnt listening to them.

    the resource is there, the options are there...But do we see or find any of them?? not really.
    Why? BECAUSE THEY DONT DO WHAT THE VOTERS WANT..
    They petition the rich and the corps, and forget about us, because WE DONT have the money.. They Arnt speaking to us. And thats the reason we dont See them saying anything, SMART..

    they arnt Politicians...they are Capitalist, and other things I cant say in public.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    discordian_eris (profile), 2 Jun 2019 @ 4:44pm

    They aren't strictly capitalists, they are much worse. They are Randians. Morons who worship Ayn Rand.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Toom1275 (profile), 2 Jun 2019 @ 5:14pm

    Just been rereading Popehat's "Anatomy of a Scam Investigation" and now many of the tricks in the scammer's toolkit seem pretty familiar:

    • sociopathy

    • never delivering on things asked of them, distracting and changing the subject when pressed

    • when called out too hard, pretending to be someone else

    • Stalking of and threats to take spurious legal action...

    • ...against individuals and blogs that write or host truthful warnings against the scammer

    • make spurious takedown requests to review sites that victims report the scammer to

    • using bought-and-sold mailing lists of scam victims

    • Particular personal hate for anti-scammer people/places like Popehat & co.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 2 Jun 2019 @ 5:56pm

      Re:

      Did we expect anything less from John Herrick Smith, aka horse with no name/MyNameHere/Whatever/Just Sayin', glorious defender of the downtrodden Prenda Law?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 3:14am

      Re:

      Well the "spurious takedown requests" have spread into unintended territory (i.e., not someone called a scammer) given one documented instance of it.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 3:32am

        Re: Re:

        We get it, you think Ken and Mike married above or underneath their station and also found some copyright enforcers who were being very naughty, and that rustles your jimmies.

        You going to shitpost on this thread to 300 replies again, Herrick? Please say yes.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 6:04am

      Re:

      I assume the author of that piece (and those with whom he associates) more than welcome criticism anywhere on the internet.

      Good to know.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Jun 2019 @ 8:55pm

    Looking at Techdirt's History post for the week, I strongly suspect Jhon boi to be Michael L. Slonecker, the pro-RIAA lawyer who tutted his tongue at everything posted on the site until he learned that leaving his real name so people could mock him was a very bad idea.

    [https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090527/1836105038.shtml](Here Slonecker mocks the EFF for trying to counter RIAA propaganda.) He then loses it when his wife is briefly mentioned in passing.

    Funny how a decade later he's reduced to stalking Masnick's wife instead.

    These copyright-types were always another level of fucked up...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Mike Masnick (profile), 2 Jun 2019 @ 11:55pm

      Re:

      I would... doubt that very much for a variety of reasons. As much trouble as he made on the site for a long time, he always seemed somewhat grounded in (a slightly confused, and old fashioned) reality (that one thread you link to is a bit of an exception). Also, he had a fairly distinct style, one I still see showing up in the comments from time to time that does not match the troll you are talking about in any way.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 2:05am

        Re: Re:

        For what it's worth, here you see Slonecker and John Smith, posting as horse with no name, using different geolocation snowflakes.

        One might argue that it's not the first time Herrick has masked his IP address by posting from his phone, but Mike's right. There's enough differences between the two.

        Then again, it's some achievement when you're insane enough to make Slonecker look grounded. For a laugh, look up "Slonecker" in the comments on Techdirt over the years. Comedy gold.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 3:12am

          Re: Re: Re:

          I am not the individual you think I am.

          That individual did not make the posts you attribute to me.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 3:23am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I am not the individual you think I am.

            Which would have been a reasonable point to make, up until you posted this gem:

            That individual did not make the posts you attribute to me.

            If you aren't that individual... how would you know that individual didn't make those posts?

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 3:09am

        Re: Re:

        I'm not who I'm accused of being, but will make sure to let him know about this post.

        Your wife isn't being stalked, but you already know that.

        It seems I'm being censored on this site so I'll have to table this until I go public with a lawyer in tow. Funny thing happens when one has a lawyer, people just stop bullying them.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 3:09am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Ah, now I'm not being censored again. I wish Techdirt would make up its mind.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 3:20am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Your wife isn't being stalked, but you already know that.

          Except for this little tidbit you posted here:

          On another note, a man with Masnick's money and status who had to settle for the low-value garbage he married is as pathetic as it gets. What's her name again? Let me look it up.

          Unless you're going to gripe about getting fakeposted again after switching to another IP address.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Rocky, 3 Jun 2019 @ 3:25am

          Re: Re: Re:

          You aren't censored.

          You are free to make your "argument" since nothing here stops you from doing that but that doesn't mean you can force others to see it who aren't interested in it.

          Funny how some people conflates free speech with the non-existing right to be heard no matter what, unless the speech has some relevance to Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child but I doubt we are talking about children even though some people behave like an entitled child with poor impulse control.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 3:31am

          Re: Re: Re:

          You go Jhon boi! Let Slonecker know that he was compared to a rich content creator making amazing things for Hollywood, that'll piss him off!

          ...Wait, how was this plan of yours supposed to work again? Never mind. Everybody knows you've been threatening subpoenas on this site for a year and could have Masnick's ass on a platter if you snapped your finger, and the amount of shit that has actually gone down in that time has ranged between jack and fuck all.

          To borrow a phrase from another Anonymous Coward, "Bring it on, you old, impotent fuckwit".

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 2:31pm

            Re: stay limp my friend.

            I don’t get quoted often. But when I do, it’s making fun of the most impotent man in the world.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 12:59pm

          Re: Just like the last 700 times you said it.

          Any day now. Any day now.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 3:12am

      Re:

      I am not that individual, and what you are saying about that individual is clearly false. Since you dragged that individual into this for no valid reason other than you WANTING to believe it was him, you seem to be the one fixated.

      I am not stalking Masnick's wife at all. I was "saying mean things" like everyone here likes to defend the right to do so. In this case, I believe the mean things are accurate because someone who is married to someone who allows bullying through his comments section is someone I'm not going to like.

      You might want to check the legal definition of stalking. Ironicially, that definition has been met a great deal more by some individuals who have frequented this site.

      I did notice some parallel construction here by someone looking to dance around a certain privacy law but I'm not sure that would hold water.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 3:23am

        Re: Re:

        Keep posting fighting words, Herrick.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Rocky, 3 Jun 2019 @ 4:50am

        Re: Re:

        Let me get this straight, you think Mike's wife is a bad person because Mike doesn't moderate people who say "mean things" about others in this comment section which you yourself use to say "mean things" about others and in this specific instance Mike's wife.

        Perhaps if you think it's such a bad thing you shouldn't contribute to it then, because your statement just shows us how hypocritical you really are.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 9:18am

        Re: Re:

        You might want to check the legal definition of stalking. Ironicially, that definition has been met a great deal more by some individuals who have frequented this site.

        Ummm... You might want to do the same, as I somehow believe that stalking requires actual knowledge of the person that is being stalked. Since you are always an AC, how can it be considered that anybody here is stalking you?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Toom1275 (profile), 3 Jun 2019 @ 9:51am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "I keep voluntarily coming to where everyone else already is" is certainly an odd way to redefine "stalking."

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 7:12pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Never mind that the post getting responded to doesn't mention stalking at all, just suggests Herrick might be another idiot. But Herrick just to have his nerve hit and testify like a jilted ex-lover.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Lawrence D’Oliveiro, 3 Jun 2019 @ 2:38am

    Damned If They Moderate, Damned If They Don’t?

    I don’t see why we need to feel sympathy for powerful, faceless megacorporations. They choose to be in this business, they should be adult enough to face the consequences. Nobody is holding a gun to their heads.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 3 Jun 2019 @ 4:41am

      'Look, if there's no gun involved what's the problem?'

      Oh, I dunno, maybe because millions of people use the platforms those 'faceless megacorporations' own, and with the various pressures put on them to moderate/not moderate those same millions are right in the crossfire of whichever way the company chooses?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 8:18am

      Re: Damned If They Moderate, Damned If They Don’t?

      Because they're not actually doing anything wrong, at least with regard to moderation. They're both crucified and venerated for the same activity which has, by outside forces, been politicized and made a partisan issue, amplifying the effect. The companies themselves are still doing what they've always done and have always had the right to do, and rightfully so.

      First they came for the social media platforms...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Thad (profile), 3 Jun 2019 @ 9:39am

      Re: Damned If They Moderate, Damned If They Don’t?

      It doesn't just apply to Facebook-sized platforms, though. Any online community, of any size, has a moderation dilemma; no matter what you do, some people will be unhappy with your moderation decisions; some will say you over-moderate, others will say you under-moderate.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Lawrence D’Oliveiro, 4 Jun 2019 @ 2:10am

        Re: Any online community, of any size

        That’s where the difference comes in: those smaller online communities do not dominate the market the way Facebook does. Or, to put it another way, the personal cost of deleting your Facebook account is much greater than, say, your Myspace one.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 3 Jun 2019 @ 9:21am

    MyNameHere/horse with no name/John Smith just hates it when due process is enforced.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2019 @ 1:38am

    Damned if they do, damned if they don't?

    I see that you're all still mocking conservatives for being upset about censorship.

    I mean, if you're all okay with corporations deciding who does and who doesn't get to speak online, that's fine.

    Just know that data proves that censorship IS going against conservatives. In 22-25 high profile censorship cases on Facebook, all but one were on the right.

    Perhaps you guys should watch Tim Pool? Timcast or Tim Pool, he has two channels on Youtube. He talks about this stuff constantly.

    In fact!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hbf-cIq824

    AND he even mentions "I do not want to live under the heel of mega corporations who aren't loyal to this country"

    And just so you know, he's NOT a conservative.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Lawrence D’Oliveiro, 4 Jun 2019 @ 2:09am

      Re: okay with corporations deciding

      I thought it was the Conservatives who were friends of the BigCorps, and the Liberals who were in favour of Government reining them in.

      Or are you a RINO?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Wendy Cockcroft (profile), 4 Jun 2019 @ 3:14am

      Re: Damned if they do, damned if they don't?

      Whatever. As long as "conservative" means "hate freak" they'll keep getting moderated to conform to community norms.

      Conservative here, never been censored.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Rocky, 4 Jun 2019 @ 5:58am

        Re: Re: Damned if they do, damned if they don't?

        The sad thing, many of these "conservatives" bleeting about liberal bias and censorship has moved the goal-post so far afield that "old style conservatives" are being decried as being liberal left-wingers.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2019 @ 6:40am

      Re: Damned if they do, damned if they don't?

      Shiva Ayyadurai still didn't invent email, Hamilton.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2019 @ 6:17pm

    For fuck's sake, Jhon. We've barely even scraped a hundred comments. Where's the subpoenas? Where's the rape threats? This is fucking weaksauce coming from you, boi.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 5 Jun 2019 @ 3:35am

    If you sit in the peanut gallery, expect peanut gallery comments...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.