As Predicted: Parler Is Banning Users It Doesn't Like

from the that-did-not-take-long-at-all dept

Well, that did not take long at all. On Friday we predicted that just like every other social media platform out there, the new favorite among people who falsely say that Twitter is censoring conservatives, would start taking down content and shutting down accounts just like everyone else. Because, if you run any sort of platform that allows 3rd party speech, sooner or later you discover you have to do that. In Friday's post, we highlighted Parler's terms of service, which certainly allows for it to take down any content for any reason (we also mocked their "quick read on Wikipedia" style understanding of the 1st Amendment).

What we did not expect was that Parler would prove us right so damn quickly. Over the weekend, Parler was apparently busy taking down accounts.

And he was not the only one.

There's a lot more as well. Parler seems to be banning a bunch of people. And it has the right to do so. Which is great. But what's not great is the site continues to pretend that it's some "free speech alternative" to Twitter when it's facing the same exact content moderation issues. And, yes, some people are claiming that Parler's quick trigger finger is mostly about shutting down "left" leaning accounts, but as with Twitter's content moderation, I won't say that for sure unless I see some actual evidence to support it.

What I will say is that when politicians like Ted Cruz say he's joining Parler because it doesn't have "censorship," he's wrong. Same with basically every other foolish person screaming about how Parler is about "free speech." It's got the same damn content moderation questions every platform has. And it's pretty silly for Parler's CEO to refer to Twitter as a "techno-fascist" company for its content moderation policies, when his company appears to be doing basically the same thing. Amusingly, the CEO is also claiming that "If you can say it on the street of New York, you can say it on Parler. Except that later in that same article, he admits: "You can’t spam people’s comment sections with unrelated content." Except, you kinda can do that on the "street of New York." (I recall there being more than one street in New York, but whatever). Anyway, this was always bogus, as you can see from the fact that so many accounts are being banned.

As I've said before: I think competition is good. And, personally, I'd prefer there to be many more competitors (though, I wish they were interoperable implementations of a protocol, rather than individual silos, but...). So, I have nothing against Parler existing. In fact, I think it's an excellent demonstration of why the concerns about "dominance" by Twitter or other platforms is silly. It's possible to create alternatives, and Parler has shown that it's able to attract a bunch of users. At least for now.

But what no one should do, is think that Parler is somehow any more "pro-free speech" than Twitter is, or that it doesn't pull down content and accounts. Because it does.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: bans, content moderation, free speech
Companies: parler


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 12:30pm

    The part you're missing is that it's only censorship if it silences speech you like. When speech you don't like is censored that's just common sense, silly. What are you, some sort of commie mutant traitor?

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

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 12:34pm

      What are you, some sort of commie mutant traitor?

      Calm down, Senator Kelly.

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

      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        identicon
        Orn Eagle, 30 Jun 2020 @ 3:12pm

        Re:

        All these commies bitching are Hillary strikers and Bite-Me lickers; can't you tell?

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:26pm

      Re:

      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.

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

    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
      identicon
      Elijah Smith, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:24pm

      Re:

      No, it's just that libs and leftists are such dicks--like that "Respectable (oxy-moron) Lawyer" retard lol.

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

      • icon
        Uriel-238 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:29pm

        "libs and leftists are such dicks"

        And with that single line of text I can see exactly how you came to such a conclusion.

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

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2020 @ 5:41pm

        Re: Re:

        What are libs and leftists?
        Who are they, how do you tell?
        Does everyone use the same definitions?

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

        • icon
          Eikinkloster (profile), 8 Sep 2020 @ 5:54am

          Re: Re: Re:

          If you need to ask, chances are you are it.

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

        • identicon
          Shawn Pittman, 7 Nov 2020 @ 7:59pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          People on the ‘left’ usually are pro-choice, for bigger govt, gun control, amnesty, open borders, and they are the one’s that call people racist, or homophobic. They watch MSNBC and CNN.

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

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2020 @ 9:37am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            General stereotypes are fun and usually full of assumptions.

            Many who voted for Biden did so not because they like neocons, but because they realize Donald is a dictator wannabe and is running a slow motion coup - or at least trying very poorly.

            Now, if one were to ask a liberal lefty whatever your derogatory term of choice my be, I doubt that any one particular person would hold all of those stated opinions.

            Not all weapons are owned by right wing conservative types.
            Amnesty for what?

            I like the bigger government thing - that is a laugh and a half. Conservative are for small government when they are not in control, otherwise it is open flood gates.

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

            • identicon
              Bobbybrownbb, 11 Nov 2020 @ 5:31pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              We also know they're leftist when they call Trump a dictator but can't think of dictator policy signed by Trump

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

              • icon
                Uriel-238 (profile), 11 Nov 2020 @ 9:39pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                It's hazardous to presume that a person's behavior or position defines who they are.

                As for Trump's dictatorial policy, his declaration of a national emergency due to alleged invaders from the southern border (id est, immigrants and refugees) was pretty dictatorial, as was the re-appropriation of funds from schools for military children and for maintaining harbors in order to build his wall. But then the whole wall program was typical of an tyrant who governs based on whimsy rather than research into state affairs.

                Then there's the whole thing of selling access to himself to foreign powers through his hotels and clubs. Profiteering off of one's position as head of state is pretty dictatorial.

                Then there's the nepotism within the White House, going as far as giving his kids security clearances for which they did not qualify (and are and remain a national security risk.) That's classic dictatorial material right there.

                Oh yes, and leaving Puerto Rico without relief after Hurricane Dorian was a dick move, the kind for which usually one has to be a banana-republic dictator to pull. But that may more be an indictment of how low the US has fallen in letting Trump get elected in the first place.

                Whether you can't think of Trump's dictatorial maneuvers, Bobbybrownbb or you choose to ignore them, it's terrifying either way. That you don't bother to look that crap up demonstrates your own indifference to your civic responsibility, but that's not unique to you, and again is an indictment of our nation.

                But that's not the only thing not unique to you. More than seventy million other Americans appear voted for Trump even after he botched the COVID-19 response (and continues to do so). Moreover our Republican Senators can't seem to scrape together an ounce of personal integrity, but that's a natural outcome of allowing an elected President serve as a dictator.

                It's the crimes against humanity that break my heart, not that Trump did them and is not (yet) held accountable, but that such a mass of American population are perfectly okay with the kids left orphaned and the Kurds left to be massacred and the Muslim ban.

                I don't know why people like you can't recognize the intrinsic hazards that come with tolerating our fascist police state and our captured federal government, as we're all on the purge list (unless you're buddies with a billionaire).

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

              • identicon
                kyle, 17 Nov 2020 @ 2:12pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                well his series of tweets about winning the election when he clearly did not, calling the very fabric of our democracy into question? that's dictator 101

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

            • identicon
              Reg, 11 Nov 2020 @ 11:13pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              If you think General Stereotype is fun...Check out the real General...If we can’t believe a retired 3 Star General McInerney …who can we believe ???

              https://fastly.cloudinary.com/wvw/video/upload/v1591934042/kgtefrv3nicl6i0hxbgu.mp3?fbclid=IwAR1 kSGd-ud08GyzCc4I4wx1x51Vqr3GOJ3V5k4IE9TRZ_-Q0DvzfYXRuYuo

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

            • identicon
              spankyinyourface, 15 Nov 2020 @ 7:16pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              sure you're right. anyone can see a demented racist criminal commie owned by china can be trusted with our nuclear codes. good job libtards. The rest of us need to research all the great things that can be acco
              mplished with DRONES.

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

              • icon
                Uriel-238 (profile), 15 Nov 2020 @ 10:23pm

                Every accusation a confession

                Wait, are you talking about Trump and his undisputed Russian connections that he lied about during his 2016 campaign?

                We're not out of the woods yet with that. He's still President until January.

                Care to reassure the rest of us Trump is not going to scorch the earth on the way out? I'm not so sure.

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

            • identicon
              bobwhite, 16 Nov 2020 @ 5:50am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Conservatives are ALWAYS for smaller government. Republicans, however, vary widely. Far too many Big Government Republicans (Conservatives used to call then RINO's).

              The Donald has no desire to be a "dictator." That is a stupid smear or the result of strong hallucinogens. Dictators never, ever reduce regulations or lower taxes. Dictators never, ever try to keep immigrants OUT of their countries. It is true, however, that The Donald has narcissistic tendencies.

              Leftists in government, however, almost always have a totalitarian streak.

              Centralized power = Leftists and Fascists
              Decentralized power = Conservatives

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

              • icon
                Uriel-238 (profile), 16 Nov 2020 @ 11:17am

                "Smaller Government"

                Except that smaller government has always been about gutting welfare programs and social safety nets. When it comes to the military, even the Fiscal Responsibility crowd like the Tea Party were glad to put more money into laser planes and active camouflage. This disdain for the serfs continues into the shit-tier care provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs, which has been a major counter-recruitment selling point since the Reagan Years: if you get half-way blown up, the US military or USMC is happy to leave you homeless and begging on the sidewalk.

                So no, I call bullshit.

                But then, you're arguing conservatives want to decentralize power, which runs contrary to the DeLay era K-Street Project policy of keeping Republican officials in lockstep by nothing short of extortion, which lead to the total divisiveness and lockdown of federal legislature today. Also, George W. Bush's notorious use of signing statements (all saying in boilerplate legal screed I will enforce this only if I feel like it ) both of them demonstrate a consolidation of power to the executive and the heads of the congressional bodies.

                Feel free to argue that the GOP from the Reagan Years forward are not true conservatives. It'll be amusing, at least. But since you're trying to condone Trump, whose authoritarianism ran thick through his whole administration, I have to assume you're willfully divorcing your comments from facts, which is on-brand for current self-identified conservatives, Republicans and Trump supporters.

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

          • identicon
            Arielle, 15 Nov 2020 @ 3:30pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I have Liberal friends, and they have everyone of the beliefs, that you just mentioned ! I cannot even have an intelligent conversation with them about Politics, because they think they are RIGHT, and I am wrong ! Of course we KNOW that THEY are wrong, but you can't convince them of that !

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

            • icon
              Uriel-238 (profile), 15 Nov 2020 @ 4:23pm

              "we know they are wrong"

              This raises the question of exactly how you know your liberal friends are wrong? I assume there's more thought to it than well, I know I'm right or _because what they argue just feels wrong.

              Most of my liberal aligned opinions are informed by fundamental principles: we are all Americans and human beings.We are all deserving of equal rights, equal liberties and equal treatment by the legal system. We all should have food security, housing security, security of family, job security and so on, since not having these things makes the population crazy and want to purge each other (into mass graves, ultimately). It should be okay to be nonwhite, non-christian, LGBT+, goth, punk or identify as part of any counterculture imagineable.

              Do you disagree with any of these notions? That might be why liberal friends disagree with you.

              What do you think should be different?

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

    • identicon
      Uncle Mike, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:45am

      Re:

      Commie Mutant Traitors, sounds like a great saturday morning cartoon.

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

      • icon
        Uriel-238 (profile), 30 Jun 2020 @ 6:24pm

        Commie Mutant Traitors

        Does someone still play Paranoia?

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

        • icon
          Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 7 Jul 2020 @ 7:13am

          Re: Commie Mutant Traitors

          "Does someone still play Paranoia?"

          Used to be a fun game...but with first GWB and now Trump that game suddenly took on a very much darker shade of Poe. A mission briefing in that game held by an unimaginative self-serving bureaucrat with a severe case of dunning-kruger and the attention span of a small child is now nothing more than switching on a newscast and catching ten seconds of a bona fide real life white house press briefing or a speech by an attorney general.

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

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2020 @ 9:05pm

        Re: Re:

        Forgot 'teenage'

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

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2020 @ 9:13pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Also, think I just had an epiphany. Are all these replies to original posts marked with re: and then RE: RE: RE: etc, the basis of the leftists saying REEEEEE meme?
          Eureka!

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

    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
      identicon
      Your Master, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:08pm

      Re:

      Its not free speech when i can't go and threaten to murder people for their views!

      Communists are the stupidest people on the planet. An entire group of envious losers who are either incapable of, or don't want to earn anything themselves.

      But sharing is caring right?

      Capitalism separates those who are smart and those who are poor. I hope you try your revolution, i want to be able to slaughter righteously.

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

    • identicon
      Cranial screw top method, 1 Jul 2020 @ 6:46am

      Re:

      If you can say it on the street on NYC, someone will probably kill you for saying it.

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

    • identicon
      Martine, 10 Nov 2020 @ 12:16pm

      Re:

      They never said they would allow people to do anything they wanted. The only people that get banned are people who use a huge amount of profanity, to who post pornographic images. they never ever ban anyone because they post liberal comments. aid someone wants to prove to me that they have done so, then show a screenshot of it happening. Just like it is a lie that they charge any fees, or ask for a driver's license. They do neither of those things. All You need to be on Parler is an email.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2020 @ 1:01am

      Re:

      Fuck you leftist nazi pig!

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

    • identicon
      Whocares, 21 Nov 2020 @ 10:57am

      Re:

      You can spot a liberal fairly easy..

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Jason In TN, 29 Jun 2020 @ 12:43pm

    The point of free speech

    Enough hypocrisy to go around?

    Our Marxist friends who are more than happy to tout Twitter's ability to ban and shadow ban speech the left labels as "fascist" are now upset about Parler?

    The left has Facebook and Twitter running plenty of interference. In a competitive market, leftists who state "all of my leftist friends joined Parler to screw with MAGA folks" are essentially stating their purpose was to dilute the platform - not participate. There is a good faith element here, and I saw multiple Parler accounts which were only established to toss out hatred for those who think differently than them.

    The point of free speech is that you can speak, and the Marxists have basically the entire public square. That their open wish is to deny conservatives or moderates such as myself a place to openly discuss our positions is no surprise.

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

    • identicon
      Rocky, 29 Jun 2020 @ 12:47pm

      Re: The point of free speech

      The point of free speech is that you can speak, and the Marxists have basically the entire public square. That their open wish is to deny conservatives or moderates such as myself a place to openly discuss our positions is no surprise.

      Please provide an example of your position that you can't discuss on Facebook and Twitter.

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

      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        icon
        TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:57pm

        Re: Re: The point of free speech

        Facebook constantly censors content, having blocked PragerU and divergent views on COVID-19. And Reddit removes posts that criticize "Black Lives Matter." That's just the tip of the iceberg.

        Time was when "progressives" were staunch free speech advocates. Now you are censors.

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

        • icon
          Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:02pm

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          Facebook constantly censors content, having blocked PragerU and divergent views on COVID-19.

          Interestingly, because people on the left say that Zuck is biased towards conservatives. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3kj3n3/facebook-apparently-thinks-left-wing-bias-is-as-bad-a-prob lem-as-hate-speech

          > Time was when "progressives" were staunch free speech advocates. Now you are censors.

          So you're saying a shop that says "No Shoes, No Shirt, No Mask, No Service" is a censor, because you're describing private actors and not the US government.

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

          • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
            icon
            TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:38pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

            Nice try at deflection and smugness. There's an Iron Law: "You can always tell a 'progressive,' but you can never tell a 'progressive' a single thing. They already think they know everything."

            http://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/11451378/smug-american-liberalism

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

            • icon
              Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:48pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              Nice job on not answering any of my points.

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

              • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                icon
                TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:53pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                Comparing it to a shop sign is dilatory and non-serious on your part, which is oh so typical of today's "progressives" who are demanding censorship of anything you don't like. Liberals used to be the strongest advocates of free speech, and now you are censors. That worm can turn.

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

                • icon
                  Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:14pm

                  You’ve played yourself if you think the censors only exist on the liberal “side”.

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

                  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                    icon
                    TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:26pm

                    Re:

                    Nice dodge. Your far-left newspapers and TV networks routinely lie through their teeth, and now the major social media platforms are censoring the right wing. And you are all for it, not stopping to think that once your wish comes true, that worm can turn overnight.

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

                    • icon
                      Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:35pm

                      Re: Re:

                      That you think the Washington Post is "far-left" shows how far to the right you are.

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

                    • icon
                      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:36pm

                      Your far-left newspapers and TV networks routinely lie through their teeth

                      Counterpoint: Fox News.

                      the major social media platforms are censoring the right wing

                      Counterpoint: Gab, Parler, Voat, and every website for conservative/right wing political news and opinions that have yet to be taken down on orders from “the major social media platforms”.

                      you are all for it

                      If Twitter, YouTube, etc. want to ban hateful speech from their platforms, and conservatives are more likely than liberals to be dinged under those service’s TOS agreements, the issue isn’t with the TOS agreements.

                      once your wish comes true, that worm can turn overnight

                      At which point I’ll be more than happy to find a service that will host my speech. (I left Tumblr without issue once the porn ban went into effect, after all.) Twitter, YouTube, etc. aren’t the alpha and omega of Internet services.

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

                    • icon
                      techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:43pm

                      Re: Re:

                      Your far-left newspapers and TV networks routinely lie through
                      their teeth

                      Unlike Faux News and the yello Cheeto. Really?

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

                • icon
                  Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:38pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                  Comparing it to a shop sign is dilatory and non-serious on your part

                  Comparing getting kicked off of private property to going to jail for printing something the government doesn't like is "dilatory and unserious" if you ask me.

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

                  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                    identicon
                    ArmchairAnalyst, 30 Jun 2020 @ 6:12am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                    Sorry, but I have to disagree with you. When the banning of supposed hate speech includes widely heard opinions and ideas, there is a problem. When social media is shitting people down for saying they think there is a biological difference between men and women, or that surgery can’t change ones sex, or all lives matter is considered racist, or freedom of speech is somehow an alt-right idea, you’ve lost the argument. Parler does have terms of service and community standards and a point system. When you violate the terms, you accrue a point. They do tell you what your violation is. When you reach 20 points, you’re banned. The idea that the are only banning liberals, or they are banning liberals for their ideas - as opposed to violating the community standards, is nonsense.

                    Twitter censored a post from the president stating he would enforce the law. That’s literally his job. He is the head of the US military, and Twitter pretended he was threatening random act of violence. And there has been rampant vote by mail fraud - see the news stories just this week. That’s one they deemed false, but it’s not. Twitter created community standards in which the closely held religious beliefs of every major religion is a violation of standards.

                    The difference for me is that Parler gives anyone a chance to speak their ideas while Twitter keeps looking for ways to silence ideas they don’t agree with. Twitter has community standards that are ideology based. Parler doesn’t. This entire screed of yours is full of lies and innuendos. I still believe you have a right to say what you have.

                    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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 6:43am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                      You don't have to be sorry. You have to be a proud American to post like you post. You're a great writer, and we're happy to see you here. I hope you will come more often.

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

                      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                        identicon
                        Trump, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:30am

                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                        Boyfriends

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

                    • icon
                      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:44am

                      The idea that the are only banning liberals, or they are banning liberals for their ideas - as opposed to violating the community standards, is nonsense.

                      Replace “liberals” with “conservatives” and you can say the same thing about Twitter. That it has community standards aimed at greater inclusiveness — standards meant to encourage the speech of marginalized groups such as trans people — doesn’t mean it has a political bias. And if you want to claim anti-trans speech as the domain of conservatives by saying “banning anti-trans speech is banning conservative speech”? That isn’t a Twitter problem.

                      Twitter censored a post from the president stating he would enforce the law.

                      I didn’t know that “adding speech to a tweet” is “censorship” nowadays. Mind explaining the logic behind that thought process, champ?

                      there has been rampant vote by mail fraud - see the news stories just this week

                      “Rampant” implies a far higher amount of instances of mail fraud than the news has reported. Fraud concerning mail-in ballots is still proportionately rare, and it doesn’t happen at levels that would sway (or have swayed) an election — especially the national presidential election.

                      Twitter created community standards in which the closely held religious beliefs of every major religion is a violation of standards.

                      That says more about the beliefs of those religions than it does about the standards set up by Twitter.

                      Parler gives anyone a chance to speak their ideas while Twitter keeps looking for ways to silence ideas they don’t agree with

                      Twitter admins keep looking for ways to keep the most people on the service. That’s it. If that means setting rules that might shut up a few homophobes and transphobes but let queer people speak without fear of harassment (in large amounts)…well, it is what it is. Don’t like it? Go to Parler; I’m sure its standards don’t have a problem with someone referring to queer people with anti-queer slurs.

                      I still believe you have a right to say what you have.

                      Twitter users have every right to say what they want. And Twitter admins have every right to boot people from the platform if such speech breaks the TOS. Don’t like it? Find a site with a TOS you do like and stay there. You’re not owed, entitled to, or guaranteed a spot on Twitter.

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

                      • identicon
                        Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2020 @ 6:14am

                        Re:

                        "Transphobia" means the belief in scientific facts and reality. You are saying people should be banned merely for stating common-sense facts?

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

                        • icon
                          Uriel-238 (profile), 7 Jul 2020 @ 12:07pm

                          Common sense and facts

                          I've yet to find common sense that is actually common, unless you are talking about those specific things that can be demonstrated with readily available scientific observation. (id east things fall. birds can fly.)

                          As regarding matters of science of sex and sexual identity, I do recommend familiarizing yourself with intersex as well as what gender is before you start asserting scientific facts and reality associated with transphobia.

                          This is your one chance to do some fucking research before you reveal yourself to be a fool and a jerk.

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

                        • icon
                          bhull242 (profile), 13 Jul 2020 @ 2:37pm

                          Re: Re:

                          Are you unfamiliar with the following scientific facts?

                          • Some people with XX chromosomes have male primary and/or secondary sex characteristics.

                          • Some people with XY chromosomes have female primary and/or secondary sex characteristics.

                          • Some people have neither XX nor XY chromosomes but instead XO, XXX, XXY, or XXX chromosomes.

                          • Some people with male primary sex characteristics develop female secondary sex characteristics.

                          • Some people with female primary sex characteristics develop male secondary sex characteristics.

                          • Some people have a mix of male and female primary sex characteristics.

                          • Some people have a mix of male and female secondary sex characteristics.

                          • Some people lack some primary and/or secondary sex characteristics for either gender.

                          • Transgender people (even before any sex-changing or hormone-replacement procedures are performed) have been found to have brains far closer to that of the gender they identify with than the sex they were assigned at birth.

                          • Going through sex-change operations and/or hormone replacement therapy is often recommended for transgender people, and it is virtually always recommended that they present as the gender they identify as and that family and friends try to accept them as they are. This is far better for their mental health in the long-term and does no real harm.

                          How about these bits of reality?

                          • Transgender people have high rates of suicide and depression based either on bullying/harassment for being transgender or on not being allowed to transition.

                          • In most cases, a transwoman presenting as a woman is externally indistinguishable (pre- or post-op) from a ciswoman while they’re dressed.

                          • In most cases, a transman presenting as a man is externally indistinguishable (pre- or post-op) from a cisman while they’re dressed.

                          • Due to the previous two facts, unless you’re their doctor or having sex with them, you should never know whether or not someone presenting as a woman was born male or female.

                          • A number of transgender people today were actually born with partial and/or complete sex organs for both sexes or were of nonexistent or indeterminate sex at birth and were simply assigned a sex at birth arbitrarily by doctors, often with surgery and frequently without the parents’ knowledge or consent. Basically, doctors would make (sometimes educated) guess as to the infant’s sex and would often be wrong.

                          • Sex and gender, while often correlating well, aren’t exactly the same thing.

                          These are all facts. They may not all be “common-sense facts,” but common sense isn’t all that common, anyways, and science and reality don’t really conform very well with common sense to begin with; many absolutely true facts are counterintuitive.

                          As for your definition of “transphobic”, you forgot that one of the comments at issue equated transition treatments with conversion therapy, which is far from being a scientific fact, reality, or a common-sense fact. It’s also not exactly borderline.

                          But let’s set that all aside for a moment. You ask whether or not we’re saying people should be banned from a privately-owned platform like Twitter by the owners of said platform for making such comments. That’s not necessarily what is being said. We’re saying that corporations like Twitter should absolutely have the right to ban people for making such comments regardless of whether we personally would do so, and that those people are not entitled to be able to say whatever they want on a privately-owned platform like Twitter, certainly not without consequence. There’s also the fact that it’s hardly surprising that people would be banned for making such comments, and I’m not all that sympathetic to them, but that’s separate. The point is that if you don’t like it, show your lack of support by using a different platform or by simply not using Twitter.

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

                          • identicon
                            Dafuqusay, 15 Sep 2020 @ 8:51am

                            Re: Re: Re:

                            Some...
                            You keep mentioning "Some"
                            Some like a mean, or an average or a mode? What is this "some" you speak of.

                            Firstly let's talk intersex. By definition intersex people are approximately 1.7% of the population.

                            That's not enough for a classical study to rule this out as anything more than genetic aberration. It certainly doesent classify to be "some" but rather an extreme few.

                            Since we classify creatures by similar traits and not by genetic defects from a taxonomy perspective the aberration of a population of 1.7% would be nothing more than genetic lottery. And would not classify a species to have a new gender. Any more than a 7 legged spider to be a new species.

                            How you "present" yourself to the world does not and cannot change this fact of nature.

                            You are picking a tiny subset of a species and saying "ah ha I have found a new gender because this monkey was born without a penis."

                            When all you have done is point out gene expression.
                            Unless you want to argue that genetics is completly wrong.

                            When you average out 2% of the population as a margin of error you have 2 distinct genders. With 2 unique gene expression, and organ sets. Along with bone density, muscle mass, and cognitive abilities even before the child is introduced to society.

                            Maybe you should learn about how genes work before you claim there are 70+ genders.

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

                            • icon
                              bhull242 (profile), 15 Sep 2020 @ 3:02pm

                              Re: Re: Re: Re:

                              1. I never claimed anything about the number of genders at all, only that which gender a given individual is isn’t always clear cut. I certainly never claimed 70+ genders. (I’m not saying there aren’t, either; the exact number is immaterial to my argument.)

                              2. “Some” means “there exists” in logic and statistics. That they exist among humans necessarily means that, biologically speaking, not every human fits neatly into exactly one of two sexes, let alone genders (there’s a difference). I was disproving an absolute statement; any number of counterexamples would suffice.

                              3. We’re not talking about classifications of species, though I should point out that there is no strict definition for what makes two organisms the same species or not. There are organisms in the same species unable to reproduce with each other but able to reproduce with some others, while others where they are different species but are able to produce fertile offspring together. Besides, we don’t classify humans the same way we do other organisms; no other species has an equivalent to race or religion that we can tell from which we can distinguish individual groups of the same species.

                              4. My point was that determining the gender of a given individual, especially at birth, isn’t always easy. It’s not black and white. You may consider it a “rounding error”, but given the sheer size of the population, 1.6% is actually quite a few people.

                              5. Even outside of intersex individuals and transgender individuals, there are a number of cisgender, nonintersex females who appear fairly masculine and cisgender, nonintersex males who appear fairly feminine. That’s not even getting into androgynous individuals. Why do I bring them up? Because it means, as a practical matter, identifying someone’s birth sex by appearance is very error-prone. So basically, why do you care if their identity differs from their assigned sex at birth? How would you even know for sure?

                              At any rate, my main point wasn’t even all that. Whether or not Twitter made the right call here in our opinions is immaterial to the point I and others were focusing on: Twitter has the legal right to make whatever decision they want when it comes to moderation.

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

                    • identicon
                      dunce, 30 Jun 2020 @ 9:13am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                      thanks for being cogent and at length.

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

                    • identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2020 @ 1:08pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                      Explain how I was banned from Parler WITHOUT posting a damn thing, because I sure didn't receive a reason from Parler!

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

                    • identicon
                      Name, 14 Nov 2020 @ 9:04pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                      Please provide links to the 'rampant vote by mail fraud' new stories you mention, because my head is in the sand and I have not seen them.
                      Unlike most people, I can read and judge for myself based on the merits of the news stories.

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

          • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
            identicon
            Bob dole, 30 Jun 2020 @ 6:26pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

            This is really funny.

            You are saying censorship based on ideology is a myth - I try to read this thread and for a while see ONLY your comments - condemning an invisible person.

            Eventually I see your debate opponent is hidden. I expand his comments - partisan, maybe, but no profanity much less random epithets.

            It literally got flagged because someone (you? Author?) disagreed.

            So you want to revise your position or are you a professional liar?

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

            • icon
              Toom1275 (profile), 30 Jun 2020 @ 8:18pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              Did it really not occur to you that gaslighting and lying about the very thread you're posting in, where all it takes to debunk your false narrative is reading anything that surrounds your disingenuous post, is a massively stupid and obvious bad-faith tactic?

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

            • icon
              bhull242 (profile), 1 Jul 2020 @ 11:44am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              It took you that long to realize you could actually see the hidden comments? And how is that censorship? If you can still see the content, and no one has been punished by the government for it, it hasn’t been censored.

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

        • icon
          Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:04pm

          Facebook constantly censors content

          Is Facebook stopping people from posting conspiracy theories about COVID-19 on Twitter or Mastodon or anywhere else? If not, it ain’t censorship. Facebook has an absolute right to moderate speech — and that includes speech such as, oh I’unno, conspiracy theories about COVID-19 that could lead to further erosion of public health.

          You’re free to say whatever you want. But you can’t make others listen. And you sure as shit can’t (and shouldn’t be able to) make others host your speech. Don’t like it? Start your own Gab or Voat or Parler or 8chan.

          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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:12pm

            Re:

            Disregarding the fact they're using the fucking WHO guidelines - an organization that was lead by a communist terrorist until recently, both FB, Twitter and others have made coordinated deplatforming in several instances. Also, they actually can't moderate their content with political bias and enjoy their special protections under the decency communications act. Sigh, i remember the left was staunch free speech proponents. Now it's corporate bootlicker like you

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

            • icon
              Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:15pm

              Re: Re:

              That you think WHO is "lead by a communist terrorist" shows much about how seriously we should take you.

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

              • icon
                YouthGoneBy (profile), 30 Jun 2020 @ 3:11pm

                Re: Re: Re:

                Terrorist may be a stretch but he certainly is, or at least was, a communist. The man was from the Tigray province, which was the support base for the communist party up until I believe 1995. He was in government as early as 1991, so to say he was not a communist is simply not accurate.

                That communist party saw major financing from the Chinese communist party. That's not necessarily damning, nations help like-minded nations all the time.

                I'm only replying to point out that the man was in fact a communist, and a member of a communist party with financial ties to China, and then as head of the WHO certainly seemingly, and I stress seemingly, softened any pandemic related press releases with China in mind.

                We could also get into WHO treatment of places like Hong Kong and Taiwan. So, I think having a rational discussion about the mans motives is not out of the question. It's natural.

                For my part I'm against Tedros. Not because of his politics, but because of the office he holds. States rights is where I stand in all things, and I do not believe that organizations like the UN and WHO can coexist with national identity. It has to be one or the other, and I choose national identity.

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

                • icon
                  Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 7 Jul 2020 @ 7:38am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  "It has to be one or the other, and I choose national identity."

                  You were doing so well up until then. Fact of the matter is that when your options are a bunch of turds spray-painted in different colors the answer should never be "Always turd A because red, white and blue is my color".

                  You should be looking - at worst - for the source which after a modicum of critical thinking provides the least bad advice. That may still be a less malodorous turd, granted, but every little bit counts when the time comes where you have to eat your selected offer.

                  I also don't trust the WHO much when it comes to China or Taiwan but they are - unfortunately - still a better source of information than anything coming out of the white house.

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

                • icon
                  Uriel-238 (profile), 7 Jul 2020 @ 12:24pm

                  communist = terrorist?

                  It's bad enough that terrorist has become common nomenclature for designated acceptable targets for neutralization, like zombie.

                  And yes, there is the old Cold War presumption that the only good Red is a dead Red. We're past the Cold War now. The Soviet Union disbanded. They're not very big on Communism now.

                  But at what point is the ideology of Communism worth shooting someone over? At what point does communism equate to terrorism?

                  (I should point out terrorism traditionally includes military violence against civilians, such as the WWI rail-gun attacks on Paris, or the German V2 attacks on London, or US targeted killings throughout the late 20th century and the drone strikes continuing to this day. I'm not sure why our drone strikes are not regarded as terrorism, except that the US is doing it and we want that to be okay. It's totally not okay.)

                  Getting back to the specifics, did Tedros Adhanom engage in ideological violence against civilians, say when he was Minister of Health of Ethiopia? What terrorism did he do that qualifies him as a terrorist?

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

            • icon
              Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:18pm

              they actually can't moderate their content with political bias and enjoy their special protections under the decency communications act

              Two things.

              1. It’s the “Communications Decency Act”, and with the sole exception of 47 U.S.C. § 230, the entire CDA was rendered unconstitutional.

              2. Interactive computer services can moderate according to political bias and retain 230 protections; show us exactly where the law says otherwise.

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

            • icon
              That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:22pm

              Re: Re:

              Also, they actually can't moderate their content with political bias and enjoy their special protections under the decency communications act.

              Hello! You've Been Referred Here Because You're Wrong About Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act.

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

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:49pm

              Re: Re:

              both FB, Twitter and others have made coordinated deplatforming in several instances.

              And your point is?

              Alex Jones has been kicked off every major platform, but he still has his own platform from which to spew his crazy ideas, and nobody is stopping him from doing that. And anybody who wants to "follow" him can do so on his own site!

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

              • identicon
                Anonymous Patriot, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:23pm

                Re: Re: Re:

                and nobody is stopping him from doing that.

                Well, except for Lenny Pozner and his lawyers.

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

              • identicon
                John, 13 Nov 2020 @ 1:47pm

                Re: Re: Re:

                Very true. Similar to the fact that any homosexual couple can bake their own wedding cake. Or that anyone who "identifies" as a member of the opposite sex can simply go outside and pee behind the bushes instead of having a department-store being forced to let them use the lavatory of their choice. Similarly, why, for example should a private men's club be forced to allow women to become members, or even Blacks for that matter, just because it might inhibit their ability to "network" in business? They could simply go and start their own private clubs. I find it amusing that one, an obvious liberal/progressive, has no problem with government intervention into a private business when it fits their agenda, but oh so vocally rush to its defense in this case.

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

                • icon
                  Uriel-238 (profile), 13 Nov 2020 @ 2:24pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Likelihood this is sincere (not parody): 0.9997/1

                  Poe factor: 4

                  Are you really arguing against public accommodations? Or comparing public accommodations to accommodation of speech on a given forum.

                  I was recently reminded our conservative colleagues are also glad to have black kids jailed for posting threatening Rap lyrics on their Facebook page, or punishing Arab boys who bring their self-made electric clock to school, because it might be a bomb.

                  Hate speech is AOK but boobs, digital timers and violent rap lyrics are not?

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

          • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
            identicon
            Anonymous Patriot, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:30pm

            Re:

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

            • identicon
              Anonymous Patriot, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:32pm

              Re: Re:

              See here.

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

              • icon
                Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:43pm

                Wow, it’s almost as if corporations don’t want to do business with people those corporations consider toxic. Imagine that~.

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

                • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                  identicon
                  Anonymous Patriot, 30 Jun 2020 @ 2:56pm

                  Re:

                  Hopefully you'll become "toxic" and de-platformed, permanently disemployed and de-banked by the monopolies.

                  Banks and payment processors, who've been given a monopoly on the issuance of unbacked credit, should be required to serve any lawful customer.

                  The same goes for Internet infrastructure companies who provide DNS, anti-DDoS, cloud hosting and the like.

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

        • icon
          bhull242 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:40pm

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          I don’t think there’s any serious debate on COVID-19 beyond when, where, and how to reopen. Any “divergent views” outside of that are almost certainly wild conspiracy theories, made out of ignorance, quack science, or wishful thinking.

          I also don’t think Facebook “blocks” users; it bans them.

          As for “free speech”, there’s a difference between supporting FA free speech and free speech on privately-owned public platforms. It’s also not censoring to kick you off my lawn when you’re saying something I don’t like.

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

          • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
            icon
            TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:40pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

            Ah yes, there's "no serious debate," because "progressives" define anything that they don't agree with as "not serious." Nice trick.

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

            • identicon
              Rocky, 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:04pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              So, please present us with examples of divergent views on COVID-19 that has been removed by Facebook.

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

              • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                icon
                TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:28pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                Facebook tossed a good friend of mine for a month for linking to a peer-reviewed, double-blind study with a control group showing the ineffectiveness of masks. Your kind loves censorship, even of carefully documented, scientific studies. It's pathetic.

                https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

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

                • icon
                  Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:37pm

                  Facebook tossed a good friend of mine for a month for linking to a peer-reviewed, double-blind study with a control group showing the ineffectiveness of masks.

                  So what? Facebook has that right.

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

                  • icon
                    That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:46pm

                    Re:

                    It not only has that right it was right to do so because that 'study' does not say what they think it does, and as such it could have resulted in people making dangerously stupid/ill-informed decisions that could get them and/or those around them infected or killed.

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

                • identicon
                  steell, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:44pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                  From your link: "Conclusions This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. "

                  A study comparing cloth masks to medical masks determines that medical masks are more effective. Imagine that.

                  You said "Facebook tossed a good friend of mine for a month for linking to a peer-reviewed, double-blind study with a control group showing the ineffectiveness of masks."
                  Lie much?

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

                • icon
                  techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:47pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                  https://twitter.com/richdavisphd/status/1276629360212979712

                  No study but it should be obvious that any droplet stopped will help the cause (as will not having to see some people's ugly mug).

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

                • identicon
                  Rocky, 30 Jun 2020 @ 12:59am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                  As others have pointed out the study shows that medical masks are better than cloth masks in protecting health workers from getting infected.

                  Another thing that infection specialists, doctors and health-care workers in general have pointed out, its that the primary reason for using a mask is not to protected the wearer - it's to protect the people around them.

                  If your buddy (and you considering the language you used) made a post on Facebook saying that masks are ineffective based on this study your posts deserve to be removed without question.

                  So your "divergent view of COVID-19" turns out to be uninformed hogwash that promulgates an idea that will put people in danger.

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

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2020 @ 6:26am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                  I don't think you or your friend read that study. It talks about the effectiveness of cloth masks, not all masks. And it even has an updated link regarding COVID-19 related shortages of PPE and says that cloth masks aren't as good as surgical masks or respirators but still better than nothing.

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

            • icon
              bhull242 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:19pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              No, I mean that no health experts have any honest disagreements about it that are being censored. Also, that study doesn’t say what you claim it does. That was the problem.

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

        • icon
          Toom1275 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:50pm

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          divergent views on COVID-19.

          Translation: Pseudo/antiscientific bullshit

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

          • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
            icon
            TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:42pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

            Got it. Anything "progressives" don't agree with is "pseudo/antiscientific bullshit." Neat trick there. LOL

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

            • icon
              Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:46pm

              Give us an example of a “divergent” view on COVID-19 that isn’t rooted in pseudoscience/anti-science ideology, then.

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

              • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                icon
                TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:58pm

                Re:

                Okey doke, then. Speaking of science, how about a peer-reviewed, double-blind study of 1,600 health care workers in high-risk units in 14 hospitals, showing that the common cloth masks block only 3% of particles, and that surgical masks only block 44%?

                Sorry, "progressive," but your mandatory masks do NOTHING to stop the spread of the virus. You couldn't care less about science. This is entirely about your politics and your insatiable need to engage in self-righteous virtue signaling.

                Now, I'm sure you will dump on the study. Why? The Iron Law: "You can always tell a 'progressive,' but you can never tell a 'progressive' a single thing. They think they know everything."

                https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

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

                • icon
                  Uriel-238 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:12pm

                  "Masks don't work"

                  But what about <looks at a websearch> this?
                  Do you judge all identity groups as uniform monoliths the way you do progressives? That's pretty pathetic for an iron law.

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

                • icon
                  Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:15pm

                  your mandatory masks do NOTHING to stop the spread of the virus

                  Seems like they do 3% more to stop the spread than not wearing a mask.

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

                  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                    icon
                    TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:21pm

                    Re:

                    Too diligent to actually read the study, I see. It found that cloth masks were worse than wearing nothing at all. Reading is fundamental, lazy "progressive." LOL

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

                    • icon
                      That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:42pm

                      Re: Re:

                      It found that cloth masks were worse than wearing nothing at all.

                      Speaking of not reading the study... no, it didn't, because there was no no-mask control group, something you would have known had you bothered to even read the abstract.

                      Intervention Hospital wards were randomised to: medical masks, cloth masks or a control group (usual practice, which included mask wearing). Participants used the mask on every shift for 4 consecutive weeks.

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

                      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                        icon
                        TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:05pm

                        Re: Re: Re:

                        Actually, yes there was a control arm. Apparently, as a "progressive," your ADD gets in the way. Oh ye of a limited attention span. No wonder you don't actually know anything. LOL

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

                        • icon
                          Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:10pm

                          yes there was a control arm

                          Did the control arm go maskless?

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

                          • icon
                            That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:53pm

                            Re:

                            Unless they had a second control group not mentioned in the abstract no, no they did not, as the abstract makes explicitly clear that the control group wore masks.

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

                            • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                              icon
                              TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:57pm

                              Re: Re:

                              No it didn't, but you are a "progressive," so why not lie? It's what you people do. LOL

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

                              • icon
                                That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:34pm

                                Re: Re: Re:

                                I get by now that you're a hypocritical ass who thinks that schoolyard level insults are making other people look bad, but just a tip for the future, if you're going to lie it helps if the refutation to that lie isn't literally a few comments above.

                                Once more from the abstract of the study in question:

                                Intervention Hospital wards were randomised to: medical masks, cloth masks or a control group (usual practice, which included mask wearing). Participants used the mask on every shift for 4 consecutive weeks.

                                Digging into the study a little more...

                                In the control arm, 170/458 (37%) used medical masks, 38/458 (8%) used cloth masks, and 245/458 (53%) used a combination of both medical and cloth masks during the study period. The remaining 1% either reported using a N95 respirator (n=3) or did not use any masks (n=2).

                                ...

                                It is also unknown whether the rates of infection observed in the cloth mask arm are the same or higher than in HCWs who do not wear a mask, as almost all participants in the control arm used a mask.

                                ...

                                Another limitation of this study is the lack of a no-mask control group and the high use of masks in the controls, which makes interpretation of the results more difficult.

                                And in a more recent response to questions regarding how the study might apply to COVID concerns:

                                Health workers are asking us if they should wear no mask at all if cloth masks are the only option. Our research does not condone health workers working unprotected. We recommend that health workers should not work during the COVID-19 pandemic without respiratory protection as a matter of work health and safety.

                                I'd say I look forward to your admission that you were wrong and an apology for calling me a liar, but as your past responses have indicated that that's almost certainly beyond you I suppose I'll take the entertainment provided from yet more of the childish name-calling that seems to be your default response instead.

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

                              • icon
                                techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:49pm

                                Re: Re: Re:

                                Keep LOLing, it only shows you're far too stupid to be that smug. Nothing new for a "conservative", though, I grant you that.

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

                        • icon
                          bhull242 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:25pm

                          Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          I sense great projection in this one…

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

                        • identicon
                          Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:38pm

                          Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          "yes there was a control arm"

                          As he said, you stupid maggot. You can't even read the comments you're responding to, let alone the study you cited.

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

                    • icon
                      blademan9999 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:12pm

                      Re: Re:

                      The writers of the study itself noted in a response to people asking if/how it applied to COVID "Health workers are asking us if they should wear no mask at all if cloth masks are the only option. Our research does not condone health workers working unprotected."

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

                    • identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:36pm

                      Re: Re:

                      "It found that cloth masks were worse than wearing nothing at all. "

                      Wrong, you lying moron.

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

                • icon
                  Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:16pm

                  Re: Re:

                  Of course, that's in hospital settings, not in quotidian outdoor settings.

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

                  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                    icon
                    TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:19pm

                    Re: Re: Re:

                    Yeah, right. They don't work in high-risk hospital settings, but they work in grocery stores. LOL. "Progressive" "logic" on display.

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

                    • icon
                      Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:34pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      The study was done in 2015, way before the COVID-19 pandemic. Maybe you should read the update before you say–as you are wont to do–"ME SMART! PROGRESSIVES R DUM-DUMS!!!"

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

                      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                        icon
                        TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:09pm

                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                        Apparently you are a typical "progressive" who is too scattered and too lazy to have read the update this spring. Please tell us that you don't have an occupation where anyone ever has to depend on you. LOL

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

                        • icon
                          bhull242 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:24pm

                          Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          Apparently, you can’t be bothered to read the comment you’re responding to, which links to the update.

                          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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:41pm

                          Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          You are a profoundly stupid maggot. Please do the world a favor and get hit by a truck.

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

                • icon
                  That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:35pm

                  Re: Re:

                  'Less effective than alternatives' does not mean 'not effective at all', and as the study itself noted there was no 'no mask' control group to compare with. In addition as the writers of the study itself noted in a response to people asking if/how it applied to COVID 'Health workers are asking us if they should wear no mask at all if cloth masks are the only option. Our research does not condone health workers working unprotected.', which rather conflicts with the idea that masks don't do any good if you're going to point to them as a source.

                  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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:34pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              Got it ... you're a dishonest imbecile, a maggot, and a s**tstain on humanity. Please do not ever wear a mask.

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

        • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
          identicon
          BillOfRights, 30 Jun 2020 @ 10:04am

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          Right. Just look your post and the one before it. They were flagged and I see nothing derogatory, fake, racist, hatefilled, etc. in it. Just someone f'ing with ya or butt hurt.

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

        • icon
          Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 7 Jul 2020 @ 7:24am

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          "Facebook constantly censors content, having blocked PragerU and divergent views on COVID-19."

          So wait, proven lies which if believed and acted upon constitute lethal danger to anyone reading it is now comparable to a measured discourse on family values and economics in your book?

          "And Reddit removes posts that criticize "Black Lives Matter.""

          Calling black people "N_ggers", implying that they're all somehow "less" than white people, or discussing George Floyd as a "criminal" who deserved death when in fact, he was not, **is not "criticizing" Black Lives Matter.
          I realize the difference may be lost to you.

          "Time was when "progressives" were staunch free speech advocates."

          Time was when a self-styled "conservative" was something other than a repetitively spamming shit-posting racist or bigot. You are still completely free to start your own platform where you can discuss just how much <insert ethnic or transgender minority> sucks. But not even way back when did "progressives" ever let you do that in their own living rooms.

          Facebook has catered to conservative values to the point where it's now harder for liberals to debate seriously than it is for the "alt-right" to sneak in a few implications about the inferiority of <minority scapegoat>...but that's just not good enough for the guys who are still miffed that they can't use someone else's platform to organize their next cross-burning.

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

      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        icon
        TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:01pm

        Re: Re: The point of free speech

        Also, Facebook immediately deletes any link to the Unz Review. Doesn't matter what the link discusses. Lefties cannot handle divergence.

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

        • identicon
          Chris, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:06pm

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          Facebook also blocks BOFA. Absolutely shameful.

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

        • icon
          Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:08pm

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:14pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

            a 2 year old article from Vice, a regressive left propaganda site that has been caught peddling fake news on multiple occasions? Seems legit

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

            • icon
              Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:16pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              says a guy who thinks the leader of the WHO is a "communist terrorist". You're a whackjob.

              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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:27pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                Ok sure, facts makes you a wackjob? You're just plain ignorant. He was a member of an oppressive regime for a party which is on the etheopian terrorist list

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

                • icon
                  Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:33pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                  Donald Trump makes terroristic threats on twitter all the time. And?

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

                  • icon
                    Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:35pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                    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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:19pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                      Any convictions? No? Then what use is that? Just some journalists making unsubstantiated claims. The fact that the very same people have no issue fuelling racial tension by lying about police brutality towards black people, something that has literally gotten people killed, makes it all the more ridiculous

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

                      • icon
                        Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:27pm

                        lying about police brutality towards black people

                        The video of George Floyd didn’t lie, unless you think he deserved to die over using a fake $20 bill that he may not have even known was fake and therefore the lethal use of force was wholly justified.

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

                        • icon
                          Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:32pm

                          Re:

                          Forget it Stephen. The Anonymous Coward doesn't see black people as people.

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

                        • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                          icon
                          TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:59pm

                          Re:

                          Floyd was a COVID-infected, sickle-cell anemic, heart disease ridden heroin addict, drunk, high, and on meth. Not that "progressives" ever noticed. LOL

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

                          • icon
                            Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:47pm

                            Please provide proof that at the time of his death, George Floyd was infected with COVID-19 and under the influence of drugs. Please also provide a reasoned opinion as to why any of what you said, regardless of whether it’s true, justifies his being murdered by a police officer for nothing more than using a fake $20 bill.

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

                            • identicon
                              Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:58am

                              Re:

                              The one time I handed over a fake note to pay for something, the store refunded me for confiscating it, and gave me an apology, after they checked their CCTV and saw me getting it out of the machine on their own premises.

                              Almost like there's some kind of notable difference between me and Floyd...

                              notes the lack of melanin

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

                          • icon
                            bhull242 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:27pm

                            Re: Re:

                            [citation needed], and how would that change anything?

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

                          • icon
                            techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:51pm

                            Re: Re:

                            So, he should have better worn a mask?

                            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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:45pm

                            Re: Re:

                            You're an evil racist sack of pus who really doesn't deserve to live.

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

                  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                    icon
                    TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:09pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                    What terroristic threats got your panties in a twist, poor "progressive" scaredy cat? LOL

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

              • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                icon
                TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:43pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

                Thanks much, China! LOL

                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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:44pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              You've been caught lying with every breath, you stupid right wing maggot. Nothing legitimate about you scum.

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

        • identicon
          Rocky, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:43pm

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          Decent people don't like antisemitism, holocaust denial and white supremacy - which Unz Review and Ron Unz stands for. All those topics are against Facebook's TOS, so why would they allow links to such material on their platform?

          It's not about divergent viewpoints, it's about assholes thinking they are entitled to use others platform to spread their message of hate - and they have a complete meltdown when they discover that they don't.

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

          • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
            icon
            TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:45pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

            Some stuff on Unz is contemptible, but it shouldn't be banned. The vast majority of their material is not. You "progressives" have become pathetic, fragile, and full of hatred.

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

            • icon
              Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:47pm

              Some stuff on Unz is contemptible, but it shouldn't be banned.

              You’re free to tell Facebook that. They’re free to ignore you. Facebook admins get to decide what is and isn’t acceptable on Facebook; if that includes sites you enjoy, well, tough titties.

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

              • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                icon
                TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:52pm

                Re:

                I get it. You're a fragile "progressive" who cannot stand opposing views, and supports censorship. You'd be best off being careful what you wish for, because once censorship becomes accepted, that worm can turn very quickly.

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

                • icon
                  Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:19pm

                  You're a fragile "progressive" who cannot stand opposing views, and supports censorship.

                  If I supported censorship, I’d call for whoever hosts Unz Review to obliterate the site from the Internet. I’m not.

                  Facebook admins have every right to moderate what speech can and cannot appear on Facebook. You can disagree with those decisions; lots of people will at some point. But neither you nor the federal government can force Facebook to host speech its owners/operators don’t want to host. Deal with it.

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

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:22pm

                  Re: Re:

                  Extreme and distasteful content causes users to leave, and Facebook and Twitter do not want to become the next 8chan, so they remove content that would likely cause people to leave their service. Their moderation is driven by how to they keep the largest user base rather than politics.

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

                • icon
                  bhull242 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:36pm

                  Re: Re:

                  I think you’re missing the point. Facebook is free to remove or leave up whatever 3rd-party content it wants (outside of the DMCA, FOSTA, and federal criminal laws). That means I support Facebook’s right to remove content it finds objectionable whether I like it or not along with its right to not remove content it doesn’t mind as much regardless of whether I like it or not. Left, right, or neither, it doesn’t matter.

                  Now, that’s not to say that I don’t have my own opinions on individual cases of Facebook moderation decisions, but I support their legal right to do so regardless and recognize that them making a lot of mistakes is inevitable when operating on such a scale and dealing with highly subjective decisions that need to be made.

                  So tell me, how is that being “fragile”?

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

            • identicon
              Rocky, 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:22pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              Some stuff on Unz is contemptible, but it shouldn't be banned.

              Why? Facebook's platform, their rules. Is this difficult to grasp somehow?

              The vast majority of their material is not. You "progressives" have become pathetic, fragile, and full of hatred.

              So why is it that you are having a meltdown about how unfair it is that Facebook doesn't want to link to a site containing antisemitism and white supremacy propaganda? Do you think those viewpoints deserve equal treatment with other more main-steam topics?

              And who is it really that "have become pathetic, fragile, and full of hatred"? It's usually those who scream how oppressed they are because they aren't allowed to use someones private property to carry their message.

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

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:14pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              "You "progressives" have become pathetic, fragile, and full of hatred."

              Please explain to me how you differ from your image of "progressives" in this regard.

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

            • icon
              techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:52pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              You "progressives" have become pathetic, fragile, and full of
              hatred.

              You conservative cunts started it. Tough luck.

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

        • icon
          Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 7 Jul 2020 @ 7:57am

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          "Also, Facebook immediately deletes any link to the Unz Review. Doesn't matter what the link discusses. Lefties cannot handle divergence."

          I have a hard time imagining any moderately sane person, left or right wing who'd allow people to use his personal property as a platform to post directions to a direct white supremacy site.

          But hey, do go on and keep demonstrating how we "lefties" apparently understand the concept of PRIVATE PROPERTY better than you "self-styled conservatives".

          It's not our fault the alt-right alternatives to Facebook and Twitter turned into sewers only the most hardened neo-nazis still bother visiting. If you've shat down your own living room to the point where no one wants to visit no one else owes you right of hospitality just because you want a fresh floor to take a dump on.

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

      • identicon
        RandomPerson, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:59pm

        Re: Re: The point of free speech

        I'll give you a great example - if you post on twitter saying that there are only 2 sexes and gender identity disorder is a mental illness, you're against their rules and bannable. Now you may not agree with that position, but this is an example of a political/ideological issue that is codified within twitter rules.

        If you post that children should not be taught about gender identity and asked if they would prefer to get hormones without the parent's consent, that can be against their TOS as well. This is always going to be a problem and it 100% comes down to the views of the moderator on whether that is hate speech or science based discourse on best policy.

        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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:49pm

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          You're lying, as all right wingers do incessantly.

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

      • identicon
        dunce, 30 Jun 2020 @ 9:05am

        Re: Re: The point of free speech

        the article does not provide any examples of the censored speech.

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

      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        identicon
        SharpShtik, 30 Jun 2020 @ 9:55am

        Re: Re: The point of free speech

        A few examples of facts that social(ist) media bans:

        • ANTIFA are communists who defame everyone left of center as "fascist" (i.e., national socialists) as an excuse to commit crimes against Americans
        • BLM is run by racist communists
        • Proud Boys defend freedom against Democrats trying to destroy freedom like leftists do worldwide
        • Democrats are trying to take dictatorial control by controlling speech, so that only leftist (propaganda) speech is allowed and non-leftists are shunned by government, businesses run by leftists, etc.
        • All lives matter
        • Democrats (due to their personal politics (immoral, self-entitled, disrespectful of other's rights, etc.) commit nearly all crime, as confirmed by multiple studies, including studies based on convict admissions
        • Black Democrats commit ~50% of crime
        • there is no systemic racism against minorities
        • The primary source of racism comes from Democrats, especially minority Democrats
        • White racism is so non-existent the FBI immediately sent 15 agents to investigate a garage door pull hoaxed as a "noose"
        • Democrats hate police because Democrats commit nearly all crime
        • Democrats have criminal minds, believing property should be taken from people for redistribution (force, deprivation of rights/freedom), whereas honest people promote charity (freedom)
        • Democrats are whipping minority Democrats into a frenzy with propaganda to try to stem the flow of minorities to the Republican Party and freedom movement
        • Democrat Party is the party of slavery

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

      • identicon
        Nomon, 2 Oct 2020 @ 6:17am

        Re: Re: The point of free speech

        You can't discuss any alternative treatment for Covid. Every Post I've made on FB is censured. You can't discuss anything about Biden's Mental health, It too is scrubbed by them.

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

        • icon
          bhull242 (profile), 3 Oct 2020 @ 5:17pm

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          You can't discuss any alternative treatment for Covid. Every Post I've made on FB is censured.

          Considering all the misinformation spreading around about COVID-19, that’s hardly surprising. Even if some posts that are relatively benign are removed in the process, that’s hardly surprising given the scale at which FB operates.

          You can't discuss anything about Biden's Mental health, It too is scrubbed by them.

          Unless I see the posts in question, I can’t really say much on this one. That said, I don’t see any reason why Biden’s mental health is bad to begin with.

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

      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        identicon
        Mark, 7 Nov 2020 @ 6:27pm

        Re: Re: The point of free speech

        Try this: Faggots and liars are reprobates that are going to hell. Human life starts at conception and abortion is murder.

        Let's see these truths go viral on FascistBook and Twittles.

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

        • icon
          bhull242 (profile), 10 Nov 2020 @ 5:41am

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          Those aren’t truths. At best, they’re opinions.

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

          • icon
            Uriel-238 (profile), 10 Nov 2020 @ 12:02pm

            Opinions.

            The first statement is religious hate speech. That's like any other hate speech, except that since it's based on Christianity, and within the doctrine of the church that has capture the Republican party (and the doctrine of the Federalist Society), our current federal government is trying to carve out exceptions for it.

            The second statement is a misstatement. Spermatozoa and ova are human life before conception. But appointing personhood at conception raises a tuckfun of moral and philosophical issues that our religious friends don't want to think about.

            I won't get into them here because a comprehensive explanation would take books, let alone pages.

            But I will get to what is on-brand for our conservative colleagues: 30% of abortions in the US are provided to Americans who do not believe in abortion access. And these patients feel their own abortion is justified, even when it's voluntary, but cannot use that to extend empathy to other Americans.

            Regardless, Mark's examples are banal and despite great effort do not go viral on Facebook or Twitter. A lot of people express these notions and a whole lot of fellow social media users fail to care.

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

    • icon
      Mike Masnick (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 12:50pm

      Re: The point of free speech

      Our Marxist friends who are more than happy to tout Twitter's ability to ban and shadow ban speech the left labels as "fascist" are now upset about Parler?

      No one's upset about Parler banning people. Everyone finds it hilarious, because it shows how bullshit their claims were.

      There is a good faith element here

      Oh, so you're admitting that it's okay to ban bad faith actors from any platform? Good to know.

      and the Marxists have basically the entire public square

      What the fuck are you on about? I don't know of any "marxists" and certainly none that control "the entire public square" (or even part of it).

      That their open wish is to deny conservatives or moderates such as myself a place to openly discuss our positions is no surprise.

      "Open wish"? Can you point to where these so-called Marxists have said that they want to deny "moderates" a place to "openly discuss" positions? Because it's never happened.

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

      • icon
        Wendy Cockcroft (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:06pm

        Re: Re: The point of free speech

        Now, now, Mike, everyone knows that anyone who doesn't worship at the altar of Trump Almighty is a commie pinko Marxist traitor to America.

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

      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        identicon
        Thiccboi, 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:09pm

        Re: Re: The point of free speech

        Obviously they don't openly say it, but using terms like"hate" you can basically ban everyone you don't like. Ironically today this just happened with Trump's major subreddit and twitch channel.

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

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:18pm

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          Left leaning reddits such as chaotraphouse were also removed.

          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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:47pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

            All of reddit is left leaning. They couldn't handle one pro-Trump sub that was pretty significant in getting him elected, which is the real reason everything is being removed.

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

            • icon
              Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:00pm

              All of reddit is left leaning.

              [citation needed]

              They couldn't handle one pro-Trump sub that was pretty significant in getting him elected, which is the real reason everything is being removed.

              Then explain why the subreddit for Chapo Trap House, a left-leaning podcast, was banned — y’know, for reasons other than supporting violence against elected officials and doxxing people (among other such things). And I’ll remind you that users of T_D made similar posts during that subreddit’s lifetime, which explains why the subreddit was quarantined well before its deletion.

              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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:09pm

                Re:

                Because they needed to have one leftwing example to say 'see guys, totally no bias here'. Meanwhile, there are numerous left leaning subs that breaks the rules daily with no repercussions. This is just to trick the low IQ people and it looks like it worked

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

                • icon
                  Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:12pm

                  Re: Re:

                  Meanwhile, there are numerous left leaning subs that breaks the rules daily with no repercussions.

                  Name 5 of 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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:18pm

                    Re: Re: Re:

                    r/politics, any antifascist subreddit. If you're trying to deny this you're either woefully ignorant or lying. This has been well documented by the likes of Tim Poole in many videos. Do your own research

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

                    • icon
                      Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:25pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      "Tim Poole"? Do you mean this guy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Pool

                      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:28pm

                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                        Yes. Good job, you can type a name in Google!

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

                    • identicon
                      Michael, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:34pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      /r/politics is definitely left-leaning, but the mods are right-wing and you have zero examples of anyone on that sub "breaking the rules daily with no repercussions.

                      "Do your own research" is what people with dumb arguments they can't support say.

                      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:39pm

                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                        Mods are right wing? LMAO

                        https://banks.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=1573

                        Lots of links in that one. Oh and what truly dumb people do is to demand sources for well documented facts only so they can dismiss those sources using ad hominem in order to derail the discussion. That's the problem when you're on the side that's against reality. We have numerous Project Veritas videos documenting the extreme leftwing bias in social media

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

                        • icon
                          Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:43pm

                          Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          LOL at you thinking Project Veritas tells the truth and doesn't doctor their own videos.

                          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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:47pm

                            Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                            And there is the ad hominem against the sources, as predicted. We're talking about undercover videos of people working at these companies stating how they're actively suppressing right wing articles, people etc. What do you want? A Washington Post article stating it? Don't you just love circular logic?

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

                            • icon
                              Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:49pm

                              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                              https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/29/project-veritas-how-fake-news-prize-went-to-rightwin g-group-beloved-by-trump

                              It's not their ideology, it's that they lie and defame people. It's like me citing Michael Moore.

                              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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:50pm

                                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                Since we're rejecting sources, The Guardian is the very definition of an unreliable source. It's like linking Breitbart. Judge the clips on their own merit, not on the who is presenting them. That's what intelligent people do

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

                                • icon
                                  Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:53pm

                                  Judge the clips on their own merit, not on the who is presenting them.

                                  When the people presenting those clips have a documented habit of editing the clips to mislead viewers, we will judge both. Deal with it.

                                  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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:02pm

                                    Re:

                                    But you're not. You're simply dismissing them. Tell me, what kind of evidence would suffice?

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

                                    • icon
                                      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:21pm

                                      You're simply dismissing them.

                                      Project Veritas has a documented history of lying and editing videos in misleading ways. I dismiss them because they have lost any assumption of credibility.

                                      Tell me, what kind of evidence would suffice?

                                      To claim “anti-conservative bias” in social media as a fact, you must prove true the following statement:

                                      When conservatives and liberals break the same rule(s) in equal amounts, a service shows bias when it punishes conservatives in far greater numbers than it punishes liberals.

                                      I wish you the best of luck in proving that. You will need it.

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

                                      • icon
                                        Tanner Andrews (profile), 1 Jul 2020 @ 2:57am

                                        Re: [tautology]

                                        To claim “anti-conservative bias” in social media as a fact, you must prove true the following statement:

                                        When conservatives and liberals break the same rule(s) in equal amounts, a service shows bias when it punishes conservatives in far greater numbers than it punishes liberals.

                                        Easily proven. Given the above definition of showing bias, which I doubt you will dispute, the above definition is true. QED.

                                        I might have framed it differently, e.g., using above definition, I might have asked for evidence of social media platforms punishing one viewpoint significantly more frequently. For instance, it may be that this ``Parler'' is acting against one particular viewpoint more often than against its opposing viewpoint. However, I do not have data.

                                        Fortunately we do not need data to meet your requirements. Given our axioms, it is pretty easy to prove our axioms.

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

                                      • icon
                                        Tanner Andrews (profile), 6 Jul 2020 @ 5:04am

                                        Re:

                                        We were asked to prove the axiom. Because it is also a given, the proof was easy.

                                        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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:04pm

                                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                    Shit man, you have the worst sources. You're only linking extreme leftwing sites. Do you have ANY non-biased, reputable sources for anything at all?

                                    Also, i'm talking about video clips with full sentences such as 'we have to do everything we can to prevent Trump being reelected'. How can that be taken out of context?

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

                                    • icon
                                      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:07pm

                                      Shit man, you have the worst sources.

                                      I don’t see you refuting the evidence in those sources, all of which have more credibility than Project “we’re gonna have someone literally defame Roy Moore so we can sting a newspaper” Veritas.

                                      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:16pm

                                        Re:

                                        No need to refute them. The courts already did and their opinion has far more gravitas than some activists on leftwing propaganda site. Also, notice how i predicted exactly how this would play out when i first brought up Veritas. It's like you people are following a script. No wonder you had your tech overlords ban the NPC meme. It hit much too close to home

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

                                        • identicon
                                          Rocky, 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:00pm

                                          Re: Re:

                                          2010: Acorn and Juan Carlos Vera

                                          On the basis of the edited videotape which O'Keefe released, Vera appeared to be a willing participant in helping with O'Keefe's plan to smuggle young women into the United States illegally. However, authorities confirmed that Mr. Vera immediately contacted them about O'Keefe and that he had also encouraged O'Keefe to share as much information as possible about his scheme and gather further evidence of O'Keefe's purported illegal activities, which could then be used by prosecutors to bring charges against O'Keefe for attempted human trafficking. Due to O'Keefe's release of the dubiously edited video, intentionally designed to "prove" that ACORN employees were ready and willing to engage in illicit activities, Mr. Vera lost his job and was falsely portrayed as being engaged in human trafficking.

                                          On March 5, 2013, O'Keefe agreed to pay $100,000 to former California ACORN employee Juan Carlos Vera for deliberately misrepresenting Mr. Vera's actions, and acknowledged in the settlement that at the time he published his video he was unaware that Vera had notified the police about the incident. The settlement contained the following apology: "O'Keefe regrets any pain suffered by Mr. Vera or his family."

                                          2010: Senator Mary Landrieu

                                          O'Keefe and colleagues were arrested in the Hale Boggs Federal Complex in New Orleans in January 2010 and charged with entering federal property under false pretenses with the intent of committing a felony, at the office of United States Senator Mary Landrieu, a Democrat.

                                          The charges in the case were reduced from a felony to a single misdemeanor count of entering a federal building under false pretenses. O'Keefe and the others pleaded guilty on May 26. O'Keefe was sentenced to three years' probation, 100 hours of community service and a $1,500 fine. The other three men received lesser sentences.

                                          2010 Abbie Boudreau

                                          O'Keefe planned a staged encounter with the CNN correspondent Abbie Boudreau, who was doing a documentary on the young conservative movement. He set up an appointment at his office in Maryland to discuss a video shoot. Izzy Santa, executive director of Project Veritas, warned Boudreau that O'Keefe was planning to "punk" her on the boat by trying to seduce her—which he would film on hidden cameras. Boudreau did not board the boat and soon left the area.

                                          CNN later published a 13-page plan written by O'Keefe mentor Ben Wetmore. It listed props for the boat scheme, including pornography, sexual aids, condoms, a blindfold and "fuzzy" handcuffs. When questioned by CNN, O'Keefe denied he was going to follow the Wetmore plan, as he found parts of it inappropriate.

                                          Following the Boudreau incident, Project Veritas paid Izzy Santa a five-figure settlement after she threatened to sue, which included a nondisclosure agreement. Funding decreased from conservative political organizations following this CNN incident.

                                          That's just a sample of Project Veritas and O'Keefe's actions during 2010, and they have kept coming.

                                          Perhaps you should look up the court records that relates to Project Veritas and O'Keefe, because trust me - they don't paint a very pretty picture.

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

                                        • icon
                                          techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:04pm

                                          Re: Re:

                                          Says the guy chickening out the moment he gets presented with examples of Project Veritas' misdeeds. Impressive.

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

                                    • icon
                                      Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:11pm

                                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                      You're only linking extreme leftwing sites.

                                      The fact that you call Business Insider and The Daily Beast "extreme leftwing" shows that you're a fringe rightwinger.

                                      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:15pm

                                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                        Imagine being so far gone you think The daily beast is not an extreme left site. I think you're the first person i've met who made such an obviously false and ridiculous claim. Most leftist can acknowledge how biased that site is just as i can acknowledge that Breitbart is incredibly biased. You're a fanatic in the cult of regressiveness

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

                        • icon
                          Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:44pm

                          Project Veritas

                          I’m happy to see you acknowledge your ignorance. Your further contributions will be read accordingly.

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

                    • icon
                      bhull242 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:42pm

                      Re: Re: Re: Re:

                      You named one without being very specific. That’s not 5. You made the claim, you provide the evidence.

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

                • icon
                  Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:15pm

                  hey needed to have one leftwing example to say 'see guys, totally no bias here'

                  [citation needed, especially since hundreds of subreddits were banned]

                  there are numerous left leaning subs that breaks the rules daily with no repercussions

                  Report them, then.

                  This is just to trick the low IQ people and it looks like it worked

                  Not…really? I mean, T_D was basically a dead subreddit by the time of its ban, from what I hear on Reddit. And nobody with any sense should think the deletion of that subreddit will magically make Reddit a happy fun place made of sunshine and flowers and puppy breath. Also, most everyone agrees that the ban for T_D came far too late, so…yeah…

                  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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:20pm

                    Re:

                    They have been reported and nothing gets done. Are you actually denying reddit does not ban right leaning subs far more than left despite no worse violations? Holy fuck

                    As for your last line - yea, no. Get out of your twitter bubble and you'll see you're actually in the minority. Most people are not regressive leftists

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

                    • icon
                      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:25pm

                      They have been reported and nothing gets done.

                      Sort of like how nothing was done against T_D until Reddit couldn’t ignore the PR nightmare?

                      Are you actually denying reddit does not ban right leaning subs far more than left despite no worse violations?

                      Until I see evidence that Reddit punishes self-identified conservative users/subreddits more often than their liberal counterparts for doing TOS-violating acts in equal measure? Yes, I am.

                      Get out of your twitter bubble and you'll see you're actually in the minority.

                      I’d rather be in the minority if it means I’m not a flagrant bigot.

                      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:29pm

                        Re:

                        Oh the 'i can't win on facts so i'll put my head in the sand and throw labels like bigots around' Sorry pal, that's called an ad hominem and the only thing that does is display your lacking intellectual capacity and the weakness of your position

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

                        • icon
                          Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:38pm

                          Your making extraordinary claims without presenting extraordinary evidence and deflecting from that lack of evidence with a bunch of namecalling does more to expose a lack of intelligence than anything I posted.

                          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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:42pm

                            Re:

                            We have very well documented evidence through Project Veritas, among others, and summarized by Tim Pool

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

                            • icon
                              Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:44pm

                              Project Veritas

                              That you consider them credible says all we need to know about your own credibility.

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

                            • icon
                              Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:46pm

                              Re: Re:

                              Project Veritas are a bunch of liars. You're too blinded by your own ideology to see that. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/29/project-veritas-how-fake-news-prize-went-to-rightwin g-group-beloved-by-trump

                              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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:53pm

                                Re: Re: Re:

                                Already refuted above. My advice, stop reading fake news sites

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

                                • icon
                                  Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:56pm

                                  Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                  Stop blindly believing Project Veritas.

                                  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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:00pm

                                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                    Stop dismissing video evidence because you don't like who is presenting it

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

                                    • icon
                                      Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:02pm

                                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                      If they didn't defame people, I wouldn't have a problem with 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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:07pm

                                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                        They didn't though according to the courts. Perhaps you should stop taking some activists' word over the legal system? Also, i'm talking about video clips with full sentences so bad that no context could justify it. The evidence is right there, you simply refuse to acknowledge it because deep down, you're perfectly fine with tech-fascism. Just understand that eventually you will be on the receiving end and there will be no one left to who wants to help you

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

                            • identicon
                              Rocky, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:50pm

                              Re: Re:

                              Anyone who thinks Project Veritas is a source of factual information has deluded themselves. They have been caught several times with outright lies or conveniently edited videos that leaves out important contexts.

                              If you have to lie to make your argument - you don't have an argument to begin with.

                              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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:56pm

                                Re: Re: Re:

                                Oh so like any MSM? Do you hold other sources to the standard? Because if you do, you should stop reading Washington Post, New York Times, The Guardian or watch CNN, MSNBC etc. I'm guessing you don't. Also, unless they used deepfakes to create those videos, judge the clip on their own merit. You're using ad hominem in order to avoid the core of the argument because you know you will lose

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

                                • icon
                                  Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:00pm

                                  Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                  There's also "out of context". Let me demonstrate:

                                  "Do you…read…The Guardian or watch CNN, MSNBC etc.?…judge [them] on their own merit[.]"

                                  That's what it sounds like as your acceptable level of Journalism, because that's what Project Veritas does.

                                  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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:09pm

                                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                    But why am i held to a higher standard than you? Surely, if you can dismiss video evidence based on smear articles by regressive activists and in spite of courts disagreeing, then i can dismiss media that has been caught lying repeatedly? Why the double standards?

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

                                    • icon
                                      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:25pm

                                      why am i held to a higher standard than you?

                                      You’re citing Project Veritas, that’s why. Stop citing liars as purveyors of truth and we’ll stop treating you as someone who prefers comfortable lies to uncomfortable truths.

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

                                • identicon
                                  Rocky, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:41pm

                                  Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                  I get my news and information from multiple places to get as a complete picture as possible, and those sites you mentioned isn't even among the top 10 I use.

                                  You on the other hand seem to think that Project Veritas can't do no wrong even though they have been caught again and again lying or maliciously editing videos since it's inception. So I use the word "deluded" for anyone who says they get their "truth" from Project Veritas, because that's the nicest word I can use for that kind of people.

                                  Just looking through O'Keefe's legal history should give even you a hint of what kind of dishonesty he is capable of.

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

                              • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                                icon
                                TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:46pm

                                Re: Re: Re:

                                Not that Rachel Maddow was caught lying through her teeth about that fake-o Russian conspiracy. Oh, but wait! As long as a "progressive" lies, you are fine with it, because "any lie for the cause."

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

                                • icon
                                  Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:51pm

                                  Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                  Um, who here has mentioned Rachel Maddow? You were the first to mention her in a whataboutist way.

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

                                  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
                                    icon
                                    TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:07pm

                                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                    She's a documented liar -- even the far-left Washington Post nailed her for it. But you love your liars as long as you think the liar is on your side. LOL

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

                                    • icon
                                      Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:10pm

                                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                      She's a documented liar -- even the far-left Washington Post nailed her for it. But you love your liars as long as you think the liar is on your side. LOL

                                      A few things:

                                      1. Amazing that you think the Washington Post is "far left". As with the Anonymous Coward with whom we were arguing, you haven't met many far leftists in your life if you think that the Washington Post is "far left".
                                      2. As I said, nobody here mentioned–let alone praised–Rachel Maddow. Why bring her up if only to set up an argument made of straw men?

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

                                • icon
                                  bhull242 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:47pm

                                  Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                  Not that it’s relevant, but out of curiosity, what specifically about a Russian conspiracy did Rachel Maddow supposedly lie about?

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

                        • icon
                          bhull242 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:43pm

                          Re: Re:

                          Pot, meet kettle.

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

                        • identicon
                          Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:48pm

                          Re: Re:

                          "Sorry pal, that's called an ad hominem..."

                          He says, and then proceeds with

                          "...and the only thing that does is display your lacking intellectual capacity..."

                          A grammatically atrocious ad hominem attack. Nice job. Better go take Introduction to Logic 101 again.

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

                        • icon
                          techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:07pm

                          Re: Re:

                          You can't win on conured up facts and definitely not on smugness. Tough shit.

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

                    • icon
                      Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:31pm

                      Re: Re:

                      Get out of your twitter bubble and you'll see you're actually in the minority. Most people are not regressive leftists

                      Not really.

                      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:33pm

                        Re: Re: Re:

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

                        • icon
                          Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:38pm

                          Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          I was responding to the "Most People are not regressive leftists" part. But since you're too dumb to read…

                          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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:40pm

                            Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                            Except your link did not disprove my statement. I'm sorry you suffer from delusions of adequacy and resort to fallacies when faced with the truth but them's the breaks i guess

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

                            • icon
                              Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:41pm

                              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                              I'm sorry you suffer from delusions of adequacy and resort to fallacies when faced with the truth but them's the breaks i guess

                              Sounds more like you, who can't back up what they say.

                              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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:44pm

                                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                                But i did. My link backs my statement where as your link did not back yours. Also, you've moved down to kindergarten insults now? Yup, truly one of those well educated and intelligent leftists you so like to claim is common

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

                        • icon
                          That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:47pm

                          Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          Did you actually read that article, or were you hoping that others wouldn't, because it does not say what you think it does. To the extent that Twitter users differ from the population in general politically it's in the single digit range, and even then more people identify democrat than republican, so what were you saying about people being in the minority?

                          Of course, many political independents actually lean toward one of the two major parties. Of the Americans who lean toward either party, 52% of U.S. adults identify as Democrats or lean toward the Democratic Party, while 60% of U.S. adult Twitter users say the same. Similarly, 43% of U.S. adults identify as or lean Republican, compared with 35% of adult Twitter users.

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

                        • identicon
                          Rocky, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:03pm

                          Re: Re: Re: Re:

                          I can't find anything about regressive leftist in the link you provided, so I'm afraid it doesn't back your statement up at all.

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

            • identicon
              Billy B. Penafor, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:16pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

              First of all, nothing had been posted to the_donald in months. Everyone had already migrated to their .win site. Shutting the sub down today had zero effect.

              Also, the_donald was NOT "pretty significant" in getting Trump elected. It was a shitposting circlejerk, like 99.9% of Reddit. It's hilarious to suggest something so self-important (and completely non-verifiable).

              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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:52pm

          Re: Re: Re: The point of free speech

          You're a dishonest right wing asshole, thick boy.

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

    • icon
      ECA (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:33pm

      Re: The point of free speech

      one man says...

      WE all must believe and say the same to be equal.

      Another man says.

      God, How boring to talk to myself all day long.

      Anyone want to go back to the demonstrations of the 60's?? re-evaluate them and NOT Scream HIPPY's Shoot them..

      What are the rights of a Muslim walking into a Jewish/christian/ANY religious building and preaching his OWN?? And the reverse? Lets go back 30-40 years..Even 10 years ago.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:19pm

      Re: The point of free speech

      If Marxists* had the entire public square, we wouldn't be having this conversation at all and this nation would be an entirely different place.

      *All 2 or 3 thousand of them. But i take it that anyone not agreeing with your shit is "Marxist", since labeling "outsiders" is so popular.

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

    • icon
      Bloof (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:29pm

      Re: The point of free speech

      'The people banned were clearly not acting in good faith, unlike those poor, persecuted conservative voices banned from more popular platforms for hatespeech, harassment and active violations of the rules they agreed to when they signed up.'

      Hilarious.

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

    • icon
      Toom1275 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:52pm

      Re: The point of free speech

      Plaintiff provides no facts in his Complaont to support these contentions.

      As with every other projecting reich-wing troll before him.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:19pm

      Re: The point of free speech

      The point of free speech is that you can speak, and the Marxists have basically the entire public square. That their open wish is to deny conservatives or moderates such as myself a place to openly discuss our positions is no surprise.

      So you’re saying “conservatives” need a safe space to convince themselves they’re still popular?

      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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:20pm

      Re: The point of free speech

      The bottom line is, as always, is that right wingers are liars and hypocrites. Hypocrisy is their life blood ... they could not function without it.

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

      • identicon
        Rocky, 30 Jun 2020 @ 1:35pm

        Re: Re: The point of free speech

        Not all of them, there are actually sane people on the right but they are drowned out by the loudmouths and the knuckle-draggers who have high-jacked the political right.

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

  • icon
    Koby (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 12:46pm

    Reasons

    What I'm more Interested in is -- why were they banned? If they broke some sort of clearly established rules, then that's awesome that they got banned. But if they were banned for simply for disagreeing with others, then that seems unfair. Discussing the reasons why is what separates a free speech platform from a biased platform.

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

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 12:56pm

      Re: Reasons

      If only that question was answered in the gorram article...

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

    • identicon
      Rocky, 29 Jun 2020 @ 12:57pm

      Re: Reasons

      We can all agree on that regardless of political affiliation there will always be asshats. I don't doubt some people joined Parler with the clear intent of being asshats, but if it turns out that they banned or moderated people just because they expressed views that can be considered on the left of the political spectrum it tells us that Parler are hypocrites and biased against non-conservatives.

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

    • identicon
      Christenson, 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:06pm

      Re: Reasons

      I don't think discussing reasons matters.
      First, even parler has bias, and I'd not expect a word of explanation from them (or techdirt) if I was posting spam. I like the techdirt comment moderation quite a bit, framing it as a popularity contest of sorts amongst its (biased) audience.
      Second, if you don't want to drown in junk, choices have to be made. See 4chan followed by 8chan as example. What are YOU gonna read? Cat photos? Hydrangea reproduction?

      Actual free speech looks like a community of trust around a topic or topics of interest. Presumably there are rules for bringing up new topics and ways to select the readers.

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

    • icon
      Koby (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:06pm

      Re: Reasons

      Update: Being curious about the reasons why people might get banned, I can see that Parler has rules posted in its Community Guidelines section that they disallow impersonation accounts. With Parler being a new app, there is currently that "Land Grab" phase where a whole lot of account names are not yet taken. It appears that a number of folks have been attempting to register themselves as public officials, or websites for which they dislike. As an example, the Thor Benson guy cited above attempted to register himself as the official account for The Federalist. Others attempted to register as Donald Trump.

      So yeah, probably joining a community and immediately breaking the rules isn't such a great idea. Pretty clear violations.

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

      • icon
        Khym Chanur (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:56pm

        Re: Re: Reasons

        They also banned the Devin Nunes' Cow person. I mean, that's technically a violation, since the he's obviously not really a cow, much less one belonging to Nunes, but that's kind of a petty reason to ban him/her.

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

      • identicon
        ryuugami, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:19pm

        Re: Re: Reasons

        Hey, Koby! You know those few conservatives banned from Twitter, Facebook, etc? They broke rules.

        So yeah, probably joining a community and immediately breaking the rules isn't such a great idea. Pretty clear violations.

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

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:23pm

      If they broke some sort of clearly established rules, then that's awesome that they got banned.

      Surely, then, you have no issue with Twitter banning anyone who self-identifies as a conservative if that person uses language that breaks clearly established rules.

      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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:23am

        Re:

        Twitter banned conservatives for the npc meme. Look it up. They are blatantly biased.

        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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:53am

          Re: Re:

          Using a meme to sat I hate the left comes under hate speech.

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

        • identicon
          Rocky, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:56am

          Re: Re:

          It could perhaps have something to do with the fact that people used the meme to spread misinformation about the election among other things.

          Also, if you somehow think that the NPC meme was only used by conservatives it tells me your consumption of media is severely restricted.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:22pm

      Re: Reasons

      This is the question you can't honestly ask or answer about the major platforms. And yet ...

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

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 12:51pm

    'Well I say free speech, but I really mean MY speech...'

    Since it's been pretty clear that those complaining about the 'terrible persecution of free speech' are primarily if not exclusively talking about speech they care about and/or agree with it is in fact possible to have the platform kicking people off left and right and still claim that unlike those other platforms Parler really does care about free speech, because look, by and large the assholes who got the boot from the other platforms are still allowed on Parler.

    So long as Parler is primarily giving the boot to those that the assholes don't like you can bet that they will continue to get a pass from the same people who were decrying the tyranny of other social media, because unlike the noble 'conservatives' that social media crushes under it's boots those others had it coming.

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

    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
      identicon
      Anonymous, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:22am

      Re: 'Well I say free speech, but I really mean MY speech...'

      You’re a tool. There’s no evidence that Parler is being biased against the people in this article, only anecdotes. Do you always drink Kool-aid this easily?

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 12:53pm

    Protocol vs Silo

    (though, I wish they were interoperable implementations of a protocol, rather than individual silos, but...)

    If there were many interoperable "speech services" that shared their content with one another the result would be what's left after each of them banned all the speech they disliked leaving us with nothing but photos of kittens. None of them are going to carry content they dislike (and let users decide what they want to read) so this is a no-go.

    If instead these services offered their content to separate clients ala Usenet or RSS then nothing has changed. The only difference between that and what we have right now is that we use a different client for each service.

    This is a drum not worth banging.

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

    • identicon
      christenson, 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:13pm

      Re: Protocol vs Silo

      Techdirt itself is an example where speech it doesn't like (primarily idiots) gets carried anyway and as a user I decide if I am curious enough to read the flagged content.

      As to usenet, well, the problem was that netnews protocol really didn't allow for moderation which was desperately needed. Protocols view lets me choose my moderator or federation of moderators.

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

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:31pm

      If there were many interoperable "speech services" that shared their content with one another the result would be what's left after each of them banned all the speech they disliked leaving us with nothing but photos of kittens.

      You would be wrong about that. I know because I’m on a Mastodon instance.

      Every Mastodon instance has the option of federating with other instances. The admins of every instance worth a damn takes the time to defederate from instances with what they think is “problematic” content (e.g., Gab instances). The “problematic” instances aren’t deleted from the Internet when this happens; you can still join Gab, after all. All that happens is people on the instances that defederated Gab don’t see Gab’s content on their timelines (unless they manually follow an account from that instance).

      End users also have similar controls: They can choose to hide all content from a given domain (i.e., instance) when viewing the profile of someone on that domain. Someone on an instance with lax federation policies can make good use of that option if they feel the need.

      Mastodon is not without its issues (e.g., the main fork still doesn’t have options for preventing boosts and replies). But let’s not act like its federation and domain block options are tantamount to censorship. Even if people choose not to listen, you still have the right to speak.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:23pm

      Re: Protocol vs Silo

      You obviously don't know what "interoperable imementations of a protocol" means.

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

  • identicon
    Pixelation, 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:01pm

    And so it begins

    Parler will ban accounts...until there is nothing Left.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:10pm

    Users Parler doesn't like (list is non-exhaustive):

    "the gays"
    "foreigners"
    "black people"
    "anyone even vaguely jewish"
    "europeans if they criticize trump"

    basically Parler is a right-wing echo chamber, that (give previous history of these type of places) will shortly lose it's hosting and DNS systems like Stormfront etc and be effectively wiped off the map.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:26pm

      Re:

      Some on the right sure seem to like the right kind of Jews. It's a toss-up with any given individual. And that "like" might be temporary.

      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:31pm

        Re: Re:

        Many on the right don't care if you're a Jew, or you're black, or red, or yellow, or green.

        Because we're not bigots, and we're not racists, and we're not anti-semites.

        But I understand why you see the world that way.

        You racist bigot.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:32am

      Re:

      Now THAT would be censorship, getting rid of the website. If you don’t like it, don’t use it.

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

  • icon
    Chris ODonnell (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:16pm

    So Parler's business plan is to attract the people too toxic for Twitter? What could possibly go wrong?

    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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:36pm

      Re:

      I don't think so. The large majority of conservatives are quiet, with an innate sense of fairness and good faith, that's why they're called the "silent majority".

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

      • icon
        Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:42pm

        Re: Re:

        So how come the "silent majority" isn't reflected in Trumpy's polling numbers and why he's trailing Biden by double digits in important swing states?

        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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:56pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Time will tell, won't it. Elections are coming. Last time was a surprise. This time will be a VERY public statement about the Future of America.

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

      • icon
        Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:48pm

        The large majority of conservatives are quiet, with an innate sense of fairness and good faith, that's why they're called the "silent majority".

        I always thought that by “silent majority”, conservatives were referring to “White people who are too afraid to say and do racist shit even though they absolutely want to say and do racist shit”. I mean, it does sorta make sense that conservatives think all White people are as racist as the average conservative.

        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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:52pm

          Re:

          Project much? The only racists that sound like what you describe were the KKK attending the Democratic Convention. Remember them? Proud of your Democratic history? Idiot. Republicans freed the slaves. Remember that.

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

          • icon
            Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:56pm

            You forget the history of the Southern Strategy, the Dixiecrats, and the ideological shift between the two parties in the wake of the Civil Rights Movement. The GOP that freed the slaves bears little resemblance to the GOP of today beyond the name.

            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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:29pm

              Re:

              blah blah blah on and end endless bullshit because you have nothing to say.

              The racists are the Democrats.

              Everybody knows that.

              It's historical fact, not fiction.

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

              • icon
                Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:54pm

                Remind me, which party has heavily supported Voter ID laws in the United States within the past two decades or so — laws that courts have said were crafted with racist intent? Which party currently stands against mail-in ballots for the national election, which could help boost voter turnout but would also give people of color a better chance of voting than in-person voting? Which party breathlessly defends symbols of the Confederacy, a failed state that seceded from and fought a war with the United States to preserve the institution of slavery? Which party has tried to suppress the Black vote by way of gerrymandering, enacting Voter ID laws, and shutting down polling stations in districts heavily populated by Black people?

                Because last time I checked, it sure as shit wasn’t the Democrats who were leading the charge in those regards.

                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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:34am

                  Re:

                  Europe has voter id laws. Cope.

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

                  • identicon
                    Rocky, 30 Jun 2020 @ 8:05am

                    Re: Re:

                    Oh, there's no doubt that European countries have voter id laws but they aren't crafted in such a way to make it difficult to acquire said id if you happen to belong to a marginalized group.

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

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:14pm

                Re: Re:

                You're literally just a liar, and it's sad.

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

              • icon
                JMT (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:23pm

                Re: Re:

                "blah blah blah on and end endless bullshit because you have nothing to say."

                That sounds an awful lot like "LA LA LA I can't hear you!"

                Ideologically the two parties are completely different than they were 150 years ago. No political historian, or anyone who can read a damn history book, would seriously argue otherwise.

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

  • icon
    radix (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:28pm

    "You can’t spam people’s comment sections with unrelated content." Except, you kinda can do that on the "street of New York."

    That street is named Madison Avenue, in fact, and it's not just allowed, it's encouraged.

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

  • icon
    TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 1:59pm

    I looked into Parler and was going to join, until they demanded my mobile phone number, access to my contacts, and legal indemnification. No way.

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

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:05pm

      I guess free speech costs too much for you, then.

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

      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        icon
        TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:48pm

        Re:

        If you want to give up your privacy, go for it. Not me.

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

        • icon
          Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:23pm

          Funny how for all your whining about censorship and your impassioned defenses of free speech, you weren’t willing to pay the price for the promise of a “free speech platform”.

          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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:38pm

            Re:

            Yeah, you think it's funny, because you have no idea what funny is. Lefties have that part of their brain missing. Humor. And Honor. And Respect. They replace it with bullying, avoidance, and banding together into mobs. Everyone else finds it disgusting.

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

            • icon
              Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:42pm

              Humor. And Honor. And Respect. They replace it with bullying, avoidance, and banding together into mobs.

              If you think none of that applies to conservatives in any way, you’ve fooled yourself.

              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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:47pm

                Re:

                I've looked at Techdirt for many, many years. Show me an instance of a right wing mod on Techdirt piling on some poor leftie.

                You can't.

                It never happened.

                It can't happen. You will silence any view you disagree with because you are too afraid to confront anyone about anything. You can only hide with your fake friends under your moma's skirt.

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

                • icon
                  Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:51pm

                  You will silence any view you disagree with

                  No, we “silence” (read: hide) bad faith arguments, trolls, and spam. Dissent on its own doesn’t get flagged. Dissent rooted in strawmen, ad hominems, paper-thin arguments, and name calling so pathetic that even elementary school students would think it’s lame, on the other hand…

                  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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:57pm

                    Re:

                    You are a fucking bold faced liar hiding behind a fake name, Mike. Just like your other leftie friends.

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

                    • icon
                      Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:59pm

                      Re: Re:

                      You are a fucking bold faced liar hiding behind a fake name, Mike.

                      AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

                      Oh wait, you were serious.

                      AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA!

                      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:28pm

                        Re: Re: Re:

                        Says the "insider".

                        Are you special, being an "insider" and all?

                        Do you even see how ridiculous you look? Parler doesn't have "insiders", it doesn't need them. Why do you?

                        Do you have a secret code and secret hand signals, too?

                        Can you see the hand signal I am making right now?

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

                • icon
                  Samuel Abram (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:58pm

                  Re: Re:

                  You will silence any view you disagree with because you are too afraid to confront anyone about anything.

                  Hiding from view isn't "silencing". All of the comments that we marked as spam can still be read here.

                  If you really think that's censorship, you must really have lived with a silver spoon in your mouth.

                  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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:27pm

                    Re: Re: Re:

                    It isn't silencing! It isn't censorship! You just can't SEE the comment! It exists in another Universe, the Universe of the UnSeen!

                    What utter bullshit you spout.

                    Censorship is censorship.

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

                • icon
                  JMT (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:31pm

                  Re: Re:

                  "You will silence any view you disagree with because you are too afraid to confront anyone about anything."

                  Lots of people here are disagreeing with you and you're being 'confronted' out the wazoo, and yet your supposedly 'silenced' voice is making an awful lot of noise. Your own many, many words, which I can clearly see, are making a complete mockery of your claims.

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

  • identicon
    Pixelation, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:26pm

    Seems fishy

    I keep wondering if Parler has been set up with help from one of the 3 letter agencies.

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

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:32pm

      Re: Seems fishy

      Possible I suppose, but I imagine there are easier ways to get that sort of information that doesn't involve a dumpster fire or alerting potential targets.

      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:39pm

        Re: Re: Seems fishy

        Why do lefties like "dumpster fires" so much? They talk about them all the time. Is that where they meet to discuss their plans to take over the world?

        Just listen to General Flynn. You 2% idiots are about to get crushed by the 98% of the rest of us.

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

        • icon
          Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:44pm

          Why do lefties like "dumpster fires" so much?

          They don’t. Why else do you think sites like Parler end up becoming shitpits for alt-right chuds like incels, Gamergaters, and White supremacists? (Whoops, tautology!)

          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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:46pm

            Re:

            You have seen the future that we are all blind to, do you, oh oracle of Truth and Enlightenment.

            Not.

            You're just another phony pony leftie idiot, like the majority of other long time posters here.

            Phony as a 3 dollar bill.

            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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:39am

            Re:

            Parler is much better than twitter, that’s for sure. Sorry if you need an echo chamber to feel safe :(

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

            • identicon
              Rocky, 30 Jun 2020 @ 8:11am

              Re: Re:

              Interesting. You do understand that if all the people who reason like you do start using Parler exclusively, that means Parler becomes your own little safe echo-chamber because you couldn't deal with the social platforms you left.

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

  • icon
    Uriel-238 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:34pm

    "Parler Is Banning Users It Doesn't Like"

    Sounds just like our law and order national justice system!

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    stu, 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:41pm

    F U, bunch of whiney left wing twats. You will soon be silenced by something with a bit more volume and velocity.

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

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 2:46pm

      Mike, you should probably report this person to the FBI for making violent threats.

      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:40pm

        Re:

        Yeah, report them to the FBI, that's a good idea. What a fucking idiot you are, Stone. Fake name, fake outrage, it's easy to be a leftie when you lie about who you are and what you think. Do you wear a mask and ski glasses, too? You're pathetic.

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

    • identicon
      Rocky, 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:09pm

      Re:

      I'm afraid impotent screaming isn't loud or fast enough. Although, it does show us who is having a meltdown since the dichotomy in your statement is very enlightening.

      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:41pm

        Re: Re:

        Wow, big words for a high school kid. Are you out of high school yet? I doubt it from your writing.

        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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:43pm

      Re:

      What like your wet farts?

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

    • icon
      techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:14pm

      Re:

      Bring it on, lamer.

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

  • icon
    restless94110 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 3:47pm

    Guidelines

    Yeah,
    I joined Parler and then read their Community Guidelines and went: Oy Vey. Why isn't there even one social media site that has NO Community Guidelines.. At least pretend there is Free Speech?

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

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:08pm

      Not what free speech means

      Why isn't there even one social media site that has NO Community Guidelines.. At least pretend there is Free Speech?

      Because anyone who was stupid enough to create a site like that would find out very quickly why those rules are in place, not to mention free speech is not and never has been short for consequence-free speech, there has always been consequences even if it's nothing more than social disapproval, such that the idea that free speech means a free-for-all is nothing but a phantom that has never existed.

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

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:14pm

      Why isn't there even one social media site that has NO Community Guidelines[?]

      Because any such service would soon find itself spammed into irrelevance.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 4:31pm

    I thought I was getting free speech

    but all I got was this crummy social media app that banned me!

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 5:55pm

    Not gonna lie, when I saw this thread had over 170 comments I thought it was Hamilton shitting things up. What I wasn't expecting was the usual anti-vaxx brigade of Koby and restless, topped up with a fucknugget who was dumb enough to sign up for a recognizable username and rant about a Twitter-competitor service that even he can't be fucked to use because user verification.

    You gotta hand it to conservatives. Even when presented with a silver platter that has someone to suck their cock for them, conservatives still manage to fuck it up.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:48pm

      Re:

      "The worst thing to do to a man is give him exactly what he wants"

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

      • icon
        That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:59pm

        'We want X!' 'Here you go.' 'This isn't what we wanted at all!'

        Hmm, I'd suggest changing that to '.. what he asks for', as the two can be widely different, if not in direct opposition, for example claiming to want equal treatment on social media when what is really desired is special treatment and exemptions to the rules everyone else has to follow.

        If those decrying the tyranny of social media got what they wanted that would indeed be great for them, it would be giving them what they are asking for that would be terrible(for 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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:33pm

          Re: 'We want X!' 'Here you go.' 'This isn't what we wanted at al

          Hey, Parler is cool.

          Techdirt is a joke.

          That's life.

          Face it.

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

          • icon
            techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:18pm

            Re: Re: 'We want X!' 'Here you go.' 'This isn't what we wanted a

            And even on Techdirt noone takes you seriously. Tired of winning yet?

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

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:24pm

            Re: Re:

            Apparently Parler is so cool you'd rather post here because... edgelord reasons.

            Thanks for playing, you triggered little snowflake.

            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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:46am

              Re: Re: Re:

              The left can’t meme, so they even resort to using rightwing words like “triggered” and “snowflake”.

              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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:28pm

    I dunno, I like Parler. I feel calm and peaceful when I see hundreds of articles with thousands of comments from people who have a worldview similar to mine. Yeah, there's a few troublemakers, they're pretty obvious. What I don't see is the kind of "piling on" that sites like this do. Conservatives are individuals, not sheep, like leftists. That's both good and bad. Sheep all go blindly together, and conservatives want to figure things out on their own. That means they organize a little more slowly. On the other hand, conservatives will pick up a gun and run towards danger, once they see a genuine threat to their liberties, while the sheepie lefties will run home to mommy and hide under the covers. So, it's kind of a mixed bag. Delayed, but overwhelming response, just like the next election. Just wait and see.

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

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:38pm

      What I don't see is the kind of "piling on" that sites like this do.

      Yeah, I can’t imagine why a circlejerk doesn’t have any pile-ons. 🙄

      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:44pm

        Re:

        What does that even mean, idiot boy? Parler is NOT dominated by fake assholes like you piling on with your fake friends PaulT and ThatOtherIdiot. It doesn't have "insiders" who plot and scheme about how to push a fake agenda with coordinated disinformation, like the Russians do. It has real red blooded Americans, like Mark Levin and Dan and soon Trump!

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

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:51pm

          Re: Re:

          Do you have a script that fires on reply, or do you actually think is what passes for discourse?

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

          • icon
            Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 6:54pm

            I’m betting they have some sort of Lorem Ipsum script that uses whatever keyword he’s using this week to fill out a bunch of different replies.

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

            • icon
              That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:04pm

              Re:

              Incoherent ranting with nothing but insults, bigotry and other mindless content doesn't exactly take much effort to come up with, and since that's all they have it's not too surprising that they'd be rather quick with comments.

              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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:32pm

                Re: Re:

                Incoherent ranting with nothing but insults, bigotry and other mindless content.

                aka Techdirt.

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

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:35pm

              Re:

              I'm getting old. Back in my day shitposting required effort.

              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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:37pm

                Re: Re:

                On this site? Are you stupid or just another lying sack of shit?

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

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:45pm

                  Re: Re: Re:

                  Thank you for proving my point by completely missing it. And no, this isn't lulzy by any standards. It's childish and truly pathetic. If this is your Monday night entertainment, I'm sorry you have to stoop this low.

                  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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:55pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Oh, ouch, I'm so hurt, you speech sounds like violence to me. Stop it or I will send BLM to burn down your house in a mostly peaceful way.

                    Idiots.

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

        • icon
          techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:18pm

          Re: Re:

          Parler is NOT dominated by fake assholes

          No, it's dominated by actual assholes.

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:10pm

      Check back on those numbers in a year to compare how many accounts exist on the service with how many of those accounts are active. I’d bet on a lopsided ratio. Parler, like Voat and Gab and other such “free speech” (read: “conservative-friendly”) sites, will likely become another failed experiment as people flock back to the popular sites.

      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:24pm

        Re:

        You mean "popular" sites like Techdirt?

        Now THAT'S funny!

        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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:49am

        Re:

        People can’t flock back when they’re banned, you galaxy brain.

        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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 7:52am

        Re:

        Sorry snowflake, but this time mainstream politicians and celebrities are joining Parler. It’s gonna last longer this time.

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    EAD, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:28pm

    So...you a**holes admit then by implication that Twitter does indeed silence conservative voices and leftists didn’t really want the free speech but to just spike the ball of them for leaving Twitter then. Fuck you. So the alternative for conservatives is to just EAD and take it in the rear. Fuck you. You pansy shits. You unwiped chocolate starfishes.

    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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:31pm

      Re:

      Unwiped Chocolate Starfishes.

      10 points for originality.

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

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:48pm

      you a**holes admit then by implication that Twitter does indeed silence conservative voices

      Not really. If self-identified conservatives feel “silenced” by having to follow the Twitter TOS agreement, that says more about them than it does about Twitter.

      the alternative for conservatives is to just EAD and take it in the rear

      No, the alternative is to leave Twitter and start their own Twitter-like service — which they’ve seemingly done, given how Parler is heavily promoted by conservatives. If conservatives don’t like Twitter’s TOS, tough shit. They’re not entitled to a spot on that service; neither is anyone else.

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

    • icon
      JMT (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 11:00pm

      Re:

      *"So...you a*holes admit then by implication that Twitter does indeed silence conservative voices..."

      I don't recall anyone admitting to that. Twitter does not silence discussions about traditional conservative values like family values, law and order, fiscal responsibility, etc. Twitter does silence discussions that are racist, xenophobic, homophobic, etc. Are you saying these are also conservative values? Coz that might be your problem right there.

      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:41pm

    Respect for Techdirt

    You know, I asked my friends at Parler about Techdirt, and they did tell me one thing that I had to agree with. You guys stick together. You might have worthless opinions, you might come to stupid conclusions, you might silence the best and the brightest voices that grace your site with attention, but you stick together. You lose the election, you lose power, you lose Brexit, you loose SCOTUS, you lose and lose and are about to lose again, but you stick together.

    That's something. Not much, but something. Maybe you deserve a LITTLE respect.

    naw.

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    G.N. Harper, 29 Jun 2020 @ 7:48pm

    The message wasn't the medium

    Having the "Last Word" with a belief that it will influence an audience, only interested in seeing "their" pearls of epiphany... is a fool's folie aux deux. Devin Nunes left twitter and is now a Parler user? A testimony that will assuredly influence right minded like thinkers. Has his cow arrived yet? Go build a house...fight ISIS ...or deliver meals to the elderly...because these words have zero value and impact with respect to fomenting any sort of real progress. History will refer to users of the "I know you are but what am I" medium, not as "Twitterer's"...The descriptor will be shortened and one vowel will be replaced.

    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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:00pm

      Re: The message wasn't the medium

      Right. Not just Nunes. Not just Dan. Not just Kevin. Not just .... like, pretty much EVERYBODY I like is on Parler.

      Except one. Where's Trump?

      Can you talk to him for me? He doesn't seem to listen to me anymore.

      Dunno why. Maybe it's my obsession with his wife. He always laughs about it but maybe he really doesn't like it.

      Signed,

      Charles

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    icon
    TBTop (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:04pm

    Very fun to see how many comments have been hidden because the pathetic "progressives" here complained to the administrators. You must be millennial baristas living on stimulus checks while looting stores. LOL

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

    • icon
      Toom1275 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:27pm

      Re:

      [Projects facts not in evidence]

      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:34pm

        Re: Re:

        Absolutely right and quite well said, TBTop.

        Very fun to see how many comments have been hidden because the pathetic "progressives" here complained to the administrators. You must be millennial baristas living on stimulus checks while looting stores. LOL

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:47pm

      Re:

      okay Boomer

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

    • icon
      techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:23pm

      Re:

      STILL too stupid to realize how moderation works here?

      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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 12:49am

        Re: Re:

        Yeah, we all know how it works. Suddenly 50 comments go missing. You say it's the "community", which is just a fucking lie told repeatedly by fucking liars. Lefties, in other words. Keep your doctor, same thing on another subject. Losers. You have no moral character. None of you. No heroes, no morals, just disgusting lies repeated again and again, usually by the same person using different identities. Pathetic losers, all of you.

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Gibson, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:04pm

    TWITTER

    Twitter don't ban conservatives? WHAt ?? ARE you for real ..Come on man , stop it there are 100000 examples ..Just like you tube

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

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:06pm

      Anecdotal experience is not empirical evidence. Yes, Twitter bans conservatives. It also bans liberals. So what?

      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:36pm

        Re:

        Even the supreme court recently ruled that it is acceptable to use common sense. Remember common sense, you leftie lawyer losers? Common sense.

        Twitter is Left. Facebook is Left, They are so left, that they are being left by their users.

        Fuck you leftie idiots.

        Gosh, it's fun to post here with my friends from Parler. I'm really enjoying it.

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

        • icon
          bhull242 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:58pm

          Re: Re:

          That ruling has zero relevance to anything being discussed here.

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

        • icon
          techflaws (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:25pm

          Re: Re:

          And you're failing miserably at it. As will Parler which is probably the reason you're guys are already turning up here. A true sign of confidence in Parler.

          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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 12:47am

            Re: Re: Re:

            Na, I come here to try to clean up this shitty toilet of a web site with some actual American speech. Not like the horseshit that you promote here, with your leftist mob mentality. On Parler, I am surrounded by patriotic Americans with interesting opinions and the ability to quote both the law and historical truth. Here, well, the Streisand Effect is big news. Pigs rolling in shit are not fun to debate. But that's OK, I also pick up garbage at the park when I see it. Pretty much the same thing. Civic duty, you get me? When you see a stinky pile of trash, try to clean it up, in your own small way. A candle in the wind, so to speak. Just like my friend Elton John wrote about me. I'm a candle in the wind, a small light in the hurricane of socialist disinformation. Self Sacrifice. Country. Family. God. All good. You suck.

            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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 8:59pm

    General Michael Flynn Now on Parler (and Techdirt)

    "I was once told if we’re not careful, 2 percent of the passionate will control 98 percent of the indifferent 100 percent of the time."

    It’s so simple but so powerful and true.

    Flynn goes on to say, “The more I’ve thought about this phrase, the more I believe it. There is now a small group of passionate people working hard to destroy our American way of life. Treason and treachery are rampant and our rule of law and those law enforcement professionals who uphold our laws are under the gun more than at any time in our nation’s history. These passionate 2 percent appear to be winning.”

    Flynn says that despite there being countless good people trying to come to grips with everything else on their plates, our silent majority (the indifferent) can no longer be silent.

    If the United States wants to survive the onslaught of socialism, if we are to continue to enjoy self-government and the liberty of our hard-fought freedoms, we have to understand there are two opposing forces: One is the “children of light” and the other is the “children of darkness.”

    I think Flynn is a Historic American Hero. I think Trump plans to bring him in to run the military and national guard to fix America's problems, which he will do el pronto quicko. Then, he will follow Trump in the 2024 Election.

    Flynn! The Symbol of the End of the Deep State! History in the making! He will be on the Thousand Dollar Bill!

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:11pm

      Re:

      Well, didn't take long for Hamilton to crawl out of the Shiva Ayyadurai woodwork. I suppose even Fran Drescher's ex knows enough to let people come up for air every once in a while.

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

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 9:35pm

      "I was once told if we’re not careful, 2 percent of the passionate will control 98 percent of the indifferent 100 percent of the time."

      And that’s how we end up with Republicans enjoying minority rule.

      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, 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:44pm

        Re:

        President Flynn. Doesn't that have a nice ring to it? A real General for a President, that would be great in these uncertain times, don't you think? Is it too early to start a President General Flynn Fan Club? I'm ready to contribute, he's my kinda guy. One guy, alone, facing impossible odds, staring down Mueller, corrupt judges, the corrupt FBI, Comey, Clapper, Brennan, all of 'em. Staring them down and them SMASHING THEM into TINY PIECES and then HANGING THEM in PUBLIC as a STATEMENT about a NEW AMERICA! Well, maybe hanging is a little much. Perp walking would be OK, in handcuffs, at 3AM with their wife in a bathrobe. That should do. With Fox covering the whole thing, yeah, that'll be fine.

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

      • icon
        Uriel-238 (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 11:13pm

        Republicans enjoying minority rule

        That indifference comes from somewhere. We have it beaten into our gradeschool heads how important it is to vote, to express our own differences and make that choice, and yet somehow by the time we're all grown up and looking at our options, it's just not that exciting.

        We like to blame MTV or our facebook feed or the YouTubez or whatever it is that we think is making the new generation lazy. (They're not. It isn't.) But really it comes down to Boss Tweed having us by the short-and-curlies since... well... since Boss Tweed.

        Ours is a two party system, and we get to choose between a capitalist and a different kind of capitalist. That's super exciting.

        And then there's those referendums which might be understandable for those who they directly affect. Most people don't actually know if the firefighters need their pension raised or if that costs too much out of the general fund. Most people don't know if bridges, libraries, lotteries, school augmentation funds, electoral funds and such are good or not.

        In the meantime much of the shit that desperately needs doing never gets near a committee meeting. The planet is dying and the nation's infrastructure is still collapsing under its own weight.

        So sure, the same interests that captured the Republican party also captured all the government departments. They also captured the Democratic party. For an allegedly free state we're all owned, even the twinkletoes that are trolling this forum. Especially the twinkletoes that are trolling this forum.

        As much of a monster Trump is, Biden is simply going to give us a reprieve until the GOP comes up with another demagogue that will totally pump up folks like Gibson and TBTop and make them feel they're on the winning team and are really huge men. Maybe another Trump. Maybe Zombie Donald, or maybe someone who knows how to use our surveillance system to assure that dissenters from the One True Party quietly have their careers ruined. And yet, a Trump victory might drive us to realize the federal government isn't going to serve the people until the people force it to.

        Frankly, we're already there. It's totally on brand for Trump to delay the election, or kick up enough doubt to call it to question, or in a worst case scenario, scorch the earth while he's lame duck.

        But we the people didn't have any contenders in the game long before the Southern Strategy, long before the religious, big textile and big oil took to the GOP.

        I think Carter was accidental, and the DNC stomped hard to the right because of him.

        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, 30 Jun 2020 @ 12:42am

          Re: Republicans enjoying minority rule

          WTF?

          You believe in a Socialist Utopia. We believe in Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

          You believe in Censorship (Techdirt's version), mob rule and disgusting liars with phony names. We believe in Free Speech, Individual Liberty and the Rule of Law.

          You are evil, and fascist, and represent the collective, the Hive.

          We are good, independent, patriotic Americans, a shining example for the whole world to envy.

          Signed,

          Your Friendly, Humble, Patriotic American (God Bless America)

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

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2020 @ 2:11am

            Re: Re: Republicans enjoying minority rule

            While the 1% believe they are entitled to own everything, including people, and the purpose of law is to force the people to make them even more wealthy. Trump is employed to advance their ideas.

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

          • icon
            Uriel-238 (profile), 30 Jun 2020 @ 3:04pm

            Evil, Fascism and Hives

            You are evil, and fascist, and represent the collective, the Hive.

            OH GREAT NYALARTHOTEP YOU FOUND ME OUT -- wait...no. It appears I am compelled neither by the power of Christ nor by American jingoist chants. You can USA...USA... at me all you want, and I will not burst into flames but be mildly annoyed. Feel free to try, though. It is entertaining.

            We are each obligated to define for ourselves what is the enemy. I don't define you as the enemy, rather I see you as a pitiable victim who just might be incapable of comprehending the social mechanics necessary to organize a nation of millions. I get it you want to be led by who feels right, and have policy that feels good. But that doesn't work unless your nation is just a few dozen hunters who migrate across the plains every year. Once you start down the path of agriculture, society gets complicated.

            I get it if you need to demonize those who disagree with you. It's a common human failing and even geniuses sometimes fail to overcome it. I'll be your enemy if it helps you feel better. Grarr. Curses. I'm going to get you Dorthy and your little dog too.

            But given I live in the United States of America, it is demonstrably a fascist police state run by an administration, a captured senate and a captured Supreme Court that accepts and encourages a fascist agenda. It's a strict plutocratic oligarchy that pretends to be a democracy on election day. As an American citizen I do live under these institutions whether I choose to or not. I dissent from the mechanisms they use to stay in power, but our institutions don't listen to me. Rather they certainly would regard me as evil and ultimately will send me to the camps (sooner than than they'll come for you, at least), but for the moment I am a lesser concern.

            Aas for hive mentality, observe that I don't represent my opinions with the collective we as if I stand with a unified front of activists and freedom fighters behind me. Rather I am acutely aware of how individual my opinions are. The facts they're based on, however, are ours to consider or ignore. You may choose to stand with larger institutions in order to share purpose or feel that power, but in doing so, you give up your own autonomy, which you will discover once you are ordered to engage in duties contrary to your conscience. When Tomi Lahren, for instance, had to reposition herself from pro-abortion-access to strictly a-fertilized-egg-is-a-person pro-life. You can see how her soul cracked between the videos before and after she was reconditioned to toe the line, and liberal tears never quite tasted the same since.

            Feel free to elaborate on who this we is, other than the royal we or the feline we. Who else is in lockstep along with you?

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

            • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
              identicon
              Anonymous Reactionary, 1 Jul 2020 @ 2:29pm

              Re: Evil, Fascism and Hives

              You lie; Trump manifestly does NOT rule. The Left rules. You're just trying to be even more insane than those who do rule.

              One lie, all lies.

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

              • icon
                Uriel-238 (profile), 1 Jul 2020 @ 3:14pm

                Re: Re: Evil, Fascism and Hives

                You're going to have to elaborate, Anonymous Reactionary what you think I said that was untrue, why you think I deliberately intended to mislead, and how you figure the left rules. Don't and I'll assume you're just trolling.

                In the meantime, madness is irrelevant. A statement is not intrinsically false because it is made by a fool or a madman or an evil demon, so whether or not I am insane is irrelevant. If you think one of my premises is delusional, start there and be prepared to support your position with facts.

                Argue my positions, or don't, Anonymous Reactionary. But if you don't I'll assume there is no good to be had by engaging you.

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

              • icon
                bhull242 (profile), 1 Jul 2020 @ 4:26pm

                Re: Re: Evil, Fascism and Hives

                Since when has having a majority in one half of one branch of the government meant you rule the country?

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

                • icon
                  Uriel-238 (profile), 1 Jul 2020 @ 5:34pm

                  Ruling from the minority

                  Maybe he was referring to 2017 and 2018 when obstructionist Democrats (not actual liberals), Republicans with some conscience and an angry war vet all conspired to block Trump's great MAGA plan (but not the tax plan that will bankrupt the US in a decade).

                  And he would have done it too if it weren't for those meddling kids.

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

          • icon
            Uriel-238 (profile), 30 Jun 2020 @ 3:38pm

            Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness

            We believe in Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

            I highly doubt this. I think you want the status quo so long as you have food security and shelter security and income security for you and yours. Maybe it's easier to believe that the inalienable rights Jefferson wrote of are still respected when police aren't directly hunting and shooting you. (I'm still hung up about Philando Castile who was pulled over at least 49 times for minor offenses until they found excuse to murder him. The father of my grandson is pulled over a lot for minor shit as well, and I can't help but wonder if it's only a matter of time before law enforcement kills him.)

            Do you revel in the inequality in our society when it affects groups that you don't like?

            I suspect you give no fucks that large swaths of our population are oppressed by the system, often imprisoned for it or beaten to pulp for it. Sometimes they get killed by it. Do you care?

            I suspect you also give no fucks about the civilians firebombed by US drone strikes which number higher than all the gun deaths put together in North America. Yes, it was started in the Obama administration. Yes, Bush was sweeping villages with mercenaries and detaining and torturing people -- Americans even -- without due process. (I expect my elected officials to operate in accordance to their oath and an ethical standard of conduct, it doesn't matter to me what party they belong to when they don't.) Considering the atrocities committed by our nation within its borders, the atrocities committed by our nation outside its borders are way worse. (We don't torture. We hire non-Americans to torture for us.) Do you care?

            And I suspect you give no fucks about the population of the US suffering the highest incarceration rate globally, in which we demonize and dehumanize our inmates, as demonstrated by our lack of concern when COVID-19 moved like brushfire through the penal system. I suspect you give no fucks that over half of our inmates were sentenced disproportionately to minor crimes or convicted falsely (100.00% incarceration rate, 90% conviction rate. Convictions rather than fair adjudications are what accelerate political careers.) Do you care?

            We believe in Free Speech, Individual Liberty and the Rule of Law

            Except the US has a clear long history of a stratified justice system that pushes warm bodies into our prison system as above, and lets law enforcement, judges and the wealthy walk away with light sentences (if the DoJ just doesn't refuse to prosecute them).

            Much like the Tea Party and the Bush-era Republican party, it appears you only believe in these notions as rights when they apply just to you and your immediate buddies, and not to anyone outside of your Facebook friends list. It's been demonstrated by the Trump administration and by his supporters and followers this inconsistency is true to type for all of them.

            To be fair, that's what feels good. We all want to be Harry Potter, special, chosen, on Team Good Guys, part of a small cadre of elites. It's normal to hold dear to beliefs and ideologies that feel good. I get it. Mongo only pawn in game of life.

            We want to elect officials that feel right even when they are helping their buddies rob the nation and are only accelerating the nation's downfall. I can't blame you. We can't blame human beings for tragedized commons. It's what we do.

            So, personally, I only wonder if the catastrophe can be prevented, or I should start grieving now that it's going to come crashing down people people will still be blaming immigrants, minorities, Muslims and liberals as they plummet.

            Feel-good me-only policy is just not realistic. Not in a nation of 320 million people, for which we get electricity, running water, cell phone service, fresh fruit imported to our corner store, the internet and a space program. For all that you have to strive for a pluralistic society in which the welfare of everyone is regarded. Or it comes apart.

            If you expect the underclass to live by harder rules than you, it means you'll have to suffer the consequences when they no longer consent to doing their bit for your pleasure. And if you decide to do what the police are trying to do and force them to it, well, again, either you get a fascist police state chewing up its own populace or a horrible and bloody revolution. And neither of those are a good look for a civilization.

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

          • icon
            Uriel-238 (profile), 30 Jun 2020 @ 3:50pm

            Socialist Utopia

            You believe in a Socialist Utopia.

            I don't believe in any form of government. I've come to learn that I don't have the answers. There are brighter, more educated minds than mine trying to develop that more perfect union, and they don't know what kind of government is going make for the next thousand year reign.

            I'm okay with not having all the answers. Finding an ideal enough state that won't fall apart in a couple of centuries is a complicated problem.

            But we have a fuckton of ideas as to how to make our nation better, how to make it more public-serving, how to deconsolidate power, how to make elections more meaningful.

            And we don't do them. None of them. Even the no-brainers. Even when (as we've discovered) the checks and balances our branches are supposed to have don't check or balance.

            Right now, as so much of our government is captured, we're desperately looking for alternatives to the fourth box of liberty and there's just nothing there.

            And now that our fascist police state is entirely unmasked, and we know that no-one in the federal government is going to do a thing about it, it's no longer a matter of if things flash, but when. I suspect in the next couple of years we'll have another spot in the street that will eventually be marked with a big brass seal commemorating the people massacred there. And another barrage of gunfire will be heard around the world.

            And everyone will have underestimated just how horrible it is to watch the Tree of Liberty feed.

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

  • identicon
    stine, 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:01pm

    You're incorrect, they don't actually have to remove any content

    You seem to think that Parler has to remove any content, but they don't. They don't have to remove anything. On the other hand, if they don't remove certain types of content, they'll find that their userbase will disappear. That's completely not the same thing at all.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:26pm

      Re: You're incorrect, they don't actually have to remove any con

      They have to remove illegal content, so there.

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

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:34pm

      ... and?

      Which puts them in the exact same position as other social media platforms, so not sure what point you're going with there or who you're addressing.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2020 @ 10:29pm

    I was also banned apparently for an obscenity where I suggested Trumo was too close to Kim Jong Un

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronolo