6 ms·

Scott Adams Shadowbanned from Twitter for Supporting Trump

27 points by empressplay 10y ago

fred_is_fred 10y ago
Predating Trump support, Scott Adams is and was a nut-bag misogynist, so my hanky is pretty dry right now.
- DiabloD3 10y ago
  Cite? Because I only know him from his comic that is about as funny as Garfield.
  - fred_is_fred 10y ago
    Feel free to find other sources but this goes way back, he's got a blog where he says lots of crazy shit about women. This is one of the better non-blog sources I found, google will find you plenty more: http://www.macleans.ca/culture/movies/whats-with-dilberts-creator/ http://www.macleans.ca/culture/movies/whats-with-dilberts-cr... He also mansplains harassment: http://freethoughtblogs.com/indelible/2014/11/10/scott-adams-mansplains-why-feminists-are-wrong-about-street-harassment-or-something/ http://freethoughtblogs.com/indelible/2014/11/10/scott-adams... You can also search for the fun stuff he said about rape and salary inequality. Here's one of the rape ones: http://jezebel.com/5813290/dilbert-creator-scott-adams-weighs-in-on-rape-now http://jezebel.com/5813290/dilbert-creator-scott-adams-weigh... He's since deleted the original post.
    - mzw_mzw 10y ago
      >mansplain Please don't use sexist language on HN.
  - ZeroGravitas 10y ago
    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scott_Adams http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scott_Adams That site has a thorough listing. He seems to have been very odd for a long time, not believing in fossils and things like that. http://mradilbert.tumblr.com/ http://mradilbert.tumblr.com/ Quotes the highlights from his recent blogs.
  - GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
    There's this classic: http://www.themarysue.com/scott-adams-mens-rights/ http://www.themarysue.com/scott-adams-mens-rights/ And of course the sock puppets: http://www.salon.com/2011/04/19/scott_adams_sock_puppetry_scandal/ http://www.salon.com/2011/04/19/scott_adams_sock_puppetry_sc... http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2011/04/16/scott-adams-imaginary-friend/ http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2011/04/16/scott-adams-ima...
- NotSammyHagar 10y ago
  He does come across as a bit of a nut. I really loved dilbert, sad to see him so paranoid and bitter about the world. He reminds me of Peter Thiel.
NotSammyHagar 10y ago
Can't he just use his powers of persuasion and hypnosis to make twitter do what he wants? More seriously, I am curious what he actually did. Is he constantly an asshole or threatening people or something? Twitter is not the same thing as free speech, but I know a lot of conservatives get their panties in a bunch, being so afraid of being oppressed by the (wo)man. The article doesn't really say what he posted.
- shitgoose 10y ago
  "The article doesn't really say what he posted." Support for Trump. Isn't that enough?
  - GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
    Why would "support for Trump" be bannable when "being Trump" is not.
    - qbrass 10y ago
      One is a choice, the other was how he was born.
    - ferentchak 10y ago
      I wonder how much Trump is responsible for Twitter's traffic these days. I know I had tuned out of it a while ago because Twitter didn't have any content that interests me. Now it's like reality tv for the election
    - shitgoose 10y ago
      as any school bully would know, you have to pick targets that are weaker than you.
  - NotSammyHagar 10y ago
    No, support for trump is not enough to get banned of course. That guy from brietbart who got banned from twitter had been attacking people for a long time, and urging others to attack people like leslie jones. I thing this is the kind of thing that eventually adds up to a ban on twitter.
robotresearcher 10y ago
He claims that the backlash against his support of Trump cost him $1M in speaker fees in the coming year. That is 20 years of the median wage for full time work in the US. I respect Adams' creativity and he's made a significant cultural contribution, but the late-stage Adams career of self-proclaimed genius too smart to be fooled by political correctness is unpleasant. It's very easy to be a libertarian when you won everything.
- jakeogh 10y ago
  Record numbers of ordinary people are voting for Trump. http://img.ccrd.clearchannel.com/media/mlib/15172/2016/06/default/gop_primary_popular_vote_0_1465386905.jpg http://img.ccrd.clearchannel.com/media/mlib/15172/2016/06/de... https://i.sli.mg/erfcMO.jpg https://i.sli.mg/erfcMO.jpg
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - robotresearcher 10y ago
    Those links show 13 million people voted for Trump in the Republican primary. In a voting population of 241 million, that's 5.39% of eligible voters. More people voted for Clinton, and very nearly as many voted for Sanders (Trump/Sanders = 1.0071). Official popular vote count in 2016 primaries, in numerical order: Clinton 16,914,722 Trump 13,300,472 Sanders 13,206,428 Cruz 7,637,262 Poll-based predictions for the general election currently: http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?...
    - jakeogh 10y ago
      2012: Barack Hussein Obama II 65,918,507 Willard Mitt Romney 60,934,407
      - robotresearcher 10y ago
        Are you proposing those GA results for comparison with the primary results? The 2012 primary results were: Obama: 6,158,064 Romney: 10,031,336 The Dems' nomination of the sitting president was a foregone conclusion so no need to get out the vote.
avmich 10y ago
This is a poster child of the case when you can completely disagree with opinion but should be really worried about the possibility of silencing it. Wonder if Scott Adams can satisfy the search for intelligent Trump supporters - http://omniorthogonal.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-quest-for-intelligent-trump.html http://omniorthogonal.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-quest-for-int... .
- ZeroGravitas 10y ago
  The slatestarcodex blog linked to above, and it's follow up are good reads: http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/09/28/ssc-endorses-clinton-johnson-or-stein/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/09/28/ssc-endorses-clinton-jo... http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/10/01/he-kept-us-out-of-war/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/10/01/he-kept-us-out-of-war/ Intelligent conservatives' comments on Trump fascinate me. I like reading between the lines as they realise they have to explain things very slowly for a big portion of their audience, who they thought were appreciating their intellectual arguments, but it turns out they just thought they were in the same tribe. For more from this genre, see also Sam Harris podcasts available on Youtube, where he goes into great detail about why Trump would be a disaster.
GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
Why would twitter ban Adams and not any of the thousands of other jerks on there?
- slededit 10y ago
  His theory: > All things considered, I had a great week. I didn’t realize I was having enough impact to get on the Clinton enemies list.

27 points by empressplay 10y ago

fred_is_fred 10y ago

Predating Trump support, Scott Adams is and was a nut-bag misogynist, so my hanky is pretty dry right now.

DiabloD3 10y ago
Cite? Because I only know him from his comic that is about as funny as Garfield.
- fred_is_fred 10y ago
  Feel free to find other sources but this goes way back, he's got a blog where he says lots of crazy shit about women. This is one of the better non-blog sources I found, google will find you plenty more: http://www.macleans.ca/culture/movies/whats-with-dilberts-creator/ http://www.macleans.ca/culture/movies/whats-with-dilberts-cr... He also mansplains harassment: http://freethoughtblogs.com/indelible/2014/11/10/scott-adams-mansplains-why-feminists-are-wrong-about-street-harassment-or-something/ http://freethoughtblogs.com/indelible/2014/11/10/scott-adams... You can also search for the fun stuff he said about rape and salary inequality. Here's one of the rape ones: http://jezebel.com/5813290/dilbert-creator-scott-adams-weighs-in-on-rape-now http://jezebel.com/5813290/dilbert-creator-scott-adams-weigh... He's since deleted the original post.
  - mzw_mzw 10y ago
    >mansplain Please don't use sexist language on HN.
- ZeroGravitas 10y ago
  http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scott_Adams http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scott_Adams That site has a thorough listing. He seems to have been very odd for a long time, not believing in fossils and things like that. http://mradilbert.tumblr.com/ http://mradilbert.tumblr.com/ Quotes the highlights from his recent blogs.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
  There's this classic: http://www.themarysue.com/scott-adams-mens-rights/ http://www.themarysue.com/scott-adams-mens-rights/ And of course the sock puppets: http://www.salon.com/2011/04/19/scott_adams_sock_puppetry_scandal/ http://www.salon.com/2011/04/19/scott_adams_sock_puppetry_sc... http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2011/04/16/scott-adams-imaginary-friend/ http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2011/04/16/scott-adams-ima...
NotSammyHagar 10y ago
He does come across as a bit of a nut. I really loved dilbert, sad to see him so paranoid and bitter about the world. He reminds me of Peter Thiel.

NotSammyHagar 10y ago

Can't he just use his powers of persuasion and hypnosis to make twitter do what he wants? More seriously, I am curious what he actually did. Is he constantly an asshole or threatening people or something? Twitter is not the same thing as free speech, but I know a lot of conservatives get their panties in a bunch, being so afraid of being oppressed by the (wo)man. The article doesn't really say what he posted.

shitgoose 10y ago
"The article doesn't really say what he posted." Support for Trump. Isn't that enough?
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
  Why would "support for Trump" be bannable when "being Trump" is not.
  - qbrass 10y ago
    One is a choice, the other was how he was born.
  - ferentchak 10y ago
    I wonder how much Trump is responsible for Twitter's traffic these days. I know I had tuned out of it a while ago because Twitter didn't have any content that interests me. Now it's like reality tv for the election
  - shitgoose 10y ago
    as any school bully would know, you have to pick targets that are weaker than you.
- NotSammyHagar 10y ago
  No, support for trump is not enough to get banned of course. That guy from brietbart who got banned from twitter had been attacking people for a long time, and urging others to attack people like leslie jones. I thing this is the kind of thing that eventually adds up to a ban on twitter.

robotresearcher 10y ago

He claims that the backlash against his support of Trump cost him $1M in speaker fees in the coming year. That is 20 years of the median wage for full time work in the US. I respect Adams' creativity and he's made a significant cultural contribution, but the late-stage Adams career of self-proclaimed genius too smart to be fooled by political correctness is unpleasant. It's very easy to be a libertarian when you won everything.

jakeogh 10y ago
Record numbers of ordinary people are voting for Trump. http://img.ccrd.clearchannel.com/media/mlib/15172/2016/06/default/gop_primary_popular_vote_0_1465386905.jpg http://img.ccrd.clearchannel.com/media/mlib/15172/2016/06/de... https://i.sli.mg/erfcMO.jpg https://i.sli.mg/erfcMO.jpg
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- robotresearcher 10y ago
  Those links show 13 million people voted for Trump in the Republican primary. In a voting population of 241 million, that's 5.39% of eligible voters. More people voted for Clinton, and very nearly as many voted for Sanders (Trump/Sanders = 1.0071). Official popular vote count in 2016 primaries, in numerical order: Clinton 16,914,722 Trump 13,300,472 Sanders 13,206,428 Cruz 7,637,262 Poll-based predictions for the general election currently: http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?...
  - jakeogh 10y ago
    2012: Barack Hussein Obama II 65,918,507 Willard Mitt Romney 60,934,407
    - robotresearcher 10y ago
      Are you proposing those GA results for comparison with the primary results? The 2012 primary results were: Obama: 6,158,064 Romney: 10,031,336 The Dems' nomination of the sitting president was a foregone conclusion so no need to get out the vote.

avmich 10y ago

This is a poster child of the case when you can completely disagree with opinion but should be really worried about the possibility of silencing it. Wonder if Scott Adams can satisfy the search for intelligent Trump supporters - http://omniorthogonal.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-quest-for-intelligent-trump.html http://omniorthogonal.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-quest-for-int... .

ZeroGravitas 10y ago
The slatestarcodex blog linked to above, and it's follow up are good reads: http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/09/28/ssc-endorses-clinton-johnson-or-stein/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/09/28/ssc-endorses-clinton-jo... http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/10/01/he-kept-us-out-of-war/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/10/01/he-kept-us-out-of-war/ Intelligent conservatives' comments on Trump fascinate me. I like reading between the lines as they realise they have to explain things very slowly for a big portion of their audience, who they thought were appreciating their intellectual arguments, but it turns out they just thought they were in the same tribe. For more from this genre, see also Sam Harris podcasts available on Youtube, where he goes into great detail about why Trump would be a disaster.

GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago

Why would twitter ban Adams and not any of the thousands of other jerks on there?

slededit 10y ago
His theory: > All things considered, I had a great week. I didn’t realize I was having enough impact to get on the Clinton enemies list.