5 ms·

Keep in mind your own biais. I am following liberals on twitter, and there has been a big outcry that some of those users had their account deactivated or tweet

Keep in mind your own biais. I am following liberals on twitter, and there has been a big outcry that some of those users had their account deactivated or tweets taken down while @jack is keeping famous neo-nazis on the platform (not talking of Trump supporters here, people that self-identify as nazis and white suprematist). So while it looks for you like Twitter has been becoming a liberal echochamber, to liberal it is becoming a place where neo-nazis are let free while critics are being harassed/taken down.

vertex-four 8y ago
Indeed. There's a reason leftist types have been escaping gradually escaping to Mastodon instances where they have much more useful content-blocking tools and aren't forced under pain of being banned to share a space with people who literally want them dead. On Twitter, a self-identifying neonazi can spout death threats, and the response to that will get the responder banned.
- swebs 8y ago
  >Twitter, a self-identifying neonazi can spout death threats, and the response to that will get the responder banned. Could you link an example?
  - vertex-four 8y ago
    Not without identifying myself, sorry. I sit in multiple irc channels where this sort of thing regularly happens to members though. It’s the bizarre inconsistency of it that’s most grating - content can result in bans or not depending on... as far as anyone can tell, a roll of the dice. For any number of instances where a fascist says something awful and gets away with it, you can find much more banal things that get leftists banned.
  - rspeer 8y ago
    It will be hard to satisfy your demand for proof, because there's no good way to search "tweets you've seen", but I have seen it happen. Person A starts a thread. Person B who A doesn't know says something dehumanizing to person A. Person A says "fuck off and die". Person A gets shadowbanned for a week. There was even a time when, due to their bad automated processes, you could get shadowbanned for using the word "queer" in a positive sense. (Hilariously, Twitter's position on shadowbanning is that they do no such thing, they just hide your tweets from everyone's timeline, which is exactly what everyone means when they say "shadowban".)
    - stuckinarut 8y ago
      > Person A says "fuck off and die". That's not a death threat. That's mean and callous and rude, but it's not a threat.
      - rspeer 8y ago
        This seems intended as an argument against my post, but I agree entirely.
vorpalhex 8y ago
Is someone who is a professed neo-nazi using your platform, but not otherwise engaging in abuse, worth banning? Let's try it with this example. Is someone who genuinely and openly holds the opinion that all men are rapists, but not otherwise engaging in abuse, worth banning? When we start going down this path of trying to get rid of "undesirables", we start engaging in censorship.
- maldusiecle 8y ago
  When you equate this imaginary feminist position with literally advocating for genocide, you're telling on yourself.
  - sincerely 8y ago
    I've been involved in leftist/feminist spaces about a decade both IRL and online and I can assure you that while it certainly never gained mass adoption and may be out of favour now compared to the late 00s early 10s (thank god), calling it an "imaginary" position is disingenuous at best.
    - maldusiecle 8y ago
      Sure, it was a second wave attitude. It's obviously not at all prevalent in the contemporary mainstream, certainly not among people young enough to be active on Twitter. In that sense it's imaginary: it's his imagined view of what feminists on Twitter are arguing for, not an accurate representation of what their views are.
    - orbitur 8y ago
      > calling it an "imaginary" position is disingenuous at best It was never worthy of engagement anyway, so perhaps stop creating strawpeople with it.
  - vorpalhex 8y ago
    I didn't use the word feminist.

vertex-four 8y ago

Indeed. There's a reason leftist types have been escaping gradually escaping to Mastodon instances where they have much more useful content-blocking tools and aren't forced under pain of being banned to share a space with people who literally want them dead. On Twitter, a self-identifying neonazi can spout death threats, and the response to that will get the responder banned.

swebs 8y ago
>Twitter, a self-identifying neonazi can spout death threats, and the response to that will get the responder banned. Could you link an example?
- vertex-four 8y ago
  Not without identifying myself, sorry. I sit in multiple irc channels where this sort of thing regularly happens to members though. It’s the bizarre inconsistency of it that’s most grating - content can result in bans or not depending on... as far as anyone can tell, a roll of the dice. For any number of instances where a fascist says something awful and gets away with it, you can find much more banal things that get leftists banned.
- rspeer 8y ago
  It will be hard to satisfy your demand for proof, because there's no good way to search "tweets you've seen", but I have seen it happen. Person A starts a thread. Person B who A doesn't know says something dehumanizing to person A. Person A says "fuck off and die". Person A gets shadowbanned for a week. There was even a time when, due to their bad automated processes, you could get shadowbanned for using the word "queer" in a positive sense. (Hilariously, Twitter's position on shadowbanning is that they do no such thing, they just hide your tweets from everyone's timeline, which is exactly what everyone means when they say "shadowban".)
  - stuckinarut 8y ago
    > Person A says "fuck off and die". That's not a death threat. That's mean and callous and rude, but it's not a threat.
    - rspeer 8y ago
      This seems intended as an argument against my post, but I agree entirely.

vorpalhex 8y ago

Is someone who is a professed neo-nazi using your platform, but not otherwise engaging in abuse, worth banning? Let's try it with this example. Is someone who genuinely and openly holds the opinion that all men are rapists, but not otherwise engaging in abuse, worth banning? When we start going down this path of trying to get rid of "undesirables", we start engaging in censorship.

maldusiecle 8y ago
When you equate this imaginary feminist position with literally advocating for genocide, you're telling on yourself.
- sincerely 8y ago
  I've been involved in leftist/feminist spaces about a decade both IRL and online and I can assure you that while it certainly never gained mass adoption and may be out of favour now compared to the late 00s early 10s (thank god), calling it an "imaginary" position is disingenuous at best.
  - maldusiecle 8y ago
    Sure, it was a second wave attitude. It's obviously not at all prevalent in the contemporary mainstream, certainly not among people young enough to be active on Twitter. In that sense it's imaginary: it's his imagined view of what feminists on Twitter are arguing for, not an accurate representation of what their views are.
  - orbitur 8y ago
    > calling it an "imaginary" position is disingenuous at best It was never worthy of engagement anyway, so perhaps stop creating strawpeople with it.
- vorpalhex 8y ago
  I didn't use the word feminist.