3 ms·

How, I would love to hear solutions. People like asparagirl will not join a free speech platform because her speech isn't really restricted from the non-free s

How, I would love to hear solutions. People like asparagirl will not join a free speech platform because her speech isn't really restricted from the non-free speech platforms. The people who have the biggest incentive to join these platforms are the one which are kicked out from all the other networks.

matt4077 8y ago
The ACLU seems like a worthwhile cause for actual advocates of free speech. And no, they don't only advocate for liberal causes. Campaign finance laws would be one area of policy where they have starkly different ideas than the political left. As to these platforms: the whole argument is essentially build on this slippery-slope fallacy that banning vile racism, anti-semitism, etc. inexorably leads more restrictions on speech, and (eventually) the end democracy. That's demonstrably false: there have always been restrictions on speech (such as obscenity laws), so there really isn't some bright red line that would be crossed, and these restrictions have also not lead to the end of free speech. There are restrictions on almost any other activity if you expand your definitions to the extremes: the right of peaceful assembly is just as central to democracy, but nobody is bothered by the restriction that you can't hold your protest in the Oval Office. So maybe these people should consider being kicked out of all these platforms not as an incentive to change platforms, but to rather think about how far they must have removed themselves from society. Seriously: if the people who think youtube comments are worth it ban you, it's time to start listening more and posting less.
- splintercell 8y ago
  I am very confused by your response, it seems like you're responding to what you think I said rather than what I actually said. I am saying that if you create a product NEW, and hope to lure away people from product OLD, the only people who will migrate to the new platform are the people who have problem with product OLD which product NEW solves for them. In case of the 'free speech' platforms, the group which has the problem and need of 'free speech' are the ones which are restricted in their speech.
repolfx 8y ago
And oddly enough the ones that get kicked out from other networks are the ones repeatedly targeted by people like Asparagirl. Their mission is quite obviously to completely erase anyone who doesn't share their same set of hates and out-groups from the internet: first, get them kicked off the big platforms, then try to choke off payment processing to smaller platforms. Then they sit back and wonder how they can get those people at the ballot box too. I don't know how this ends, but people like Asparagirl are clearly the sort of people Trump means when he talks about mobs. They will presumably never stop trying to shut down anyone she identifies as an enemy. This probably ends with some sort of legislative solution, in the long run.

matt4077 8y ago

The ACLU seems like a worthwhile cause for actual advocates of free speech. And no, they don't only advocate for liberal causes. Campaign finance laws would be one area of policy where they have starkly different ideas than the political left. As to these platforms: the whole argument is essentially build on this slippery-slope fallacy that banning vile racism, anti-semitism, etc. inexorably leads more restrictions on speech, and (eventually) the end democracy. That's demonstrably false: there have always been restrictions on speech (such as obscenity laws), so there really isn't some bright red line that would be crossed, and these restrictions have also not lead to the end of free speech. There are restrictions on almost any other activity if you expand your definitions to the extremes: the right of peaceful assembly is just as central to democracy, but nobody is bothered by the restriction that you can't hold your protest in the Oval Office. So maybe these people should consider being kicked out of all these platforms not as an incentive to change platforms, but to rather think about how far they must have removed themselves from society. Seriously: if the people who think youtube comments are worth it ban you, it's time to start listening more and posting less.

splintercell 8y ago
I am very confused by your response, it seems like you're responding to what you think I said rather than what I actually said. I am saying that if you create a product NEW, and hope to lure away people from product OLD, the only people who will migrate to the new platform are the people who have problem with product OLD which product NEW solves for them. In case of the 'free speech' platforms, the group which has the problem and need of 'free speech' are the ones which are restricted in their speech.

repolfx 8y ago

And oddly enough the ones that get kicked out from other networks are the ones repeatedly targeted by people like Asparagirl. Their mission is quite obviously to completely erase anyone who doesn't share their same set of hates and out-groups from the internet: first, get them kicked off the big platforms, then try to choke off payment processing to smaller platforms. Then they sit back and wonder how they can get those people at the ballot box too. I don't know how this ends, but people like Asparagirl are clearly the sort of people Trump means when he talks about mobs. They will presumably never stop trying to shut down anyone she identifies as an enemy. This probably ends with some sort of legislative solution, in the long run.