3 ms·

Parler is 2 years old and not exclusive. It just got popular this week thanks to some Twitter influencers and due to the founder requesting peot to join.

Natsu 6y ago
Huh, I didn't know that. This week was the first I'd heard of it.
pfraze 6y ago
Had to look it up. It's another social media play like Gab that uses "free speech" to mean "pro alt right." Every one of their product screenshots is of a pro-Trump story. EDIT: https://parler.com/auth/access https://parler.com/auth/access
- weare138 6y ago
  Here's a screenshot from Parler's site showing their promoted news sources. It pretty much sums up Parler: https://i.imgur.com/2Lb8kwB.png https://i.imgur.com/2Lb8kwB.png
- ALittleLight 6y ago
  I think what people actually need, and probably would want, is a less free speech alternative. Like, you're banned from being rude, crass, or offensive. In general, I like the idea of free speech, but to my intuition "free speech" seems like philosophers daring to go anywhere their minds will take them regardless of mainstream norms, political correctness, or commonly held beliefs. In practice, "free speech" is just people being jerks and saying mean things.
  - dionian 6y ago
    And of course the moderators of such a forum would never lean to one side of neutral and define 'hate' in ways that would benefit them politically! Just like how twitter very fairly enforces the rules against liberals just like it does conservatives! /s
  - ImprobableTruth 6y ago
    This post seems absolutely crazy to me. If you look at history, one (if not the) main usage of censorship is as a tool for the powerful to oppress their opponents. Ideas that go against established institutions are often by their very nature offensive. Book burnings and similar atrocities such as Entartete Kunst aren't some hypothetical dreamed up by paranoid philosophers, they are real things that happened, are happening and will happen. I think there are ways to deal with jerks without limiting free speech (e.g. user customizable filtering of content, so people can themselves decide whether to view content they think is objectionable), but if there wasn't I think you have to at the very least recognize that there is a very real cost attached to curtailing free speech.
- klyrs 6y ago
  They've got an amusing take on free speech. Namely, if they get sued over your content, you're liable for their legal fees. Also their policy seems to be overly strict vis a vis the first amendment. And of course they reserve the right to remove you and your posts for any reason, without recourse. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200625/16303844790/just-like-every-other-platform-parler-will-deal-with-content-moderation-questions.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200625/16303844790/just-...

Natsu 6y ago

Huh, I didn't know that. This week was the first I'd heard of it.

pfraze 6y ago

Had to look it up. It's another social media play like Gab that uses "free speech" to mean "pro alt right." Every one of their product screenshots is of a pro-Trump story. EDIT: https://parler.com/auth/access https://parler.com/auth/access

weare138 6y ago
Here's a screenshot from Parler's site showing their promoted news sources. It pretty much sums up Parler: https://i.imgur.com/2Lb8kwB.png https://i.imgur.com/2Lb8kwB.png
ALittleLight 6y ago
I think what people actually need, and probably would want, is a less free speech alternative. Like, you're banned from being rude, crass, or offensive. In general, I like the idea of free speech, but to my intuition "free speech" seems like philosophers daring to go anywhere their minds will take them regardless of mainstream norms, political correctness, or commonly held beliefs. In practice, "free speech" is just people being jerks and saying mean things.
- dionian 6y ago
  And of course the moderators of such a forum would never lean to one side of neutral and define 'hate' in ways that would benefit them politically! Just like how twitter very fairly enforces the rules against liberals just like it does conservatives! /s
- ImprobableTruth 6y ago
  This post seems absolutely crazy to me. If you look at history, one (if not the) main usage of censorship is as a tool for the powerful to oppress their opponents. Ideas that go against established institutions are often by their very nature offensive. Book burnings and similar atrocities such as Entartete Kunst aren't some hypothetical dreamed up by paranoid philosophers, they are real things that happened, are happening and will happen. I think there are ways to deal with jerks without limiting free speech (e.g. user customizable filtering of content, so people can themselves decide whether to view content they think is objectionable), but if there wasn't I think you have to at the very least recognize that there is a very real cost attached to curtailing free speech.
klyrs 6y ago
They've got an amusing take on free speech. Namely, if they get sued over your content, you're liable for their legal fees. Also their policy seems to be overly strict vis a vis the first amendment. And of course they reserve the right to remove you and your posts for any reason, without recourse. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200625/16303844790/just-like-every-other-platform-parler-will-deal-with-content-moderation-questions.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200625/16303844790/just-...