6 ms·
It sounds like he tweeted new things today that they considered breaching their earlier warning? Does anyone know what those tweets were? Edit: Oh, damn, I had
by Sebguer 6y ago
It sounds like he tweeted new things today that they considered breaching their earlier warning? Does anyone know what those tweets were?
Edit: Oh, damn, I had just seen the Twitter Safety and just assumed that this was linking to that, not to a separate blogpost. As many people have pointed out it was for these two tweets:
On January 8, 2021, President Donald J. Trump tweeted:
“The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!”
Shortly thereafter, the President tweeted:
“To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.”
- zwily 6y agoIt quotes them in the article.
- GranPC 6y agoPer the linked article: > The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!! > To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.
- mc32 6y agoOk so he’s dissing the incoming President... ok, that’s rude. But the other preceding text is pretty anodyne. I think it’s clear about controlling the narrative. In the end what this will do is kickstart more of an echochamber on another service, they’ll diverge and we’ll get people in one camp on one platform, the other camp in the other. Except they’ll be more extreme on both sides as moderates tail off.
- jakelazaroff 6y agoOne interpretation is that his supporters should feel confident attacking the inauguration knowing he won’t be there to be injured. They are already openly planning violence: https://twitter.com/slpng_giants/status/1347609631527489537?s=21 https://twitter.com/slpng_giants/status/1347609631527489537?...
- mc32 6y agoWhat? Is this pre-crime we’re getting into now? What the hell happened to us?
- jakelazaroff 6y agoHe hasn’t been charged with anything, so no. I would like to think Twitter would ban any public figure who appears to be inciting a second terrorist attack mere days after inciting a first one.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoThere's blood and bullet holes in the halls of Congress! Principles of neutrality and restraint fly out the window when the seat of government is attacked by a violent mob. We can't just keep our fingers crossed that they don't mean it when they say they're coming back.
- rtx 6y agoWhat is a government without neutrality.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoNot much more than a big gorilla with a lot of guns. That's why maintaining the principles of neutrality is so important - and why we must react so severely when someone breaches the principles of neutrality to try and install their preferred politicians into power.
- u10 6y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_(criminal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_(criminal)
- fredley 6y agoHe's anticipating (planning?) further attacks on the Capitol and wants to be a safe distance away?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- tw04 6y ago>They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!! That's pretty clearly a veiled threat taken in light of all his other statements and the violence from just days ago.
- bpodgursky 6y ago> Due to the ongoing tensions in the United States, and an uptick in the global conversation in regards to the people who violently stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021, these two Tweets must be read in the context of broader events in the country and the ways in which the President’s statements can be mobilized by different audiences, including to incite violence, as well as in the context of the pattern of behavior from this account in recent weeks. That's so Orwellian. That so obviously reads... "we wanted to ban him, so we did". Like, if you want to ban him based on past tweets, just do it. But to claim that this tweet is inciting violence is just farcical.
- yanderekko 6y agoBe prepared for more nebulous, uncharitable "you're lending support to those who promote violence" bans in the future. Wouldn't be surprised to see it being used more aggressively across a variety of platforms in the coming weeks.
- disgrunt 6y agoOr "dog whistles", which the left seems to be able to hear, rendering the term utterly illogical.
- busymom0 6y agoThe downvotes on these sensible comments clearly shows me HN is filled with anti-liberals who support big tech billionaires while claiming to be resistance. Definition of Liberal used to be: "Willing to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas. Relating to or denoting a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise."
- bpodgursky 6y agoMeh, at this point it's half unemployed Europeans with a scattering of paid Chinese and Russian agitators. I don't read anything into the downvotes.
- 6y ago
- quotemstr 6y ago> The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!! > To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th. Imagine living in a society where saying either of these things is a banning offense. To all the censorship apologists here: you've given unelected and unaccountable people at big tech companies the ability to decide what people can say in public. Is that really the world you want to live in?
- cecja 6y agoIt's not the public you may seeing it as such but it's not. As Parler kicks off democratic politicians without proper cause twitter as a private company is allowed to ban a fascist wannabe dictator.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoI'd rather live in that world than the world where my national legislature flees their chambers in fear of a mob trying to overturn the democratic process. Do you have a third option to suggest?
- asenchi 6y agoYes, because as the article discusses, in context these tweets are being interpreted by his followers as, “don’t give up.” There are already postings on Parler about coming back to DC on the 19th and 20th.
- 1MachineElf 6y agoHis entire presidency was marked by #NotMyPresident and every democrat member of government, media, and tech all supporting protests against him for 4 years straight. Did they give up? If not, then why should his supporters?
- jhardy54 6y agoThey're welcome to protest, but as a society we draw the line at terrorism. Don't do that.
- razius 6y agoThey are purging a lot of conservative accounts.
- dividedbyzero 6y agoAre they? Which ones?
- busymom0 6y agoTechnoFog, an account which literally only tweets lawsuits just got banned too. #WalkAway is a movement of ex liberals who have left the democrat party. Founded by a gay dude, majority blacks, hispanics, gay etc. Had over half a million users who shared their testimonials on why they left the democrat party. Facebook banned the group today along with the founder and all the members.... all 500K of them
- chrononaut 6y ago> TechnoFog, an account which literally only tweets lawsuits just got banned too. I assume you typo'd that handle? There are only five tweets from 2013 on that account. https://twitter.com/TechnoFog https://twitter.com/TechnoFog
- Sebguer 6y agoYeah, think he means techno_fog. His claim that it only tweets lawsuits is definitely not true, as well: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:vnAQV4fQJ88J:https://twitter.com/techno_fog%3Flang%3Den+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:vnAQV4... I imagine whatever actually got him banned isn't caught in the cache, though.
- chrononaut 6y agoAh gotcha. Thanks! Yes, that account is not quite what was being positioned in GP.