9 ms·

> My understanding is that in Parler, posts are moderated by a jury of five peers. But if that jury is just as extreme as the poster advocating murdering journa

> My understanding is that in Parler, posts are moderated by a jury of five peers. But if that jury is just as extreme as the poster advocating murdering journalists, what then? We’ve entered new territory. When you look at analogues to this situation, Islamic radicals, mass shooters in America being mostly white men, both of the broader groups (Muslims, white Americans) can easily say those fringe actors are the 0.000001%. Even those that might support the fringe actors in the broader group would still only represent a small percentage. The rioters in this case, if they are the fringe of the broader Republican base, visually looked significant. This is nothing like ‘oh, yeah that’s just one crazy nut’. In the broader group, the percentage that sympathizes with this fringe is high, with the most official accounting of this number being the actual 75 million Americans that voted for Trump. We are in no way talking about a fringe imho.

dash2 6y ago
I doubt if all Americans that voted for Trump are sympathetic to the Capitol riots. Polls showed that the majority of Republicans were against them. Yougov showed 45% support among Republicans: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/republicans-congress-capitol-support-trump-b1783807.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-electio.... PBS/Marist poll, only 18%: https://thehill.com/homenews/news/533452-poll-18-percent-of-republicans-support-capitol-riots https://thehill.com/homenews/news/533452-poll-18-percent-of-....
- empthought 6y ago
  This isn’t an election or popularity contest; 18% of Republicans in favor of armed insurrection and coup is quite significant, ranging into the millions of people.
  - runawaybottle 6y ago
    I’ll also add that they did this without a good enough reason too. I know this is going to go against the media narrative about how reprehensible the riot was, and the reverence we must pay to Congress, but for the entirety of 2005-2020, Congress had record low approval ratings. Last week we just visually saw the reality of storming congress (you may not even know it’s possible in your perceptions until you literally see it). Well, people just saw it’s possible. Either base can find a lot more reasons to rile themselves up and go down there. So, I really don’t buy that Americans will by and large condemn the act, especially on the Republican side. Those polls are for sure under-tallied, Congress (and now particularly, a Democratic congress) is way too hated by the agitated right-wing, the once war mongering Bush nationalists, to the reimagined tea-party anti-Obama coalition, to the re-imagined anti-authoritarian Trump cohort, to the newly re-imagined ___________ (militant?). Not a fringe my dear friends, an evolving force.
  - linuxftw 6y ago
    If you label it a 'coup' well of course that sounds terrible. If you believe the election was stolen, then the other side perpetrated the 'coup.' I don't see either side making any effect towards compromise.
    - Jochim 6y ago
      > If you believe the election was stolen At this point I have to ask, what compromise do you suggest be made to these people? How do you compromise with people that were shouting "Hang Mike Pence" in front of some home-made gallows?
      - linuxftw 6y ago
        A compromise would have been performing a transparent audit in the disputed states, especially in counties where the counting stopped and resumed in the middle of the night. You know, actually listen to and address their complaints instead of just saying 'you're a crazy conspiracy nut.'
        Jochim 6y ago
        > A compromise would have been performing a transparent audit in the disputed states, especially in counties where the counting stopped and resumed in the middle of the night. But it looks like this did happen? One example[1]. > You know, actually listen to and address their complaints instead of just saying 'you're a crazy conspiracy nut.' There were attempts to address their complaints. Re ounts and audits took place. Those recounts and audits didn't change the result or uncover any further evidence of fraud. This didn't align with Trump's claims so his base dismissed it as lies. The interesting thing coming out of this is that they're now turning on the rest of the republican party who accept what their own observers are telling them. I'd also like to point out that this was all happening while Trump was privately pressuring the Georgia secretary of state to 'find' him enough votes to win[2]. Uncovering fraud was never the motivation here, it's a cynical attempt at destroying trust in the election process in order to corrupt the result. [1]https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/georgia-recount-trump-biden-cobb-county-b1780298.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-electio... [2]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/trump-call-georgia-election-find-the-fraud https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/trump-call-g...
- throwaway80332 6y ago
  As always, there is a twist. The question asked was: "Supporters of President Trump have stormed the US Capitol to protest lawmakers certifying Joe Biden’s election victory. Based on what you have read or heard about this, do you support or oppose these actions?" That is not the same as supporting armed rioters breaking into the Capitol Building to try and kill democratic politicians (which isn't what happened, but leftists pretend they think it was). But obviously "liberals" will simply downvote and flag and ban.
throwaway316943 6y ago
How many of the people attending the protest actually entered or attempted to enter the Capitol building? Out of those that did how many were actively seeking to cause trouble and how many were just following the crowd and looking around? If you look at the facts for yourself and don’t rely on other people’s opinions you’ll see more clearly.
- runawaybottle 6y ago
  It was a pretty small entrance.
- xnx 6y ago
  If you pick your photos carefully, you can pretend that this was a bunch of goofs who accidentally got into the Capitol. This video was eye-opening to me: https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2021/01/09/officer-crushed-in-door-capitol-riots-lemon-reaction-ctn-vpx.cnn https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2021/01/09/officer-crushed-in-...
- morty_s 6y ago
  See this clearly: https://youtu.be/182JKOm1LY0 https://youtu.be/182JKOm1LY0 You can see the “violent few” drag and beat an officer to death. You can see and hear the surrounding mob cheer themselves on. So how many people need to witness a murder in progress before doing anything about it?
intended 6y ago
The one thing that I’ve noticed on the HN convos is that space is being made for parler and those that use it, unintentionally. It seems that not many people have been to parler, and very few links to screen shots or other evidence is available. Unfortunately - and this really is just what usually happens - the noble arguments for free speech get converted into a shield to add respectability to parler and hate speech. And if the trend continues, more political or even subversive content starts appearing in the sub, at just the angle to take advantage of the blind spots of forum goers. It’s happening here, I’m seeming that dumb path finding algo for indoctrination playing out over the past three threads.
- Grimm1 6y ago
  I had a conversation with a friend about this, I asked him what Parler is like and on a scale of 1-10 how extreme it was. He said it depended and that there was some perfectly normal content but that the number of clicks to get to a more radical place and thus start to see the extreme side and potentially be radicalized was much shorter than say Reddit. His supporting evidence that one of the first suggested places to follow you see when you signup is the OANN. I'm not personally comfortable with the easy bake radicalizing from that so to speak and is what pushed me over the edge in being okay with the ban. We wouldn't tolerate a place where it was easy to breed other types of extremism why is this any different was my thought.
  - intended 6y ago
    The sad part is that people give it the benefit of doubt when they hear this. They’ll translate it as “it’s not that bad”. “It’s only a few steps away from OANN” “That means the first bunch of stuff is normal people talking about conservative talking points.” “Sure, not a place I’d like to hang out, but I’d see why it may need protection even if I may disagree, that’s what I’m trained to do.” Yeah no. Parler actively removes people who bring in the “liberal” point of view. I’ll even grant, that removal by ideology is a necessary tool for political moderation. But that still means that parler is an echo chamber, amplifying beliefs that the “election was stolen”, “democrats will destroy the country.”

dash2 6y ago

I doubt if all Americans that voted for Trump are sympathetic to the Capitol riots. Polls showed that the majority of Republicans were against them. Yougov showed 45% support among Republicans: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/republicans-congress-capitol-support-trump-b1783807.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-electio.... PBS/Marist poll, only 18%: https://thehill.com/homenews/news/533452-poll-18-percent-of-republicans-support-capitol-riots https://thehill.com/homenews/news/533452-poll-18-percent-of-....

empthought 6y ago
This isn’t an election or popularity contest; 18% of Republicans in favor of armed insurrection and coup is quite significant, ranging into the millions of people.
- runawaybottle 6y ago
  I’ll also add that they did this without a good enough reason too. I know this is going to go against the media narrative about how reprehensible the riot was, and the reverence we must pay to Congress, but for the entirety of 2005-2020, Congress had record low approval ratings. Last week we just visually saw the reality of storming congress (you may not even know it’s possible in your perceptions until you literally see it). Well, people just saw it’s possible. Either base can find a lot more reasons to rile themselves up and go down there. So, I really don’t buy that Americans will by and large condemn the act, especially on the Republican side. Those polls are for sure under-tallied, Congress (and now particularly, a Democratic congress) is way too hated by the agitated right-wing, the once war mongering Bush nationalists, to the reimagined tea-party anti-Obama coalition, to the re-imagined anti-authoritarian Trump cohort, to the newly re-imagined ___________ (militant?). Not a fringe my dear friends, an evolving force.
- linuxftw 6y ago
  If you label it a 'coup' well of course that sounds terrible. If you believe the election was stolen, then the other side perpetrated the 'coup.' I don't see either side making any effect towards compromise.
  - Jochim 6y ago
    > If you believe the election was stolen At this point I have to ask, what compromise do you suggest be made to these people? How do you compromise with people that were shouting "Hang Mike Pence" in front of some home-made gallows?
    - linuxftw 6y ago
      A compromise would have been performing a transparent audit in the disputed states, especially in counties where the counting stopped and resumed in the middle of the night. You know, actually listen to and address their complaints instead of just saying 'you're a crazy conspiracy nut.'
      - Jochim 6y ago
        > A compromise would have been performing a transparent audit in the disputed states, especially in counties where the counting stopped and resumed in the middle of the night. But it looks like this did happen? One example[1]. > You know, actually listen to and address their complaints instead of just saying 'you're a crazy conspiracy nut.' There were attempts to address their complaints. Re ounts and audits took place. Those recounts and audits didn't change the result or uncover any further evidence of fraud. This didn't align with Trump's claims so his base dismissed it as lies. The interesting thing coming out of this is that they're now turning on the rest of the republican party who accept what their own observers are telling them. I'd also like to point out that this was all happening while Trump was privately pressuring the Georgia secretary of state to 'find' him enough votes to win[2]. Uncovering fraud was never the motivation here, it's a cynical attempt at destroying trust in the election process in order to corrupt the result. [1]https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/georgia-recount-trump-biden-cobb-county-b1780298.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-electio... [2]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/trump-call-georgia-election-find-the-fraud https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/trump-call-g...
throwaway80332 6y ago
As always, there is a twist. The question asked was: "Supporters of President Trump have stormed the US Capitol to protest lawmakers certifying Joe Biden’s election victory. Based on what you have read or heard about this, do you support or oppose these actions?" That is not the same as supporting armed rioters breaking into the Capitol Building to try and kill democratic politicians (which isn't what happened, but leftists pretend they think it was). But obviously "liberals" will simply downvote and flag and ban.

throwaway316943 6y ago

How many of the people attending the protest actually entered or attempted to enter the Capitol building? Out of those that did how many were actively seeking to cause trouble and how many were just following the crowd and looking around? If you look at the facts for yourself and don’t rely on other people’s opinions you’ll see more clearly.

runawaybottle 6y ago
It was a pretty small entrance.
xnx 6y ago
If you pick your photos carefully, you can pretend that this was a bunch of goofs who accidentally got into the Capitol. This video was eye-opening to me: https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2021/01/09/officer-crushed-in-door-capitol-riots-lemon-reaction-ctn-vpx.cnn https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2021/01/09/officer-crushed-in-...
morty_s 6y ago
See this clearly: https://youtu.be/182JKOm1LY0 https://youtu.be/182JKOm1LY0 You can see the “violent few” drag and beat an officer to death. You can see and hear the surrounding mob cheer themselves on. So how many people need to witness a murder in progress before doing anything about it?

intended 6y ago

The one thing that I’ve noticed on the HN convos is that space is being made for parler and those that use it, unintentionally. It seems that not many people have been to parler, and very few links to screen shots or other evidence is available. Unfortunately - and this really is just what usually happens - the noble arguments for free speech get converted into a shield to add respectability to parler and hate speech. And if the trend continues, more political or even subversive content starts appearing in the sub, at just the angle to take advantage of the blind spots of forum goers. It’s happening here, I’m seeming that dumb path finding algo for indoctrination playing out over the past three threads.

Grimm1 6y ago
I had a conversation with a friend about this, I asked him what Parler is like and on a scale of 1-10 how extreme it was. He said it depended and that there was some perfectly normal content but that the number of clicks to get to a more radical place and thus start to see the extreme side and potentially be radicalized was much shorter than say Reddit. His supporting evidence that one of the first suggested places to follow you see when you signup is the OANN. I'm not personally comfortable with the easy bake radicalizing from that so to speak and is what pushed me over the edge in being okay with the ban. We wouldn't tolerate a place where it was easy to breed other types of extremism why is this any different was my thought.
- intended 6y ago
  The sad part is that people give it the benefit of doubt when they hear this. They’ll translate it as “it’s not that bad”. “It’s only a few steps away from OANN” “That means the first bunch of stuff is normal people talking about conservative talking points.” “Sure, not a place I’d like to hang out, but I’d see why it may need protection even if I may disagree, that’s what I’m trained to do.” Yeah no. Parler actively removes people who bring in the “liberal” point of view. I’ll even grant, that removal by ideology is a necessary tool for political moderation. But that still means that parler is an echo chamber, amplifying beliefs that the “election was stolen”, “democrats will destroy the country.”