7 ms·

> And also what are you even trying to say, that the reason why Parler was banned was those images? And now that I have shown you that Amazon did use those low

> And also what are you even trying to say, that the reason why Parler was banned was those images? And now that I have shown you that Amazon did use those low engagement Parler posts as reason to boot Parler (their email mentions "98 examples"), will it use the same yardstick to boot Twitter out of AWS for the thousands of low engagement violent tweets that is littered across Twitter? If you have a convincing answer for it I'll be glad to engage with you further. I say so because Twitter is hosted on AWS (https://www.techradar.com/in/news/twitter-signs-up-aws-for-its-cloud-needs https://www.techradar.com/in/news/twitter-signs-up-aws-for-i...) If Amazon cannot kick Twitter out then I say that Big Tech is hypocritical and ideologically biased. Or that Twitter is a big paying customer and Amazon wouldn't want to mess with the relationship it has with Twitter. You pick what is the excuse going to be. --- Replying to your posts as edits because of rate limits *shrugs* > It was those images PLUS context, and you argue the context is they're right leaning, and I argue the context is they refused to censor hate speech and ended up being a haven for it Censor hate speech in low engagement content? Isn't that the very reason you gave for why Twitter is not removing those hate speech filled posts? Because they are surprise, surprise low engagement posts. So why bother? Why is Amazon going out of its way to remove Parler from AWS for low engagement posts? It is not like some high profile user with a large following asked for people to commit violence right? I am literally using your own justification for Parler too. Why is your justification for Twitter okay while not okay for Parler? If Amazon had evidence of high engagement posts spreading violence in Parler it would have attached those images. Not images from low engagement posts. This just goes to show that Big Tech just doesn't want Parler in there. That is all there is to it. It is an ideological battle. Else the same filth you find in right wing Parler you find in Twitter, Facebook and the rest of social media. There is literally no difference between any of these social platforms.

BoorishBears 6y ago
> Censor hate speech in low engagement content? Isn't that the very reason you gave for why Twitter is not removing those hate speech filled posts? Because they are surprise, surprise low engagement posts. Nope. You see you tacked on your own little part that changes the meaning in a HUGE way. Parler eschewed censorship period. You're slowly inching towards getting this No matter how much engagement a post had, how much vitriol someone spewed, literally the first page is promising there is no deplatforming a user for their speech. So when your differentiator is you don't censor at all, you become a lightning rod for things like hate speech! - I mean seriously this applies to ANYTHING: imagine a burger place called "WcDonalds" We have an 1:1 equivalent to menu to McDonalds. But we're lesser known, long term prospects are unknown. Despite that we aim to be functionally equivalent to McDonalds with one small twist... We allow drug use in our restaurants. Let's say it's a state that decriminalized drugs, we allow you to toke up in line, as you eat, we're saying its your right. - Who do you think ends up going to our WcDonalds? If someone claims WcDonalds locations are just full of drug users, are you going to go "you have no proof of that!!!!"? Isn't it common sense that's the outcome? That's Parler and Twitter. The biggest draw to Parler is that you have free speech regardless of engagement, where Twitter is limited speech. Anything that doesn't fit in the Twitter limited speech, including hate speech and racism, is going to be attracted to Parler. And in Twitter when you see it you can report it and there's a reason for it to be removed! Even if it fails for old low enagament posts! But on Parler, by design, that content will not be removed. No matter how big it gets, how many reports it has, by design, the user won't be deplatformed. - Also seriously I want you to clarify if you actually think Twitter only deletes Right Wing comments, it's a pretty off the wall claim that harms the weight of any further discussion
- shripadk 6y ago
  I read your long winding post and it still is unable to address my points. You are just beating around the bush with all sorts of analogies. It's funny to see how the left wing was crying over censorship in Parler now suddenly says that Parler was banned because it wasn't censoring anything. Isn't this what leftists were saying just a year back: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200627/23551144803/as-predicted-parler-is-banning-users-it-doesnt-like.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200627/23551144803/as-pr... Here is another quote from Amazon's email which talks about Parler removing violent posts: "You remove some violent content when contacted by us or others, but not always with urgency." This is Amazon crying about Parler removing violent posts but "not always with urgency". What the actual fuck? Why should Parler do anything with "urgency" just because Amazon asked for it? Is Amazon the US Government? I have been reporting accounts and tweets for months on Twitter and it hasn't yet been removed. But Amazon is greater than you, me and everyone else. If it asks something you better deliver immediately or else you'll be booted from their platform. But they are doing nothing about the low engagement violent tweets on Twitter which is hosted on AWS infrastructure. I haven't seen a bigger bunch of hypocrites in my life! Amazon doesn't realise it but it has given so much ammunition for Parler to sue in a court case. They literally have admitted in the email that Parler is removing violent posts but not with the same urgency that it wants. Well news flash: no social media platform in the World removes any post with urgency. I sometimes get notifications for reports I had submitted months ago with "Sorry we did not find it violating our policies and it cannot be taken down". On posts that are literally violent. Unless you have used the garbage reporting system that these social media companies have in place and experienced it first hand you don't have any right to talk about Parler and its efficacy in removing illegal content.
  - BoorishBears 6y ago
    Beating around what bush?! I've literally addressed, line by line, every single point you made. The analogy is there to aid your understanding, but if you want to block your ears and go "lalalala left wingerr lalalalala" I guess it won't help right? I told you to stop ascribing your political leanings to me, nothing I've said is partisan. It's lazy attempts to distract from actual discourse. - You chose one point to explode which isn't even related to the topic at hand and still won't answer if you actually think "Twitter only removes Right Wing content" which is what started this whole thing! And you just spent an entire comment complaining about Parler's removals... you want to be embarrassed real quick? My points about Parler... come from Parler! Here's their exact words: > We prefer to leave decisions about what is seen and who is heard to each individual. _In no case will Parler decide what will content be removed or filtered, or whose account will be removed, on the basis of the opinion expressed within the content at issue._ You say >you don't have any right to talk about Parler and its efficacy in removing illegal content Another weasel! Hate speech is not illegal! At least not in the US! My comment repeatedly says Parler allows hate speech yet amusingly you're trying to distract with all sorts of talk about Amazon when _the literal community guidelines_ are bragging that you won't be banned for any opinion... which includes hate speech! Stop doing this. Stop trying to throw up a smoke screen by building up strawman after straw man. I won't answer you anymore until you answer two questions: 1. Does Parler allow hate speech (with the reminder that it is not illegal in their jurisdiction) 2. Do you believe Twitter only deletes Right Wing content. Answer thise questions, not with another unrelated question or diatribe which I'll easily dismantle. Just yes or no, or you'll have shown who's really beating around the bush

BoorishBears 6y ago

> Censor hate speech in low engagement content? Isn't that the very reason you gave for why Twitter is not removing those hate speech filled posts? Because they are surprise, surprise low engagement posts. Nope. You see you tacked on your own little part that changes the meaning in a HUGE way. Parler eschewed censorship period. You're slowly inching towards getting this No matter how much engagement a post had, how much vitriol someone spewed, literally the first page is promising there is no deplatforming a user for their speech. So when your differentiator is you don't censor at all, you become a lightning rod for things like hate speech! - I mean seriously this applies to ANYTHING: imagine a burger place called "WcDonalds" We have an 1:1 equivalent to menu to McDonalds. But we're lesser known, long term prospects are unknown. Despite that we aim to be functionally equivalent to McDonalds with one small twist... We allow drug use in our restaurants. Let's say it's a state that decriminalized drugs, we allow you to toke up in line, as you eat, we're saying its your right. - Who do you think ends up going to our WcDonalds? If someone claims WcDonalds locations are just full of drug users, are you going to go "you have no proof of that!!!!"? Isn't it common sense that's the outcome? That's Parler and Twitter. The biggest draw to Parler is that you have free speech regardless of engagement, where Twitter is limited speech. Anything that doesn't fit in the Twitter limited speech, including hate speech and racism, is going to be attracted to Parler. And in Twitter when you see it you can report it and there's a reason for it to be removed! Even if it fails for old low enagament posts! But on Parler, by design, that content will not be removed. No matter how big it gets, how many reports it has, by design, the user won't be deplatformed. - Also seriously I want you to clarify if you actually think Twitter only deletes Right Wing comments, it's a pretty off the wall claim that harms the weight of any further discussion

shripadk 6y ago
I read your long winding post and it still is unable to address my points. You are just beating around the bush with all sorts of analogies. It's funny to see how the left wing was crying over censorship in Parler now suddenly says that Parler was banned because it wasn't censoring anything. Isn't this what leftists were saying just a year back: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200627/23551144803/as-predicted-parler-is-banning-users-it-doesnt-like.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200627/23551144803/as-pr... Here is another quote from Amazon's email which talks about Parler removing violent posts: "You remove some violent content when contacted by us or others, but not always with urgency." This is Amazon crying about Parler removing violent posts but "not always with urgency". What the actual fuck? Why should Parler do anything with "urgency" just because Amazon asked for it? Is Amazon the US Government? I have been reporting accounts and tweets for months on Twitter and it hasn't yet been removed. But Amazon is greater than you, me and everyone else. If it asks something you better deliver immediately or else you'll be booted from their platform. But they are doing nothing about the low engagement violent tweets on Twitter which is hosted on AWS infrastructure. I haven't seen a bigger bunch of hypocrites in my life! Amazon doesn't realise it but it has given so much ammunition for Parler to sue in a court case. They literally have admitted in the email that Parler is removing violent posts but not with the same urgency that it wants. Well news flash: no social media platform in the World removes any post with urgency. I sometimes get notifications for reports I had submitted months ago with "Sorry we did not find it violating our policies and it cannot be taken down". On posts that are literally violent. Unless you have used the garbage reporting system that these social media companies have in place and experienced it first hand you don't have any right to talk about Parler and its efficacy in removing illegal content.
- BoorishBears 6y ago
  Beating around what bush?! I've literally addressed, line by line, every single point you made. The analogy is there to aid your understanding, but if you want to block your ears and go "lalalala left wingerr lalalalala" I guess it won't help right? I told you to stop ascribing your political leanings to me, nothing I've said is partisan. It's lazy attempts to distract from actual discourse. - You chose one point to explode which isn't even related to the topic at hand and still won't answer if you actually think "Twitter only removes Right Wing content" which is what started this whole thing! And you just spent an entire comment complaining about Parler's removals... you want to be embarrassed real quick? My points about Parler... come from Parler! Here's their exact words: > We prefer to leave decisions about what is seen and who is heard to each individual. _In no case will Parler decide what will content be removed or filtered, or whose account will be removed, on the basis of the opinion expressed within the content at issue._ You say >you don't have any right to talk about Parler and its efficacy in removing illegal content Another weasel! Hate speech is not illegal! At least not in the US! My comment repeatedly says Parler allows hate speech yet amusingly you're trying to distract with all sorts of talk about Amazon when _the literal community guidelines_ are bragging that you won't be banned for any opinion... which includes hate speech! Stop doing this. Stop trying to throw up a smoke screen by building up strawman after straw man. I won't answer you anymore until you answer two questions: 1. Does Parler allow hate speech (with the reminder that it is not illegal in their jurisdiction) 2. Do you believe Twitter only deletes Right Wing content. Answer thise questions, not with another unrelated question or diatribe which I'll easily dismantle. Just yes or no, or you'll have shown who's really beating around the bush