5 ms·
Better than doing what we do in the "civilised" world: only banning one side.
by eznzt 6y ago
Better than doing what we do in the "civilised" world: only banning one side.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- dheera 6y agoYeah seriously. Also why are they so overly concerned with US elections but not concerned with the elections of 100 other democracies in the world?
- chrismeller 6y agoWell you have to admit that the US is the 800lb gorilla in the room, at least as far as countries that actually even pretend to hold elections that mean anything.
- vlunkr 6y agoThat's a huge exaggeration, I'm sure you'll still find millions of Trump supporters on twitter and facebook.
- throwaway894345 6y agoI’m pretty apathetic about these bannings (so hopefully this comment doesn’t read as support or opposition), but “not all conservatives were banned” does not refute “only conservatives were banned”.
- root_axis 6y agoThe latter is an obvious lie. https://twitter.com/blm https://twitter.com/blm
- Enginerrrd 6y agoOooh, that's interesting. I hadn't heard about that one. Thanks for sharing.
- eznzt 6y agoWas that twitter account official in any capacity?
- mrec 6y agoOfficial account is https://twitter.com/blklivesmatter https://twitter.com/blklivesmatter so I suspect this was a fake or parody.
- TameAntelope 6y agoYes it does, as it highlights their conservatism is not what got them banned.
- throwaway894345 6y agoNo, it doesn't. A rather obvious disproof: Twitter could ban 15% of conservative accounts expressly for being conservative.
- TameAntelope 6y agoThe fact that you associate these viewpoints with conservatives is an indictment on conservatism, not an indictment on Twitter. Twitter has and will ban zero people for conservative viewpoints. Twitter has and will ban as many people as necessary for content that has the potential to lead to offline harm.
- throwaway894345 6y agoWas it not obvious that my example was contrived and hypothetical? How could I have been more clear that I was merely commenting on the logic and not speaking in support or opposition to the bans?
- TameAntelope 6y agoIt was obvious, however it was not specific whether or not your statement was regarding the determinant for the ban or an attribute of the banned, which is relevant in this case. "A property of those banned was that they were all conservative." is not the same as "The people who were banned were treated so as a result of their conservatism." For people who aren't ignoring the specific situation, we're aware that there's a general accusation of, "Conservatism is getting banned from Twitter!" so in this context your ambiguity is resolved by applying context, which then makes what you tried to point out wrong. So in this context, saying "only conservatives were banned" can be interpreted to mean, "conservatives were the target of the ban", which is then false, and what I responded to as such.
- vlunkr 6y agoThey said "only banning one side" which reads to me as "all conservatives were banned"
- dmingod666 6y agoUnthinkable, how could someone support a sitting president. Are you telling me that some people will also start supporting Biden in the future? what has the world come to..
- virgil_disgr4ce 6y agoHow has a "side" been banned? Who has done this?
- klmadfejno 6y agocivilised actors don't smear poop in their nation's capitol.
- cambalache 6y agoNeither destroy restaurants, neighborhoods and police hq.
- 45t3424rgf 6y agocivilised actors also dont riot for 7 months and burn down mulitple cities
- anothermoron 6y agoThey burn it to the ground instead ?
- uniqueid 6y agocivilized I have trouble relating that word to the fresh memory of watching drooling, bearded gun-monkeys clambering on tables in the Capitol chanting 'hang Mike Pence!'
- AndrewUnmuted 6y agoBoth spellings of that word are acceptable. Get off of your high horse, especially if you can't even ride it yourself. Your depictions of the very disturbed, impoverished and desperate people involved in the DC/Capitol building fiasco are heartless, cruel, and completely uncivilized. You clearly have no idea what is going on in their lives, just as so many of them were unaware of what the BLM marches were all about.
- pjc50 6y agoThey definitely weren't all impoverished. Certainly not the retired USAF colonel. https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/01/10/retired-air-force-lieutenant-colonel-arrested-charged-capitol-riot.html https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/01/10/retired-air-f...
- uniqueid 6y agoBoth spellings of that word are acceptable Because I was quoting a single word, I just typed it into my phone, which 'autocorrected' it. There's nobody, and I mean 'nobody' literally, whose actions I cannot empathize with, if I take into account their limitations and life experiences. It's impractical to do that in everyday life. One would never be able to pass judgement on anybody. And I pass judgement on these dangerous idiots. A reminder, by the way, that my feelings here aren't particularly directed toward you, personally :)
- AndrewUnmuted 6y agoYou've had an entire year to understand that people's lives are being wrecked senselessly and needlessly by unprecedented, totally illegal government mandates. The lockdowns caused the madness of the BLM summer, and it caused this thing that happened last Wednesday. People are at their buckling points, and that is a thing ripe for malicious actors to take advantage of. Even you: > drooling, bearded gun-monkeys clambering on tables Seriously? This is bigotry. How much do you need to tweak this sentence before it is _very conventionally_ racist?