4 ms·

That's a huge exaggeration, I'm sure you'll still find millions of Trump supporters on twitter and facebook.

by vlunkr 6y ago

throwaway894345 6y ago
I’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 ago
  The latter is an obvious lie. https://twitter.com/blm https://twitter.com/blm
  - Enginerrrd 6y ago
    Oooh, that's interesting. I hadn't heard about that one. Thanks for sharing.
  - eznzt 6y ago
    Was that twitter account official in any capacity?
  - mrec 6y ago
    Official account is https://twitter.com/blklivesmatter https://twitter.com/blklivesmatter so I suspect this was a fake or parody.
- TameAntelope 6y ago
  Yes it does, as it highlights their conservatism is not what got them banned.
  - throwaway894345 6y ago
    No, it doesn't. A rather obvious disproof: Twitter could ban 15% of conservative accounts expressly for being conservative.
    - TameAntelope 6y ago
      The 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 ago
        Was 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 ago
        It 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.
  - a1369209993 6y ago
    "their conservatism is not what got them banned" also does not refute "only conservatives were banned". (FWIW, I'm at least as strongly opposed to both sides as they are to each other, although that doesn't really have any bearing on "You are committing the logical fallacy of conflating "only X" versus "all X".". Edit, aside: "existential" qualifier would be "some X", not "only X"; is there a term for "not any non-X"?)
- vlunkr 6y ago
  They said "only banning one side" which reads to me as "all conservatives were banned"
dmingod666 6y ago
Unthinkable, 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..

That's a huge exaggeration, I'm sure you'll still find millions of Trump supporters on twitter and facebook.

by vlunkr 6y ago

That's a huge exaggeration, I'm sure you'll still find millions of Trump supporters on twitter and facebook.

I’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 ago
The latter is an obvious lie. https://twitter.com/blm https://twitter.com/blm
- Enginerrrd 6y ago
  Oooh, that's interesting. I hadn't heard about that one. Thanks for sharing.
- eznzt 6y ago
  Was that twitter account official in any capacity?
- mrec 6y ago
  Official account is https://twitter.com/blklivesmatter https://twitter.com/blklivesmatter so I suspect this was a fake or parody.
TameAntelope 6y ago
Yes it does, as it highlights their conservatism is not what got them banned.
- throwaway894345 6y ago
  No, it doesn't. A rather obvious disproof: Twitter could ban 15% of conservative accounts expressly for being conservative.
  - TameAntelope 6y ago
    The 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 ago
      Was 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 ago
        It 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.
- a1369209993 6y ago
  "their conservatism is not what got them banned" also does not refute "only conservatives were banned". (FWIW, I'm at least as strongly opposed to both sides as they are to each other, although that doesn't really have any bearing on "You are committing the logical fallacy of conflating "only X" versus "all X".". Edit, aside: "existential" qualifier would be "some X", not "only X"; is there a term for "not any non-X"?)
vlunkr 6y ago
They said "only banning one side" which reads to me as "all conservatives were banned"

dmingod666 6y ago

Unthinkable, 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..