3 ms·

>> Of course every platform has the right to dictate users of their platform yada yada... People who claim that should logically be wanting Rosa Parks to have

• prox 6y ago
  That’s a weird analogy that doesn’t make any sense. It’s actually quite offensive to compare the segregation of a whole people to what’s basically a sign on Discords door that said “We don’t allow this type of speech. We have bouncers here.” Also Rosa Parks wasn’t anonymous, and I assume many on WSB are. I wonder if they would act the same if they weren’t? Or in real life?
  • gadders 6y ago
    It was more a comment on the general "Oh, big tech banned you?" well just create your own payment network, dns service, cdn, hosting, etc etc. And to extend your analogy, it's like a whole nightclub being permanently closed because one of the 250,000 people in the club (admittedly a big club) said a bad word. It's just a new form of Tone Policing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_policing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_policing)
    • lotsofpulp 6y ago
      It’s like a nightclub being closed by the nightclub’s owner, which I think most would agree the nightclub’s owner has the right to do by virtue of being the owner. It’s not closed by police or any outside entity.
• roenxi 6y ago
  The buses were public and segregation was a law. Blacks made up 75% of the bus customers [0]. A competing, nonsegregated, service would have owned the market if it were possible. So it probably wasn't. The situation here is very different. There is no government monopoly favouring Reddit or Discord. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_bus_boycott https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_bus_boycott