3 ms·

So, the path to success for Parler would have been: Step 1: Hire huge moderation team. Step 2: Write draconian terms of service that incorporated every possib

So, the path to success for Parler would have been: Step 1: Hire huge moderation team. Step 2: Write draconian terms of service that incorporated every possible offensive thing that any vendor might object to. Step 3: Build an app that explodes with all the users that are delighted with the moderation. Step 4: Profit! That's not how Facebook and Twitter ("the free speech wing of the free speech party") were launched, but maybe those wouldn't ever have been able to launch today anyway.

newacct583 6y ago
> Step 2: Write draconian terms of service that incorporated every possible offensive thing that any vendor might object to. No, just violent rhetoric associated with a real world violent movement. I don't understand why that keeps not registering in these discussions. I mean, even accepting your frame that we leftists have infested Big Tech and want nothing but to censor our political enemies: they've had years and years to do it, and didn't. And only when it got to the point where congress was actually attacked that a site had to be shut down. And it was just one site, and its users just moved on to Gab and such. I mean really, if conservatives are so terribly censored... how is it you guys are so loud about it?
- skynet-9000 6y ago
  > And it was just one site, and its users just moved on to Gab and such. Is this intentionally ironic? Or did you not actually know that Gab was completely deplatformed in exactly the same way, and it almost killed them by knocking them offline for months, just when they hit a big growth curve. Interesting, actually, that the timing was so similar, as well as some of the same players.
8note 6y ago
The problem is that twitter and Facebook already exist and do their jobs well enough and have moderation Any parler type thing is only ever going to get the worst of the worst of possible users. The folks who get kicked off Facebook and Twitter aren't the people you want to build a business on
- freebuju 6y ago
  > kicked off Facebook and Twitter aren't the people you want to build a business on They could have if they went with a provider located in another more conservative country. Or long-shot self hosted. Not supporting Parler however, it deserves it's rightful place in the embers of eternal hell for negligently failing to protect & secure sensitive user data.
- roenxi 6y ago
  That is asserting unsettled matters of fact. Twitter's moderation has become partisan enough that it might be desirable to build a business on people they have kicked off. Notably Trump - while he was supremely unpopular on the left, opinion polling suggests he is leaving a more popular legacy than, eg, George W Bush. Maybe even George H.W. Bush. That is a pretty decent foundation for a business.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    > Twitter's moderation has become partisan enough That's also an unsettled assertion. Especially when talking about kicking off Trump, since they had been letting him break the rules for years. Removing his exemption is arguably a reduction in partisan bias.
    - roenxi 6y ago
      That is a particularly difficult argument to make - Twitter put out a statement [0] when they banned him. They do not mention 'breaking the rules for years'. They take a surreal and incoherent view that "To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th." is an incitement of violence. Siding with a political majority is a safe strategy; but that statement is pretty much indefensible. Even if you believe they had grounds for the ban based on a history, their actual reasoning is different from your justification. Nonpartisan moderation would involve, at some level, quotes or instances where Trump said something objectionable. [0] https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.htmlhttps://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspensio...

newacct583 6y ago

> Step 2: Write draconian terms of service that incorporated every possible offensive thing that any vendor might object to. No, just violent rhetoric associated with a real world violent movement. I don't understand why that keeps not registering in these discussions. I mean, even accepting your frame that we leftists have infested Big Tech and want nothing but to censor our political enemies: they've had years and years to do it, and didn't. And only when it got to the point where congress was actually attacked that a site had to be shut down. And it was just one site, and its users just moved on to Gab and such. I mean really, if conservatives are so terribly censored... how is it you guys are so loud about it?

skynet-9000 6y ago
> And it was just one site, and its users just moved on to Gab and such. Is this intentionally ironic? Or did you not actually know that Gab was completely deplatformed in exactly the same way, and it almost killed them by knocking them offline for months, just when they hit a big growth curve. Interesting, actually, that the timing was so similar, as well as some of the same players.

8note 6y ago

The problem is that twitter and Facebook already exist and do their jobs well enough and have moderation Any parler type thing is only ever going to get the worst of the worst of possible users. The folks who get kicked off Facebook and Twitter aren't the people you want to build a business on

freebuju 6y ago
> kicked off Facebook and Twitter aren't the people you want to build a business on They could have if they went with a provider located in another more conservative country. Or long-shot self hosted. Not supporting Parler however, it deserves it's rightful place in the embers of eternal hell for negligently failing to protect & secure sensitive user data.
roenxi 6y ago
That is asserting unsettled matters of fact. Twitter's moderation has become partisan enough that it might be desirable to build a business on people they have kicked off. Notably Trump - while he was supremely unpopular on the left, opinion polling suggests he is leaving a more popular legacy than, eg, George W Bush. Maybe even George H.W. Bush. That is a pretty decent foundation for a business.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  > Twitter's moderation has become partisan enough That's also an unsettled assertion. Especially when talking about kicking off Trump, since they had been letting him break the rules for years. Removing his exemption is arguably a reduction in partisan bias.
  - roenxi 6y ago
    That is a particularly difficult argument to make - Twitter put out a statement [0] when they banned him. They do not mention 'breaking the rules for years'. They take a surreal and incoherent view that "To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th." is an incitement of violence. Siding with a political majority is a safe strategy; but that statement is pretty much indefensible. Even if you believe they had grounds for the ban based on a history, their actual reasoning is different from your justification. Nonpartisan moderation would involve, at some level, quotes or instances where Trump said something objectionable. [0] https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.htmlhttps://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspensio...