7 ms·

What "wrong" political views are those?

by user-the-name 6y ago

konjin 6y ago
All of them.
- user-the-name 6y ago
  All political views? You get kicked off Youtube for having any political view at all?
Covzire 6y ago
Curiously, virtually all "legal speech" bans and demonetization happen to be for opinions or content that disagree with whatever talking points the DNC and/or the CCP are pushing. I know this will get down votes but that's literally the truth. Opposing the CCP is marginally safer but not at all when they encroach on DNC statements.
fallingknife 6y ago
Apparently, in the case of Parler, believing that you should allow users to post any legal content without moderation. (I know they didn't lose their domain, but the effect of being denied hosting is functionally the same.)
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- celticninja 6y ago
  The problem, as I understand it was not the posting of legal content but the fact it wasn't moderated meant there was borderline stuff, calls for specific people to be killed etc, that were the key factor in them losing hosting.
  - kebman 6y ago
    And there aren't such things on Facebook or Twitter, that in fact never get taken down despite multiple complaints?
    - celticninja 6y ago
      I think they have an active policy of taking them down, even if it is inefficient. Not that it should let them off the hook for that content being left up. However Parler could solve their hosting problem the same way Facebook do, which is to own their own hardware.
- bawolff 6y ago
  Isn't AWS's claim that parlar was hosting illegal content? Regardless, they signed a contract detailing what they could and could not host on aws. They broke it. Its not like they were unaware of the requirements. Moral of the story, if you promise X, dont promise someone else Y if X and Y conflict. You are going to be breaking your word ine way or another.
  - _-david-_ 6y ago
    If strictly hosting illegal content / being slow to remove it means you should be booted from AWS then how on earth is Twitter still using AWS?
    - midasz 6y ago
      > being slow to remove it They just didn't. There's a difference between being slow and just not doing it at all.
      - _-david-_ 6y ago
        Twitter has just not removed stuff as well so I don't think that is actually a difference between them.
        user-the-name 6y ago
        Twitter hosts their own servers rather than agreeing to another company's terms of service.
        _-david-_ 6y ago
        Twitter uses AWS. You are probably thinking of Facebook https://www.techradar.com/news/twitter-signs-up-aws-for-its-cloud-needs https://www.techradar.com/news/twitter-signs-up-aws-for-its-...
        user-the-name 6y ago
- Can_Not 6y ago
  > believing that you should allow users to post any legal content without moderation. Parler was removed for being under-moderated, sure, but with that aside, it was also a huge censorship platform. https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/parler-app-ban-free-speech-trump-b1721710.html https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/pa... 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...
mandelbrotwurst 6y ago
Whichever the platform operator disapproves of.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  *at this time. Dr Seuss was totally OK just a few weeks ago. Btw, is "OK" still OK??!
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    He's still OK. In fact sales are through the roof thanks to people being dumb about the story.
- user-the-name 6y ago
  Which is...?
celticninja 6y ago
Generally extreme ones. You can be politically on the right and espouse views such as "lower taxes, smaller government, less regulation" but spilling over into racism is what would be termed "wrong". The right are not at risk of being deplatformed,the racist right is.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  That is a very narrow view. Take, for example, transgenders in women's sport. Do they have an unfair biological advantage over natural women? Are you a transphobe if you think so? Should you be cancelled and deplatformed if you think so? With so many potentially offensible groups, and with offense definition shifting so often, are you sure that something totally ok now won't deplatform you in 5 years?
  - cmeacham98 6y ago
    I have never seen somebody cancelled for an opinion similar to "Transgender women have an inherent advantage in women's sports due to the biological advantage of their body producing testosterone." I have seen people disagree with this opinion, but never call it immoral or transphobic. What I _have_ seen people get (correctly) called a transphobe for is the opinion "Transgender women should not be in women's sports because they are men."
    - tux1968 6y ago
      > I have never seen somebody cancelled for an opinion similar to "Transgender women have an inherent advantage in women's sports due to the biological advantage of their body producing testosterone." So should a human born as a woman who happens to naturally have higher testosterone than is typical in other women, be excluded from women's sport? Of course not. > "Transgender women should not be in women's sports because they are men." Really? That's offensive? The reason they have higher testosterone is because they are men. That doesn't mean we should stand in their way of living however they want, or demean them in any way. But we should not have to lie about their biological constitution as being the reason we deem it unfair. It's not their level of testosterone that makes it unfair, it's because they come by that level of testosterone by way of being a man... if a woman naturally has the same level of testosterone, it would be fair and she shouldn't be excluded. Maybe the answer is just doing away with all gender based distinctions, have no sports leagues separated on the basis of gender at all. Of course, that has its own problems.
golemotron 6y ago
That's backward. The people who can best answer that question are the ones who have been de-platformed.
daniellarusso 6y ago
This was controversial: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
- Kye 6y ago
  That's not the best example. Every attempt to shut it down just made it spread further.
- user-the-name 6y ago
  Who was kicked off Youtube for that?
gsich 6y ago
Youtube disabled monetization on COVID-19 videos last year. (has been reenabled) This lead some Youtubers to using alternate words for that because the automated system could target your video.

What "wrong" political views are those?

konjin 6y ago

All of them.

user-the-name 6y ago
All political views? You get kicked off Youtube for having any political view at all?

Covzire 6y ago

Curiously, virtually all "legal speech" bans and demonetization happen to be for opinions or content that disagree with whatever talking points the DNC and/or the CCP are pushing. I know this will get down votes but that's literally the truth. Opposing the CCP is marginally safer but not at all when they encroach on DNC statements.

fallingknife 6y ago

Apparently, in the case of Parler, believing that you should allow users to post any legal content without moderation. (I know they didn't lose their domain, but the effect of being denied hosting is functionally the same.)

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
celticninja 6y ago
The problem, as I understand it was not the posting of legal content but the fact it wasn't moderated meant there was borderline stuff, calls for specific people to be killed etc, that were the key factor in them losing hosting.
- kebman 6y ago
  And there aren't such things on Facebook or Twitter, that in fact never get taken down despite multiple complaints?
  - celticninja 6y ago
    I think they have an active policy of taking them down, even if it is inefficient. Not that it should let them off the hook for that content being left up. However Parler could solve their hosting problem the same way Facebook do, which is to own their own hardware.
bawolff 6y ago
Isn't AWS's claim that parlar was hosting illegal content? Regardless, they signed a contract detailing what they could and could not host on aws. They broke it. Its not like they were unaware of the requirements. Moral of the story, if you promise X, dont promise someone else Y if X and Y conflict. You are going to be breaking your word ine way or another.
- _-david-_ 6y ago
  If strictly hosting illegal content / being slow to remove it means you should be booted from AWS then how on earth is Twitter still using AWS?
  - midasz 6y ago
    > being slow to remove it They just didn't. There's a difference between being slow and just not doing it at all.
    - _-david-_ 6y ago
      Twitter has just not removed stuff as well so I don't think that is actually a difference between them.
      - user-the-name 6y ago
        Twitter hosts their own servers rather than agreeing to another company's terms of service.
        _-david-_ 6y ago
        Twitter uses AWS. You are probably thinking of Facebook https://www.techradar.com/news/twitter-signs-up-aws-for-its-cloud-needs https://www.techradar.com/news/twitter-signs-up-aws-for-its-...
        user-the-name 6y ago
Can_Not 6y ago
> believing that you should allow users to post any legal content without moderation. Parler was removed for being under-moderated, sure, but with that aside, it was also a huge censorship platform. https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/parler-app-ban-free-speech-trump-b1721710.html https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/pa... 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...

mandelbrotwurst 6y ago

Whichever the platform operator disapproves of.

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
*at this time. Dr Seuss was totally OK just a few weeks ago. Btw, is "OK" still OK??!
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  He's still OK. In fact sales are through the roof thanks to people being dumb about the story.
user-the-name 6y ago
Which is...?

celticninja 6y ago

Generally extreme ones. You can be politically on the right and espouse views such as "lower taxes, smaller government, less regulation" but spilling over into racism is what would be termed "wrong". The right are not at risk of being deplatformed,the racist right is.

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
That is a very narrow view. Take, for example, transgenders in women's sport. Do they have an unfair biological advantage over natural women? Are you a transphobe if you think so? Should you be cancelled and deplatformed if you think so? With so many potentially offensible groups, and with offense definition shifting so often, are you sure that something totally ok now won't deplatform you in 5 years?
- cmeacham98 6y ago
  I have never seen somebody cancelled for an opinion similar to "Transgender women have an inherent advantage in women's sports due to the biological advantage of their body producing testosterone." I have seen people disagree with this opinion, but never call it immoral or transphobic. What I _have_ seen people get (correctly) called a transphobe for is the opinion "Transgender women should not be in women's sports because they are men."
  - tux1968 6y ago
    > I have never seen somebody cancelled for an opinion similar to "Transgender women have an inherent advantage in women's sports due to the biological advantage of their body producing testosterone." So should a human born as a woman who happens to naturally have higher testosterone than is typical in other women, be excluded from women's sport? Of course not. > "Transgender women should not be in women's sports because they are men." Really? That's offensive? The reason they have higher testosterone is because they are men. That doesn't mean we should stand in their way of living however they want, or demean them in any way. But we should not have to lie about their biological constitution as being the reason we deem it unfair. It's not their level of testosterone that makes it unfair, it's because they come by that level of testosterone by way of being a man... if a woman naturally has the same level of testosterone, it would be fair and she shouldn't be excluded. Maybe the answer is just doing away with all gender based distinctions, have no sports leagues separated on the basis of gender at all. Of course, that has its own problems.

golemotron 6y ago

That's backward. The people who can best answer that question are the ones who have been de-platformed.

daniellarusso 6y ago

This was controversial: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Kye 6y ago
That's not the best example. Every attempt to shut it down just made it spread further.
user-the-name 6y ago
Who was kicked off Youtube for that?

gsich 6y ago

Youtube disabled monetization on COVID-19 videos last year. (has been reenabled) This lead some Youtubers to using alternate words for that because the automated system could target your video.