3 ms·

And yet almost everyone around here was standing clapping hands when the silenced where on the opposite political side.

atoav 5y ago
I was happy when political figures who for years spouted things on plattforms that would have gotten me banned in a single day, finally got judged under the same guidelines as me. Because why have guidelines if you don't enforce them evenly? Is it really politcal if you ban a politician from your establishment for shitting into the pool if both common sense, manners and decency demand people not shitting into pools. After all normal people also get banned for shitting into pools. Unless we make twitter a true public plattform which is paid by taxes and where rules are enforced by the police I don't really see why they shouldn't enforce their (not unreasonable) rules. I don't particularily care whether the person seriously inciting violence is from the left or on the right, it is reasonable to go after both on your own plattform.
- avereveard 5y ago
  first off, not all of them where inciting violence. you bunching them all up is part of the issue, the other being selective tos enforcement. idk what else to say, keep standing and clapping.
  - atoav 5y ago
    first off, I didn't claim all of them where. What I did say is that: A) there are common sense rules of communication that are enforced everywhere for the most part. If you are screaming, yelling or generally trashtalking you will be usually not tolerated in any kind of private etablishment. This is not different online. B) these rules should be applied evenly and transparently. If they are not (which is sometimes the case) this is a problem. This means removing posts that adhered to the rules because some mod didn't like them politically is bad. This also means leaving posts up that broke the rules because the person who posted it had some sort of power is also bad. So if they didn't break the rules and their posts got deleted, this would be clearly something I'd criticize. If they did break the rules and it is just a case of "the rules are too extreme for my flavour of politics" then your flavour of politics could either be incompatible with common rules of human decency and behaviour, or the platform is needlessly strict with their rules or the enforcement of said rules.

I was happy when political figures who for years spouted things on plattforms that would have gotten me banned in a single day, finally got judged under the same guidelines as me. Because why have guidelines if you don't enforce them evenly? Is it really politcal if you ban a politician from your establishment for shitting into the pool if both common sense, manners and decency demand people not shitting into pools. After all normal people also get banned for shitting into pools. Unless we make twitter a true public plattform which is paid by taxes and where rules are enforced by the police I don't really see why they shouldn't enforce their (not unreasonable) rules. I don't particularily care whether the person seriously inciting violence is from the left or on the right, it is reasonable to go after both on your own plattform.

avereveard 5y ago
first off, not all of them where inciting violence. you bunching them all up is part of the issue, the other being selective tos enforcement. idk what else to say, keep standing and clapping.
- atoav 5y ago
  first off, I didn't claim all of them where. What I did say is that: A) there are common sense rules of communication that are enforced everywhere for the most part. If you are screaming, yelling or generally trashtalking you will be usually not tolerated in any kind of private etablishment. This is not different online. B) these rules should be applied evenly and transparently. If they are not (which is sometimes the case) this is a problem. This means removing posts that adhered to the rules because some mod didn't like them politically is bad. This also means leaving posts up that broke the rules because the person who posted it had some sort of power is also bad. So if they didn't break the rules and their posts got deleted, this would be clearly something I'd criticize. If they did break the rules and it is just a case of "the rules are too extreme for my flavour of politics" then your flavour of politics could either be incompatible with common rules of human decency and behaviour, or the platform is needlessly strict with their rules or the enforcement of said rules.