5 ms·

Elon Musk Bans CrimethInc. From Twitter at the Urging of Far-Right Troll

24 points by deanCommie 4y ago

version_five 4y ago
The website appears to be mostly just an insane rant. That said, I don't think it should have been banned either, outside of doing something specifically illegal. (Edit: also, I've never heard of Andy Ngo, the person the site is accusing of being a "far right troll", but it's pretty clearly a highly editorialized title, even if it accurately reflects the title of the original article)
- codefreeordie 4y ago
  - syzarian 4y ago
    I think the outrage is due to Musk’s apparent hypocrisy. Also, what we are seeing is that it’s becoming apparent that when a few companies act as the gatekeeper to a large percentage of the people then perhaps government intervention is warranted.
    - version_five 4y ago
      > we are seeing is that it’s becoming apparent that when a few companies act as the gatekeeper to a large percentage of the people then perhaps government intervention is warranted I think that's basically the GP's point. It's only "become apparent" now that there is a big tech company that doesn't toe the mainstream line. This (gatekeeping / censorship) was always a big problem with big tech, especially twitter, but the "it's a private company, if someone doesn't like it they can build their own" crowd (conveniently libertarian for a microsecond) shot down any notions that platforms needed some common carrier regulations. Then someone actually did the equivalent of getting their own social network by buying the most popular one, and suddenly everyone is up in arms.
      - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
        These are fundamentally different complaints. The first party is complaining they believe a right is being violated. The second party is complaining that the first party is inconsistently applying their own beliefs.
    - codefreeordie 4y ago
      Dorsey's Twitter claimed to be pro free speech and fair, and yet apparently it was fine for Twitter to ban only one side then. As per usual, the true story is "it's good when my guy does it and unfair and evil when the other side does it to me"
  - bediger4000 4y ago
    That's not it at all. Musk bought Twitter with the stated purpose of allowing free speech. If Musk bans some accounts while bringing back others, he's being a giant hypocrite by not allowing all to speak freely.
    - metadat 4y ago
      No kidding, he is an emotional character and answers to questions vary wildly by the day and hour. In other words, as you've intuited: a "hypocrite".
    - codefreeordie 4y ago
      - bediger4000 4y ago
        Sure, and I still say that. It's just that criticism of Musk on hypocrisy grounds is justified, because he bought Twitter to bring back free speech or something like that, which includes crimethinc, and Andy Ngo. Free speech is a uniform criteria, not a collection of special cases. The latter is hypocrisy. There's general agreement on what "free speech" means. If Musk wants to claim free speech moral high ground, he has to put up with Chad Loder and crimethinc and Evon Latrail. If Musk bans accounts that he doesn't like that's fine, he owns that particular printing press. But he doesn't get to claim "free speech" and ban accounts, too. That's the very definition of hypocrisy.
        codefreeordie 4y ago
        tovej 4y ago
        Are the conservative voices advocating for violence against LGBTQ+, ethnic minorities, and critics? Then it's not really hypocrisy but completely valid and according to the policy of most of the platforms.
  - draw_down 4y ago
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- sp332 4y ago
  I think it's a pretty good description. Even Wikipedia doesn't have much else to say about him. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Ngo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Ngo
  - version_five 4y ago
    I looked at the wikipedia article before I made my comment. It appears neutral, even if they don't have anything nice to say about him, they don't participate in name-calling, which is what I'm suggesting for the title
    - leereeves 4y ago
      Check the edit history on that page; there's a lot of controversy behind the scenes. Such Wikiwars can produce neutral language masking underlying bias. Fortunately there's no need to trust pseudonymous Wikipedia editors when the entire record is public. Andy Ngo reports on left-wing violence (primarily "antifacists" in Portland), as you can see from his Twitter feed: https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo He seems to have caused several bannings tonight by reporting various crimes, criminal histories, and calls to violence on Twitter. He discussed CrimethInc with Elon in this thread: https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1596087310042296320 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1596087310042296320
- BulgarianIdiot 4y ago
  It's quite bizarre to constantly hear Elon Musk talk about free speech and unbanning everyone, and then this ongoing list of left-leaning accounts get nuked. And not just left-leaning. The Oatmeal's Twitter account (https://theoatmeal.com/ https://theoatmeal.com/) was "permanently banned" couple of days ago for no given reason. Activism got it back, but imagine you're not popular. Your account is gone forever just like that. It's pure chaos.
  - DLA 4y ago
    - someNameIG 4y ago
      That just sound childish, "you where mean to me so I'll be mean back"
    - krapp 4y ago
      They didn't really, that's just a Trumpist conspiracy theory trying to equivocate the racist and violent speech among its base with legitimate and mainstream conservative speech, and the banning thereof with political persecution by a shadowy, all-controlling leftist cabal. But conservative speech always has and still does exist on social media, everywhere, in abundance. In fact, Twitter (and other social media platform) algorithms have been shown to amplify right-wing content more often than left-wing content, not suppress it. Which is of course why they're trying so hard to control it.
      - BulgarianIdiot 4y ago
        I'm not sure I fully believe the algorithms promoted right-wing content, although I do believe the algorithm promotes controversial content, which is one of the strategies on the right, as more of a cultural underdog trying to get visibility. It's also self-evident, honestly, that the human moderators, which overviewed the decisions of the algorithm in Twitter 1.0 were predominantly left-leaning, with many LGBTQ+ members working as contractors, moderating from home. The sad thing for me is the hypocrisy. Here is Elon coming and proclaiming himself a "free speech absolutist" and "comedy is now legal", and then start banning accounts in large swaths on a whim based on whatever right-wing $8 badge buyers tweet at him, including a whole group of apolitical comedy accounts. This will shrink Twitter and turn it into Parler. The right see the destruction of Twitter as a win, and it is a win, but quite a short term one. This network will rebuild itself elsewhere, and you won't have $44 billion ready every time for the next hostile takeover. I see this as a huge missed opportunity to have a truly inclusive platform that welcomes everyone and takes no sides. I have no idea if Elon Musk lied about this intentionally or he was coached and tricked into it by his right-wing supporters, but he shot his investment in the foot.
- matbatt38 4y ago
  Can you elaborate on "insane rant"?
paulpauper 4y ago
After reading the twitter thread and the link, i don't think it should have been banned unless it actually called for violence at a location or against an individual.
- matbatt38 4y ago
  Which Trump did and he still got unbanned
draw_down 4y ago
licebmi__at__ 4y ago
Maybe we can stop pretending "muh free speech" is something more than a right wing talking point, and what these "free speech absolutists" actually want is to prop up right wing talking points and ban left leaning ones. Just stop the lying about.
- taolegal 4y ago
  There's no lying, and that you're suggesting that they're lying reveals your own bias. And it also reveals that you don't support the idea of free speech, since you seem to believe it's only a politically motivated concept.
  - deanCommie 4y ago
    If you support the idea of free speech, do you support banning CrimethInc? If you do, do you also support banning anti-vaxx misinformation at the height of a societal health crisis? If you do not, do you support calling Musk out on his hypocrisy here? Just clarifying.
    - taolegal 4y ago
      > do you support banning CrimethInc? Not really, but free speech goes hand-in-hand with free association. Musk obviously has the prerogative to ban people. > do you also support banning anti-vaxx misinformation at the height of a societal health crisis? Nope, but again it's their perogative. > do you support calling Musk out on his hypocrisy here? I don't particularly care. At the end of the day, free speech is the foundational freedom in the US. It's the 1st amendment for a reason. There's no use in arguing against it, it's an ultimate virtue whether people support it or not. Clearly a private company do whatever it wants, BUT free speech is an ideal and Twitter should nevertheless try to uphold it, as the de facto public square on the internet.
papito 4y ago
Elon's little power trip as his own lord of Twitter Land and the King of the People is really going speeding towards pathetic levels. Who is he trying to impress? We know this is all an act, and the thin-skinned vulgarian will get all discombobulated at the first sign of being questioned. But what's truly remarkable is his almost overnight alignment with disinformation peddlers, trolls, and insurrectionists. I mean, wow, way to flame out. Tip of a hat, sire. Really, question your life choices if you care about what the convicted felon Dinesh D'Souza thinks.

24 points by deanCommie 4y ago

The website appears to be mostly just an insane rant. That said, I don't think it should have been banned either, outside of doing something specifically illegal. (Edit: also, I've never heard of Andy Ngo, the person the site is accusing of being a "far right troll", but it's pretty clearly a highly editorialized title, even if it accurately reflects the title of the original article)

codefreeordie 4y ago
- syzarian 4y ago
  I think the outrage is due to Musk’s apparent hypocrisy. Also, what we are seeing is that it’s becoming apparent that when a few companies act as the gatekeeper to a large percentage of the people then perhaps government intervention is warranted.
  - version_five 4y ago
    > we are seeing is that it’s becoming apparent that when a few companies act as the gatekeeper to a large percentage of the people then perhaps government intervention is warranted I think that's basically the GP's point. It's only "become apparent" now that there is a big tech company that doesn't toe the mainstream line. This (gatekeeping / censorship) was always a big problem with big tech, especially twitter, but the "it's a private company, if someone doesn't like it they can build their own" crowd (conveniently libertarian for a microsecond) shot down any notions that platforms needed some common carrier regulations. Then someone actually did the equivalent of getting their own social network by buying the most popular one, and suddenly everyone is up in arms.
    - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
      These are fundamentally different complaints. The first party is complaining they believe a right is being violated. The second party is complaining that the first party is inconsistently applying their own beliefs.
  - codefreeordie 4y ago
    Dorsey's Twitter claimed to be pro free speech and fair, and yet apparently it was fine for Twitter to ban only one side then. As per usual, the true story is "it's good when my guy does it and unfair and evil when the other side does it to me"
- bediger4000 4y ago
  That's not it at all. Musk bought Twitter with the stated purpose of allowing free speech. If Musk bans some accounts while bringing back others, he's being a giant hypocrite by not allowing all to speak freely.
  - metadat 4y ago
    No kidding, he is an emotional character and answers to questions vary wildly by the day and hour. In other words, as you've intuited: a "hypocrite".
  - codefreeordie 4y ago
    - bediger4000 4y ago
      Sure, and I still say that. It's just that criticism of Musk on hypocrisy grounds is justified, because he bought Twitter to bring back free speech or something like that, which includes crimethinc, and Andy Ngo. Free speech is a uniform criteria, not a collection of special cases. The latter is hypocrisy. There's general agreement on what "free speech" means. If Musk wants to claim free speech moral high ground, he has to put up with Chad Loder and crimethinc and Evon Latrail. If Musk bans accounts that he doesn't like that's fine, he owns that particular printing press. But he doesn't get to claim "free speech" and ban accounts, too. That's the very definition of hypocrisy.
      - codefreeordie 4y ago
        tovej 4y ago
        Are the conservative voices advocating for violence against LGBTQ+, ethnic minorities, and critics? Then it's not really hypocrisy but completely valid and according to the policy of most of the platforms.
- draw_down 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
sp332 4y ago
I think it's a pretty good description. Even Wikipedia doesn't have much else to say about him. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Ngo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Ngo
- version_five 4y ago
  I looked at the wikipedia article before I made my comment. It appears neutral, even if they don't have anything nice to say about him, they don't participate in name-calling, which is what I'm suggesting for the title
  - leereeves 4y ago
    Check the edit history on that page; there's a lot of controversy behind the scenes. Such Wikiwars can produce neutral language masking underlying bias. Fortunately there's no need to trust pseudonymous Wikipedia editors when the entire record is public. Andy Ngo reports on left-wing violence (primarily "antifacists" in Portland), as you can see from his Twitter feed: https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo He seems to have caused several bannings tonight by reporting various crimes, criminal histories, and calls to violence on Twitter. He discussed CrimethInc with Elon in this thread: https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1596087310042296320 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1596087310042296320
BulgarianIdiot 4y ago
It's quite bizarre to constantly hear Elon Musk talk about free speech and unbanning everyone, and then this ongoing list of left-leaning accounts get nuked. And not just left-leaning. The Oatmeal's Twitter account (https://theoatmeal.com/ https://theoatmeal.com/) was "permanently banned" couple of days ago for no given reason. Activism got it back, but imagine you're not popular. Your account is gone forever just like that. It's pure chaos.
- DLA 4y ago
  - someNameIG 4y ago
    That just sound childish, "you where mean to me so I'll be mean back"
  - krapp 4y ago
    They didn't really, that's just a Trumpist conspiracy theory trying to equivocate the racist and violent speech among its base with legitimate and mainstream conservative speech, and the banning thereof with political persecution by a shadowy, all-controlling leftist cabal. But conservative speech always has and still does exist on social media, everywhere, in abundance. In fact, Twitter (and other social media platform) algorithms have been shown to amplify right-wing content more often than left-wing content, not suppress it. Which is of course why they're trying so hard to control it.
    - BulgarianIdiot 4y ago
      I'm not sure I fully believe the algorithms promoted right-wing content, although I do believe the algorithm promotes controversial content, which is one of the strategies on the right, as more of a cultural underdog trying to get visibility. It's also self-evident, honestly, that the human moderators, which overviewed the decisions of the algorithm in Twitter 1.0 were predominantly left-leaning, with many LGBTQ+ members working as contractors, moderating from home. The sad thing for me is the hypocrisy. Here is Elon coming and proclaiming himself a "free speech absolutist" and "comedy is now legal", and then start banning accounts in large swaths on a whim based on whatever right-wing $8 badge buyers tweet at him, including a whole group of apolitical comedy accounts. This will shrink Twitter and turn it into Parler. The right see the destruction of Twitter as a win, and it is a win, but quite a short term one. This network will rebuild itself elsewhere, and you won't have $44 billion ready every time for the next hostile takeover. I see this as a huge missed opportunity to have a truly inclusive platform that welcomes everyone and takes no sides. I have no idea if Elon Musk lied about this intentionally or he was coached and tricked into it by his right-wing supporters, but he shot his investment in the foot.
matbatt38 4y ago
Can you elaborate on "insane rant"?

paulpauper 4y ago

After reading the twitter thread and the link, i don't think it should have been banned unless it actually called for violence at a location or against an individual.

matbatt38 4y ago
Which Trump did and he still got unbanned

draw_down 4y ago

licebmi__at__ 4y ago

Maybe we can stop pretending "muh free speech" is something more than a right wing talking point, and what these "free speech absolutists" actually want is to prop up right wing talking points and ban left leaning ones. Just stop the lying about.

taolegal 4y ago
There's no lying, and that you're suggesting that they're lying reveals your own bias. And it also reveals that you don't support the idea of free speech, since you seem to believe it's only a politically motivated concept.
- deanCommie 4y ago
  If you support the idea of free speech, do you support banning CrimethInc? If you do, do you also support banning anti-vaxx misinformation at the height of a societal health crisis? If you do not, do you support calling Musk out on his hypocrisy here? Just clarifying.
  - taolegal 4y ago
    > do you support banning CrimethInc? Not really, but free speech goes hand-in-hand with free association. Musk obviously has the prerogative to ban people. > do you also support banning anti-vaxx misinformation at the height of a societal health crisis? Nope, but again it's their perogative. > do you support calling Musk out on his hypocrisy here? I don't particularly care. At the end of the day, free speech is the foundational freedom in the US. It's the 1st amendment for a reason. There's no use in arguing against it, it's an ultimate virtue whether people support it or not. Clearly a private company do whatever it wants, BUT free speech is an ideal and Twitter should nevertheless try to uphold it, as the de facto public square on the internet.

papito 4y ago

Elon's little power trip as his own lord of Twitter Land and the King of the People is really going speeding towards pathetic levels. Who is he trying to impress? We know this is all an act, and the thin-skinned vulgarian will get all discombobulated at the first sign of being questioned. But what's truly remarkable is his almost overnight alignment with disinformation peddlers, trolls, and insurrectionists. I mean, wow, way to flame out. Tip of a hat, sire. Really, question your life choices if you care about what the convicted felon Dinesh D'Souza thinks.