3 ms·

> It’s a private company and he has every right to do so, but for the love of god, his governance will not increase the amount of freedom that people using Twit

> It’s a private company and he has every right to do so, but for the love of god, his governance will not increase the amount of freedom that people using Twitter have. Coldtea pointed out that this exact line was being used by conservatives when they were getting banned, but everyone was fine with it. But now that others are getting banned, it’s suddenly not ok. I think double standards are bad in general, and we should just quit with the banwaves. But that would mean letting people like Andrew Tate stay. Are you sure that’s what you want?

zimpenfish 4y ago
> But now that others are getting banned, it’s suddenly not ok. No. Ol' Muskie can do what he wants - if he's bored, he can throw 19 d10s and ban the user who posted that status id and get GPT-3 to generate the reason why they're banned. It's his company. Go nuts, Ol' Muskie! What he can't do, though, without pushback or commentary, is turn up pronouncing that "FREE SPEECH IS HERE", "BOTS ARE BAD", "ONLY ILLEGAL SPEECH WILL BE CENSORED", etc., immediately go back on all three of those, enable and promote bigots, take a hard turn into transphobia, and then start throwing hissy fits at people who call him out on his hypocrisy and lies by banning people with post-hoc rationales. If he doesn't like people calling him on his bullshit decisions, there's a simple solution. Hell, liberals and progressives would have -some- respect for him if he just owned his bullshit and said "Yes, I'm a petty narcissist who is now pandering to conservatives and bigots because they'll stroke my ego if I punch down."
aschearer 4y ago
Copying from another thread, cuz there are so many confused souls: Not sure how many times we must explain this, he can do what he wants with his website. But don't tell us you're a champion of free speech while capriciously silencing detractors. "The left" never claimed to be champions for free speech. "They" sought a balance between freedom of speech and public harm. At least that's my take, I can't speak for "them." Elon Musk calls himself a "free speech absolutist" and that if it's not illegal speech, it shouldn't be banned. Yet the moment he's at the helm, the bans start flowing for all manner of legal speech. What I'm saying is, words have meaning. If you want to claim a principle you have to make an effort to live by it. People who claim principles and proceed to ignore them or even act contrary to them are not principled people, they're just making noise. We should not listen to them, or take what they say seriously. For unprincipled people are fairweather friends, and likely have ulterior motives.
- mikeyouse 4y ago
  It's utterly telling who gets banned as well.. shouldn't have to repeat it for the 1,000th time but of course he's free to ban anyone he wants. The obnoxious thing is that he was so sanctimonious about prior bans, going so far to welcome outright back neonazis, insurrection planners, fake doctors selling dangerous covid 'cures', and on and on because those things weren't technically illegal -- but banning journalists for the act of journalism (so legal that it's a right literally enshrined in the first amendment!) after they reported on his ban of the stupid flight-tracking account?
badrequest 4y ago
The double standard is that Musk explicitly said he wouldn't do the things he's doing now. You're upset at straw men you made up and not the concrete hypocrisy in front of you.
- taolegal 4y ago
  [flagged]
kgwxd 4y ago
"Conservatives" weren't getting banned. People that consistently lied, expressed hate in vile ways, and other things that easily justified banning were getting banned. They just happened to mostly identify as "conservative". Now people speaking truth to power, seek equality for all people, and other things most of the civilized world already knows is good for society are getting banned. They just happen to mostly identify as "not conservative".
- throwawayfranco 4y ago
  [dead]
notfromhere 4y ago
He can do what he wants, but he can't be free of public criticism. Conservatives don't actually care about free speech, they care about their reach being limited on digital platforms. But nobody is banning conservatives from Twitter, people were getting removed for hate speech or dangerous behavior. This wasn't really a problem for a long time, and conservatives don't want to discuss why suddenly conservative viewpoints are becoming synonymous with hate speech. Conservatism in the US has moved to incredibly hard right/far right/fascist positions that its shocking. There are sitting Republicans that advocated for the former president to seize power through martial law.

zimpenfish 4y ago

> But now that others are getting banned, it’s suddenly not ok. No. Ol' Muskie can do what he wants - if he's bored, he can throw 19 d10s and ban the user who posted that status id and get GPT-3 to generate the reason why they're banned. It's his company. Go nuts, Ol' Muskie! What he can't do, though, without pushback or commentary, is turn up pronouncing that "FREE SPEECH IS HERE", "BOTS ARE BAD", "ONLY ILLEGAL SPEECH WILL BE CENSORED", etc., immediately go back on all three of those, enable and promote bigots, take a hard turn into transphobia, and then start throwing hissy fits at people who call him out on his hypocrisy and lies by banning people with post-hoc rationales. If he doesn't like people calling him on his bullshit decisions, there's a simple solution. Hell, liberals and progressives would have -some- respect for him if he just owned his bullshit and said "Yes, I'm a petty narcissist who is now pandering to conservatives and bigots because they'll stroke my ego if I punch down."

aschearer 4y ago

Copying from another thread, cuz there are so many confused souls: Not sure how many times we must explain this, he can do what he wants with his website. But don't tell us you're a champion of free speech while capriciously silencing detractors. "The left" never claimed to be champions for free speech. "They" sought a balance between freedom of speech and public harm. At least that's my take, I can't speak for "them." Elon Musk calls himself a "free speech absolutist" and that if it's not illegal speech, it shouldn't be banned. Yet the moment he's at the helm, the bans start flowing for all manner of legal speech. What I'm saying is, words have meaning. If you want to claim a principle you have to make an effort to live by it. People who claim principles and proceed to ignore them or even act contrary to them are not principled people, they're just making noise. We should not listen to them, or take what they say seriously. For unprincipled people are fairweather friends, and likely have ulterior motives.

mikeyouse 4y ago
It's utterly telling who gets banned as well.. shouldn't have to repeat it for the 1,000th time but of course he's free to ban anyone he wants. The obnoxious thing is that he was so sanctimonious about prior bans, going so far to welcome outright back neonazis, insurrection planners, fake doctors selling dangerous covid 'cures', and on and on because those things weren't technically illegal -- but banning journalists for the act of journalism (so legal that it's a right literally enshrined in the first amendment!) after they reported on his ban of the stupid flight-tracking account?

badrequest 4y ago

The double standard is that Musk explicitly said he wouldn't do the things he's doing now. You're upset at straw men you made up and not the concrete hypocrisy in front of you.

taolegal 4y ago
[flagged]

kgwxd 4y ago

"Conservatives" weren't getting banned. People that consistently lied, expressed hate in vile ways, and other things that easily justified banning were getting banned. They just happened to mostly identify as "conservative". Now people speaking truth to power, seek equality for all people, and other things most of the civilized world already knows is good for society are getting banned. They just happen to mostly identify as "not conservative".

throwawayfranco 4y ago
[dead]

notfromhere 4y ago

He can do what he wants, but he can't be free of public criticism. Conservatives don't actually care about free speech, they care about their reach being limited on digital platforms. But nobody is banning conservatives from Twitter, people were getting removed for hate speech or dangerous behavior. This wasn't really a problem for a long time, and conservatives don't want to discuss why suddenly conservative viewpoints are becoming synonymous with hate speech. Conservatism in the US has moved to incredibly hard right/far right/fascist positions that its shocking. There are sitting Republicans that advocated for the former president to seize power through martial law.