5 ms·

> neutral standpoint > some of the tech world has put in significant effort to silence conservatives That doesn’t strike me as a neutral statement! What does

> neutral standpoint > some of the tech world has put in significant effort to silence conservatives That doesn’t strike me as a neutral statement! What does “conservatives” mean in this context? Always reminds me of this tweet: —- Conservative: I have been censored for my conservative views Me: Holy shit! You were censored for wanting lower taxes? Con: LOL no...no not those views Me: So....deregulation? Con: Haha no not those views either Me: Which views, exactly? Con: Oh, you know the ones https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1050391663552671744 https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/105039166355267174...

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
animatethrow 3y ago
[flagged]
- afavour 3y ago
  Any examples of the tech world putting in significant effort to silence the viewpoint that men have penises? In any case, that’s not “conservatives”. That’s a very specific issue.
  - throw_m239339 3y ago
    > Any examples of the tech world putting in significant effort to silence the viewpoint that men have penises? Dorsey era's Twitter, Reddit.
    - afavour 3y ago
      Any, you know, actual examples of things that happened?
  - animatethrow 3y ago
    There's the Babylon Bee deplatforming that led to Musk buying Twitter. The Babylon Bee called a public official who is a biological man a 'man'. So Twitter deplatformed the Babylon Bee.
    - afavour 3y ago
      > Twitter locked the account of a right-leaning parody site, The Babylon Bee, after it awarded Rachel Levine, the transgender Biden administration official, the title of “man of the year.” https://nypost.com/2022/03/21/twitter-suspends-babylon-bee-over-rachel-levine-man-of-the-year-title/ https://nypost.com/2022/03/21/twitter-suspends-babylon-bee-o... That’s pretty obviously a personal attack. There’s a very obvious difference between holding and expressing a personal opinion on gender identity and launching a public attack against a specific person. This is the way these complaints always go. “conservatives are being censored!” becomes “well sure, they were censored because they violated the terms and conditions of the site in a distasteful way but why is that important?!”
      - Georgelemental 3y ago
        If I Tweet "Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is evil and wrong, and also he is a bad person and his armpits stink!" am I making a personal attack that should get me banned from the platform?
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        afavour 3y ago
        You really think that a personal attack on the head of state for Russia and an assistant secretary for health are equivalent? How much harassment do you think Putin would be subject to as a result of you (assuming you have the 1.3m followers the Babylon Bee has, which you don’t) attacking him? We both know you don’t think they’re equivalent. You’re just trying to find technicalities to excuse abhorrent behaviour.
  - feltmann 3y ago
    Reddit banning all the gender-critical feminist subreddits, and anyone expressing these viewpoints. Twitter of old doing similar. I agree with you that this isn't about silencing conservatives, but rather anyone who refuses to accept the ideological stance that men can be women and vice versa.
- Zigurd 3y ago
  If by old fashioned you mean US 1950s conformism, OK. If by old fashioned you mean in the context of history to the best of our non-bowdlerized knowledge, then, no. It's just historically uninformed.
Georgelemental 3y ago
Why would a conservative complain about their views being censored, and then self-censor those same views? Seems like a strange straw man
- toofy 3y ago
  the absurdity of “we’re being censored for our conservative views” is that the primary target of banning hasnt been a “conservative viewpoints”. for example, if someone is banned for saying “death to non-whites”, theres a pretty good chance they’re being banned for advocating genocide, not because they’re conservative. or if someone was banned for denying that covid was real, they weren’t banned for “conservative views”. whether we agree with the reasoning or not, they were banned for denying covid when the sites had made clear this topic would result in a ban. i’ll repeat what i’ve said many times before. this idea that banning is somehow new, or is some creepy definition of censorship is nonsense. site owners and moderators have had rules for their online spaces since the beginnings. and just like real world spaces, people get removed constantly. it’s not new. it’s not weird. it’s not shocking.
  - Georgelemental 3y ago
    > for example, if someone is banned for saying “death to non-whites”, theres a pretty good chance they’re being banned for advocating genocide, not because they’re conservative. I think you will find that people have been getting banned for rather less harsh statements, like "maybe Covid was man-made", "Hunter Biden is corrupt", and "men cannot be women."

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

animatethrow 3y ago

[flagged]

afavour 3y ago
Any examples of the tech world putting in significant effort to silence the viewpoint that men have penises? In any case, that’s not “conservatives”. That’s a very specific issue.
- throw_m239339 3y ago
  > Any examples of the tech world putting in significant effort to silence the viewpoint that men have penises? Dorsey era's Twitter, Reddit.
  - afavour 3y ago
    Any, you know, actual examples of things that happened?
- animatethrow 3y ago
  There's the Babylon Bee deplatforming that led to Musk buying Twitter. The Babylon Bee called a public official who is a biological man a 'man'. So Twitter deplatformed the Babylon Bee.
  - afavour 3y ago
    > Twitter locked the account of a right-leaning parody site, The Babylon Bee, after it awarded Rachel Levine, the transgender Biden administration official, the title of “man of the year.” https://nypost.com/2022/03/21/twitter-suspends-babylon-bee-over-rachel-levine-man-of-the-year-title/ https://nypost.com/2022/03/21/twitter-suspends-babylon-bee-o... That’s pretty obviously a personal attack. There’s a very obvious difference between holding and expressing a personal opinion on gender identity and launching a public attack against a specific person. This is the way these complaints always go. “conservatives are being censored!” becomes “well sure, they were censored because they violated the terms and conditions of the site in a distasteful way but why is that important?!”
    - Georgelemental 3y ago
      If I Tweet "Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is evil and wrong, and also he is a bad person and his armpits stink!" am I making a personal attack that should get me banned from the platform?
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - afavour 3y ago
        You really think that a personal attack on the head of state for Russia and an assistant secretary for health are equivalent? How much harassment do you think Putin would be subject to as a result of you (assuming you have the 1.3m followers the Babylon Bee has, which you don’t) attacking him? We both know you don’t think they’re equivalent. You’re just trying to find technicalities to excuse abhorrent behaviour.
- feltmann 3y ago
  Reddit banning all the gender-critical feminist subreddits, and anyone expressing these viewpoints. Twitter of old doing similar. I agree with you that this isn't about silencing conservatives, but rather anyone who refuses to accept the ideological stance that men can be women and vice versa.
Zigurd 3y ago
If by old fashioned you mean US 1950s conformism, OK. If by old fashioned you mean in the context of history to the best of our non-bowdlerized knowledge, then, no. It's just historically uninformed.

Georgelemental 3y ago

Why would a conservative complain about their views being censored, and then self-censor those same views? Seems like a strange straw man

toofy 3y ago
the absurdity of “we’re being censored for our conservative views” is that the primary target of banning hasnt been a “conservative viewpoints”. for example, if someone is banned for saying “death to non-whites”, theres a pretty good chance they’re being banned for advocating genocide, not because they’re conservative. or if someone was banned for denying that covid was real, they weren’t banned for “conservative views”. whether we agree with the reasoning or not, they were banned for denying covid when the sites had made clear this topic would result in a ban. i’ll repeat what i’ve said many times before. this idea that banning is somehow new, or is some creepy definition of censorship is nonsense. site owners and moderators have had rules for their online spaces since the beginnings. and just like real world spaces, people get removed constantly. it’s not new. it’s not weird. it’s not shocking.
- Georgelemental 3y ago
  > for example, if someone is banned for saying “death to non-whites”, theres a pretty good chance they’re being banned for advocating genocide, not because they’re conservative. I think you will find that people have been getting banned for rather less harsh statements, like "maybe Covid was man-made", "Hunter Biden is corrupt", and "men cannot be women."