Parler Gone but Not Forgotten...

[*Nately120*]

(01-11-2021, 01:33 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Unless I am mistaken Parler was a platform that promised zero censorship.  It may have been started as a right wing response to twitter but I believe the primary motivation for it was zero censorship.  Because of that I'm not a fan of our big tech overlords deciding that we couldn't have a platform in that mold.  There are people who will abuse freedom when given it, but I still prefer more freedom over less, especially when it's companies like Amazon making the decisions.

I didn't delve into Parler and I've never used Twitter, but the notion that Parler was anti-censorship probably would have been refuted soundly the moment you tried to post a bunch of pro BLM stuff on there, or if you called for Trump's public execution, or something to that effect.

I honestly don't know, and I could be wrong but I'd be surprised if "anti-censorship" didn't just mean you are free to post right-wing stuff the masses have assembled to discuss and agree with.  Just my take.  

[Forever Spinning Vinyl]

(01-11-2021, 01:33 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Unless I am mistaken Parler was a platform that promised zero censorship.  It may have been started as a right wing response to twitter but I believe the primary motivation for it was zero censorship.  Because of that I'm not a fan of our big tech overlords deciding that we couldn't have a platform in that mold.  There are people who will abuse freedom when given it, but I still prefer more freedom over less, especially when it's companies like Amazon making the decisions.

I've read on a couple of other forums about Independents and Democrats signing up for Parler and being deleted. I have no proof of that other than other posters saying this. If true, the "No censorship on Parler" appears to be false.

[*Nately120*]

(01-11-2021, 01:42 PM)Forever Spinning Vinyl Wrote: I've read on a couple of other forums about Independents and Democrats signing up for Parler and being deleted. I have no proof of that other than other posters saying this. If true, the "No censorship on Parler" appears to be false.

This is my assumption as well, mostly just based on the zeal people have for mistaking "freedom" for "freedom to agree with me."  It's not specifically a parler thing.

[Belsnickel]

(01-11-2021, 01:33 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Unless I am mistaken Parler was a platform that promised zero censorship. It may have been started as a right wing response to twitter but I believe the primary motivation for it was zero censorship. Because of that I'm not a fan of our big tech overlords deciding that we couldn't have a platform in that mold. There are people who will abuse freedom when given it, but I still prefer more freedom over less, especially when it's companies like Amazon making the decisions.

But this is the market at work. Parler can exist in the form it chooses if they can find hosting that is willing to do it. Every company has its own rules and terms of service. If any of these big tech giants find you in violation of those terms, then they can terminate a contract. Period. No one has a right to a platform from which to be heard and denying them a platform is not a violation of free speech. By trying to say companies should acquiesce to the demands of platforms like Parler, it is limiting the freedoms of those companies and their executives. Shutting down Parler is still freedom. The freedom of choice for a company to do that is their own freedom of speech.

[CJD]

(01-11-2021, 01:33 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Unless I am mistaken Parler was a platform that promised zero censorship.  It may have been started as a right wing response to twitter but I believe the primary motivation for it was zero censorship.  Because of that I'm not a fan of our big tech overlords deciding that we couldn't have a platform in that mold.  There are people who will abuse freedom when given it, but I still prefer more freedom over less, especially when it's companies like Amazon making the decisions.

It doesn't really matter anymore because it seems Parler is dead, but there have been accusations of it banning Liberals who, for some reason, tried to post there.

Granted, this shouldn't really be surprising. Conservatives are pretty notorious for claiming they support free speech, but they put up barriers to prevent anyone to speak on their free speech platforms. R/Conservative on Reddit is the most flagrant example of this, as they now have set their sub to, by default, make posts "flaired users only" regardless of the content of the post. 

And, for those curious, you can't just get a flair in that subreddit. Each flair is given by the mods after you have an "interview" with the mods where they gauge what kind of conservative you are (for example, constitutional conservative, trump conservative, 2A conservative etc). Without this interview, you can't get a flair and therefore can't comment on the subreddit at all.

Even before it was set as the default for new posts, this was the case in "controversial" threads, where they were very quickly locked into flaired only if there was too much brigading from more left subreddits like R/politics.

Coincidentally, I have no problem with them locking their threads. I imagine getting brigaded is a huge problem for mods and so locking it to verified users is a really easy way to make the moderators' jobs easier.

I just find it funny that they do this, and then complain about the exact thing that they themselves very commonly do.

Conservatives and projection often go hand in hand.

[GMDino]

(01-11-2021, 01:42 PM)Forever Spinning Vinyl Wrote: I've read on a couple of other forums about Independents and Democrats signing up for Parler and being deleted. I have no proof of that other than other posters saying this. If true, the "No censorship on Parler" appears to be false.

I've read of posts that were anti-Trump or anti-trump supporter being deleted.

Also they started to censor the world "kill" or "die" and so the poster there switched to saying "make people not alive" or some such thing.

They were never "no censorship".  They were an attempt to create a safe place for right wing radicals and other conservatives to share conspiracy theories and death threats about liberals.

But don't you know Twitter is "just as bad" because they don't allow that?  

I swear the right, the party of personal responsibility, has more excuses about "well the other side" than anything.

[Au165]

(01-11-2021, 01:44 PM)Nately120 Wrote: This is my assumption as well, mostly just based on the zeal people have for mistaking "freedom" for "freedom to agree with me."  It's not specifically a parler thing.

This is in fact true. They banned plenty of people who disagreed with their core beliefs, which they are free to do so. The whole gimmick of "zero censorship" simply meant they were open to any and all right-wing propaganda to be spread no matter how false it was.

[BmorePat87]

(01-11-2021, 01:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: But this is the market at work. Parler can exist in the form it chooses if they can find hosting that is willing to do it. Every company has its own rules and terms of service. If any of these big tech giants find you in violation of those terms, then they can terminate a contract. Period. No one has a right to a platform from which to be heard and denying them a platform is not a violation of free speech. By trying to say companies should acquiesce to the demands of platforms like Parler, it is limiting the freedoms of those companies and their executives. Shutting down Parler is still freedom. The freedom of choice for a company to do that is their own freedom of speech.

this is the exact same thing as Twitter removing content that violates its TOS. 

While not perfect, the comparison going around is: pretend Twitter is a Christian baker and Donald Trump's tweets are a cake for a same sex marriage. 

[*Nately120*]

(01-11-2021, 01:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: this is the exact same thing as Twitter removing content that violates its TOS. 

While not perfect, the comparison going around is: pretend Twitter is a Christian baker and Donald Trump's tweets are a cake for a same sex marriage. 

Is the cake shaped like a giant dick?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

In response to all the above, if they were banning liberal or left leaning speech then eff 'em, now I have no sympathy. As to Bel's point, I am fully aware that Amazon or any other company has the right to make this type of decision. Unlike many people crying "freedom of speech" I am aware that this is not speech censored by the government, thus the 1st Amendment does not apply. I still don't like tech overlords deciding for everyone what is, and is not, acceptable. While I get the general point, the more outlets continue to conglomerate under a few ownership groups the worse this is going to get. I can absolutely see a time in which there is not outlet for speech that goes against the current zeitgeist.

Maybe Elon Musk will save us?

[Au165]

(01-11-2021, 01:58 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: In response to all the above, if they were banning liberal or left leaning speech then eff 'em, now I have no sympathy.  As to Bel's point, I am fully aware that Amazon or any other company has the right to make this type of decision.  Unlike many people crying "freedom of speech" I am aware that this is not speech censored by the government, thus the 1st Amendment does not apply.  I still don't like tech overlords deciding for everyone what is, and is not, acceptable.  While I get the general point, the more outlets continue to conglomerate under a few ownership groups the worse this is going to get.  I can absolutely see a time in which there is not outlet for speech that goes against the current zeitgeist.

Maybe Elon Musk will save us?  

Here is the issue though, someone always has to be there to make a call on legal and illegal speech because illegal speech is in fact a thing. That means there will always be someone making that call and in the digital world, it has to be the company that is enabling the speech to exist. It's easy to say, only make it X or Y, but those lines will always end up gray and that is where people get bent out of shape. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-11-2021, 02:00 PM)Au165 Wrote: Here is the issue though, someone always has to be there to make a call on legal and illegal speech because illegal speech is in fact a thing. That means there will always be someone making that call and in the digital world, it has to be the company that is enabling the speech to exist. It's easy to say, only make it X or Y, but those lines will always end up gray and that is where people get bent out of shape. 

I agree, but the line where speech becomes illegal is rather obvious.  It's honestly baffling to me because I was on the internet in the early to mid nineties when it was a free for all.  Seriously, the things people said to each other would probably kill someone today. 

[Belsnickel]

(01-11-2021, 01:58 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: In response to all the above, if they were banning liberal or left leaning speech then eff 'em, now I have no sympathy. As to Bel's point, I am fully aware that Amazon or any other company has the right to make this type of decision. Unlike many people crying "freedom of speech" I am aware that this is not speech censored by the government, thus the 1st Amendment does not apply. I still don't like tech overlords deciding for everyone what is, and is not, acceptable. While I get the general point, the more outlets continue to conglomerate under a few ownership groups the worse this is going to get. I can absolutely see a time in which there is not outlet for speech that goes against the current zeitgeist.

Maybe Elon Musk will save us?

Well, the failure of anti-trust regulations to prevent these giant conglomerations is one of my biggest issues. I am a Roosevelt man, after all, and both Roosevelts were trust-busters.

As to Elon Musk, he can **** right off.

[Au165]

(01-11-2021, 02:03 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I agree, but the line where speech becomes illegal is rather obvious.  It's honestly baffling to me because I was on the internet in the early to mid nineties when it was a free for all.  Seriously, the things people said to each other would probably kill someone today. 

Not anymore. Cyberbullying laws differ so much across the country, a lot falls under those laws that you may not be able to easily identify as illegal.

[GMDino]

There's a great clip in "Death to 2020" with Lisa Kudrow, portraying a Trump spokesperson, talking about "conservative voices being silenced" and how she has had to repeat that on Joe Rogan's podcast, Tucker Carlson's show...twice, in her book, etc.

Just perfect.

Secondly:  Has anyone told Trump he can hold a press conference anytime he wants?  He can make a speech, and answer questions and completely defend or explain everything.

Maybe they are still trying to level his meds?

[Forever Spinning Vinyl]

(01-11-2021, 02:13 PM)GMDino Wrote: There's a great clip in "Death to 2020" with Lisa Kudrow, portraying a Trump spokesperson, talking about "conservative voices being silenced" and how she has had to repeat that on Joe Rogan's podcast, Tucker Carlson's show...twice, in her book, etc.

Just perfect.

Secondly:  Has anyone told Trump he can hold a press conference anytime he wants?  He can make a speech, and answer questions and completely defend or explain everything.

Maybe they are still trying to level his meds?

Re-instate the Coronavirus press conferences. He hardly talked about Covid in his 90 minute to 2 hour speeches.

[GMDino]

A North Idaho internet provider sent this email out to costumers, absolutely INSANE pic.twitter.com/ecwRFqnzwS

— Coping MAGA (@CopingMAGA) January 11, 2021

All I can think is some MAGA nut somewhere yelling "REVENGE!"

[fredtoast]

(01-11-2021, 04:26 PM)GMDino Wrote:

A North Idaho internet provider sent this email out to costumers, absolutely INSANE pic.twitter.com/ecwRFqnzwS

— Coping MAGA (@CopingMAGA) January 11, 2021

All I can think is some MAGA nut somewhere yelling "REVENGE!"

So many grammatical/spelling errors it almost seems like English is the second language for whoever posted it.

[Au165]

(01-11-2021, 04:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So many grammatical/spelling errors it almost seems like English is the second language for whoever posted it.

Their Twitter feed is just as bad. I would have guessed it was a Phising scam if it wasn't the same on their Twitter feed.

[Rotobeast]

(01-11-2021, 04:26 PM)GMDino Wrote:

A North Idaho internet provider sent this email out to costumers, absolutely INSANE pic.twitter.com/ecwRFqnzwS

— Coping MAGA (@CopingMAGA) January 11, 2021

All I can think is some MAGA nut somewhere yelling "REVENGE!"

If there were not so many big words, I'd think "Clay the free" had a hand in writing that.