Twitter permanently suspends Milo Yiannopoulos over row with 'Ghostbusters' actress

PopePalpatine

Maguined wrote: »

Apart from the face he has not broken any rules that Jones herself had broken so his banning while she was not seems poitical.

Which rules had Jones broke? I don't remember her photoshopping any tweets and falsely attributing them to Milo and his kind.

Outlaw Pete

Maguined wrote: »

.. seems political.

As is the post you're replying to.

Maguined

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Which rules had Jones broke? I don't remember her photoshopping any tweets and falsely attributing them to Milo and his kind.

She made remarks that could considered as racist as Milo's.

Lord have mercy...white people sh*t

ok you white girls are starting to look alike like a mutherf*cka.I swear i went to high school with them two girls!#ainteventryingtolookdiff

get the **** outta here a white boy is best dj wtf?

mickey mouse gangster cousin wtf? white people smh

Most importantly is the idea that Milo was banned for inciting others to harass Jones despite him making no such tweets encouraging others to attack Jones yet this is something Jones has done herself.

@whitebecky1776 bitch I want to tell you about your self but I'm gonna let everybody else do it I'm gonna retweet your hate!! Get her!!

PopePalpatine

At worst, they're dumb generalisations, I don't really feel too offended by these out-of-context tweets.

As for this "whitebecky1776", while I think it was an asshole move on Jones's part to attempt to direct a hate mob at her, a quick look at her account shows that she's a Trump fangirl and probably part of the cancerous "alt-right", the very people who attacked Jones in the first place.

Outlaw Pete

Surprised he bothered given an interview to ABC given their liberal left agenda (which is often on display at a nauseating degree) but here it is:

Shown of course as a part of a special on 'Online Trolls' .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkrY6Ny7pMg

Maguined

PopePalpatine wrote: »

At worst, they're dumb generalisations, I don't really feel too offended by these out-of-context tweets.

As for this "whitebecky1776", while I think it was an asshole move on Jones's part to attempt to direct a hate mob at her, a quick look at her account shows that she's a Trump fangirl and probably part of the cancerous "alt-right", the very people who attacked Jones in the first place.

So it's okay to direct a hatemob against people if you don't agree with them?

Sorry I don't think that makes it okay. I am not really bothered by her other comments but then I don't really think Milo's were bad enough to be banned by but the hypocrisy does bother me. As a company Twitter should set whatever standards and rules they want but they should enforce them equally and this is where it seems they have not.

I do not support or condone anyone who harassed Jones herself and I would never excuse such abuse because the harassers felt justified when her racist comments were made over a year ago predating all these attacks.

Nero did not incite anyone to attack Jones and I think it is ludicrous to justify Jones incitment as because the girl is questions is a Tump supporter she is "probably" part of the group that attacked her thefore it is justified?

RayM

Maguined wrote: »

Apart from the fact he has not broken any rules that Jones herself had broken so his banning while she was not seems poitical.

Prison forum's full of people complaining that they haven't broken any rules...

El_Dangeroso

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Surprised he bothered given an interview to ABC given their liberal left agenda (which is often on display at a nauseating degree) but here it is:

Shown of course as a part of a special on 'Online Trolls' .

He is an attention seeking narcissist, media coverage is his oxygen, otherwise he's just a sad man ranting at nothing.

Also WTF is a 'liberal'. Stupid American bull**** terms that have no relevance in this country.

Maguined

RayM wrote: »

Prison forum's full of people complaining that they haven't broken any rules...

Valid point apart from the bit where Jones own rule breaking is okay then?

FA Hayek

Maguined wrote: »

So it's okay to direct a hatemob against people if you don't agree with them?

Welcome the the alternative morality of the modern day progressive. Directing a hate mob is wrong, unless of course they are directing it against a person with whom I disagree with, in which case go right ahead.

The essence of hypocrisy, right there.

Outlaw Pete

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

He is an attention seeking narcissist, media coverage is his oxygen, otherwise he's just a sad man ranting at nothing.

To say he is "ranting" at nothing, just shows your ignorance on the man tbf, as Milo's tackles many issues which need to be attacked, such as the third wave feminist notion that women are an oppressed class in western society. His debunking of their lies regarding wage gaps, rape culture, college campus sexual assault stats etc etc is not appreciated I guess. The fact that Milo's lectures are often protested and hijacked by feminists in and of itself shows them up as the hypocrites that they are.

Also WTF is a 'liberal'. Stupid American bull**** terms that have no relevance in this country.

Unfortunately it does now as all that crap has pretty much been imported. Western society gets smaller and smaller all the time thanks to the interwebs. UK collage campuses have taken on the same victimhood feminist ideology as their US counterparts for example and it's only getting worse. No relevance in this country? I wish.

El_Dangeroso

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

To say he is "ranting" at nothing, just shows your ignorance on the man tbf, as Milo's tackles many issues which need to be attacked, such as the third wave feminist notion that women are an oppressed class in western society. His debunking of their lies regarding wage gaps, rape culture, college campus sexual assault stats etc etc is not appreciated I guess. The fact that Milo's lectures are often protested and hijacked by feminists in and of itself shows them up as the hypocrites that they are.

Unfortunately it does now as all that crap has pretty much been imported. Western society gets smaller and smaller all the time thanks to the interwebs. UK collage campuses have taken on the same victimhood feminist ideology as their US counterparts for example and it's only getting worse. No relevance in this country? I wish.

Nonsense, no it hasn't. You just imagine that it has because presumably you read about it all the time given how much you talk about it.

The rest of us are just getting on with it living our lives blissfully oblivious to the evil feminist conspiracy threatening the very foundations of society. :rolleyes:

Give me one concrete example of feminism having a negative impact in Ireland.

pumpkin4life

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Nonsense, no it hasn't. You just imagine that it has because presumably you read about it all the time given how much you talk about it.

The rest of us are just getting on with it living our lives blissfully oblivious to the evil feminist conspiracy threatening the very foundations of society. :rolleyes:

Give me one concrete example of feminism having a negative impact in Ireland.

Una Mullally.

511

RayM wrote: »

Prison forum's full of people complaining that they haven't broken any rules...

Are you seriously using Boards.ie's prison forum as a measuring stick for law and order? I've seen so many people on Politics.ie, Reddit and Facebook complain about excessive and biased moderation on here.

conorhal

There is a current controversy flaring up on YouTube regards 'de-monetizing' at the moment. A lot of vids are being demonetized, no longer available to generate revenue for the channel owner, because they have been tagged as 'infracting youtubes user policy' which aims to avoid paid advertising hitting videos that they deem no advertising friendly.
The terms and conditions of the user policy are vague, some are obvious like videos including violent images etc may be demonetized while other suggest videos can be demonetised if they are deemed 'controversial'.
I suppose you can shrug and say, well their site their rules, but the reality is that Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are now primary culture shapers, the place an entire generation communicates and gets their news from. So it's worrying that they seem to be controlled by particular agendas that don't like to be questioned.
Take this for example,

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/02/twitters-new-safety-council-makes-a-mockery-of-free-speech/

Twitter appointed Anita Sarkeesian to head its 'Trust And Safety Council', that would be a bit like putting Irish Times journo Una Mullally in charge of what is acceptable to say on Twitter. Which is to say, anybody who disagrees with her is banned and anybody that agrees with her can say pretty much what the like.
There is a real sense that liberal groupthinks is fast becoming the only acceptable form of expression allowed and even legitimate criticism is labelled hate speech and banned.
The likes of Anita Sarkeesian would like the entire internet to become a college campus 'safe space'.

RDM_83 again

511 wrote: »

RayM wrote: »

Prison forum's full of people complaining that they haven't broken any rules...

Are you seriously using Boards.ie's prison forum as a measuring stick for law and order? I've seen so many people on Politics.ie, Reddit and Facebook complain about excessive and biased moderation on here.

Particularly as the sites user base (definitely the active user base) is shrinking

El_Dangeroso

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Una Mullally.

Who?

B0jangles

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

To say he is "ranting" at nothing, just shows your ignorance on the man tbf, as Milo's tackles many issues which need to be attacked, such as the third wave feminist notion that women are an oppressed class in western society. His debunking of their lies regarding wage gaps, rape culture, college campus sexual assault stats etc etc is not appreciated I guess. The fact that Milo's lectures are often protested and hijacked by feminists in and of itself shows them up as the hypocrites that they are.



Unfortunately it does now as all that crap has pretty much been imported. Western society gets smaller and smaller all the time thanks to the interwebs. UK collage campuses have taken on the same victimhood feminist ideology as their US counterparts for example and it's only getting worse. No relevance in this country? I wish.

Would it be hypocritical to raise money for grants for poor white male students and instead have the donations sent to your personal account then fail to do anything whatsoever to actually create the promised scholarships?

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/news-blog/2016/aug/19/milo-yiannopoulos-denies-spending-privilege-fund

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/19/breitbart-editor-milo-yiannopoulos-takes-100-000-for-charity-gives-0.html#

http://www.advocate.com/media/2016/8/22/gay-conservative-milo-yiannopoulos-faces-scrutiny-white-mens-scholarship-fund

Yiannopoulos doesn't 'tackle' anything, he says whatever gets him the most attention, positive or negative.

That's pretty much it.

tritium

B0jangles wrote: »

Would it be hypocritical to raise money for grants for poor white male students and instead have the donations sent to your personal account then fail to do anything whatsoever to actually create the promised scholarships?

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/news-blog/2016/aug/19/milo-yiannopoulos-denies-spending-privilege-fund

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/19/breitbart-editor-milo-yiannopoulos-takes-100-000-for-charity-gives-0.html#

http://www.advocate.com/media/2016/8/22/gay-conservative-milo-yiannopoulos-faces-scrutiny-white-mens-scholarship-fund

Yiannopoulos doesn't 'tackle' anything, he says whatever gets him the most attention, positive or negative.

That's pretty much it.

No offence, while i have mixed views on Milo all im seeing here is a project that is delayed, an explanation that may or may not be true but is at least plausible, and a number of sources who have a different political leaning to Milo seeing a chance to engage in slightly thrashy journalism under a "public interest' shield.

Most people would probably wait and see what happens here rather than calling Milo out as a crook or hypocrite at this stage.

B0jangles

tritium wrote: »

No offence, while i have mixed views on Milo all im seeing here is a project that is delayed, an explanation that may or may not be true but is at least plausible, and a number of sources who have a different political leaning to Milo seeing a chance to engage in slightly thrashy journalism under a "public interest' shield.

Most people would probably wait and see what happens here rather than calling Milo out as a crook or hypocrite at this stage.

Yeah, it's just a massive coincidence that he did absolutely nothing about this project until 2 days after the current stories broke.

I have to say, I am very amused (and unsurprised) at the contrast between the unbelievable level of sustained vitriol that was thrown at Anita Sarkeesian about her kickstarter campaign*, versus the generally flabby "lets wait and see" response to Yiannopoulous completely failing to do any of what he promised.


*for those who've never heard of her, she started a kickstarter campaign to make a series of youtube videos about the depiction of women in videogames, raised far more than originally expected and so revised the scale of the project which is still ongoing.
see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropes_vs._Women_in_Video_Games

Sweetemotion

B0jangles wrote: »

Yeah, it's just a massive coincidence that he did absolutely nothing about this project until 2 days after the current stories broke.

I have to say, I am very amused (and unsurprised) at the contrast between the unbelievable level of sustained vitriol that was thrown at Anita Sarkeesian about her kickstarter campaign*, versus the generally flabby "lets wait and see" response to Yiannopoulous completely failing to do any of what he promised.


*for those who've never heard of her, she started a kickstarter campaign to make a series of youtube videos about the depiction of women in videogames, raised far more than originally expected and so revised the scale of the project which is still ongoing.
see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropes_vs._Women_in_Video_Games

It's not still ongoing, she didn't even do half of what she said she would do and now has a new venture of portraying women in history for which she wants another $200,000.

B0jangles

Sweetemotion wrote: »

It's not still ongoing, she didn't even do half of what she said she would do and now has a new venture of portraying women in history for which she wants another $200,000.

Latest video in the series was posted yesterday, is that not pretty recent?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbqRtp5ZUGE

An any case, Sarkeesian is not the topic of the thread, I was merely contrasting the scrutiny and abuse to which she was and still is subjected to compared to the wishy-washy excuses made by Milo fans for his total failure to fulfill any of his promises re: college scholarships.

Double standards a-go-go

InTheTrees

B0jangles wrote: »

Would it be hypocritical to raise money for grants for poor white male students and instead have the donations sent to your personal account then fail to do anything whatsoever to actually create the promised scholarships?[.

He's going to get a horrible shock when tax time comes around.

Unless he's created a charity to handle the money he's going to liable to pay tax on it.

super_furry

Tell you what, he's obviously feeling the pinch of this twitter ban. I haven't heard a single thing about him in the last month or so.

When someone like him, who is basing an entire career on being a professional troll, has their access to the public withdrawn, well what have they got left?

I mean, I'm sure he's up to his usual antics but outside of his website and some fringe sub-reddits, no-one's paying attention. Without twitter he doesn't really have the chance to spill out into the wider world.

InTheTrees

super_furry wrote: »

When someone like him, who is basing an entire career on being a professional troll, has their access to the public withdrawn, well what have they got left?

It's even more pathetic than that because it's only twitter that has banned him.

His access to social media is still there.

He can manage to start his own website surely??

PopePalpatine

InTheTrees wrote: »

It's even more pathetic than that because it's only twitter that has banned him.

His access to social media is still there.

He can manage to start his own website surely??

I remember Wikileaks claiming they'd set up their own microblogging site (blackjack and hookers not included) when Milo got banned. Haven't heard anything about it since - I'd imagine it'd be like that site that was set up when Reddit banned the likes of /r/fatpeoplehate and /r/coontown.

super_furry

InTheTrees wrote: »

It's even more pathetic than that because it's only twitter that has banned him.

His access to social media is still there.

He can manage to start his own website surely??

He has a "news" site - Breitbart - which is pretty much a hate-filed hole going after the Alex Jones angle and I'm sure he probably uses Youtube, but these places are so much easier to ignore.

With Twitter you didn't really have to go looking for him, whatever nonsense he was spouting would often get retweeted or get the reaction he was looking for and kick-off a row. People would react to him, raising his profile and his work was done for the day, he's lost that now.

I mean what point is a professional provocateur if he doesn't have an audience to provoke?

Little CuChulainn

B0jangles wrote: »

Latest video in the series was posted yesterday, is that not pretty recent?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbqRtp5ZUGE

An any case, Sarkeesian is not the topic of the thread, I was merely contrasting the scrutiny and abuse to which she was and still is subjected to compared to the wishy-washy excuses made by Milo fans for his total failure to fulfill any of his promises re: college scholarships.

Double standards a-go-go

I'm sure the supporters of Sarkeesian are equally as critical of Milo and equally defensive of Anita. Is it really that odd that you'd be more trusting of someone you believe in?

EDIT: I see her videos haven't become less nonsense.

B0jangles

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I'm sure the supporters of Sarkeesian are equally as critical of Milo and equally defensive of Anita. Is it really that odd that you'd be more trusting of someone you believe in?

EDIT: I see her videos haven't become less nonsense.

Do you really think Milo has received even 1% of the harassment and abuse Sarkeesian received? If he had, do you not think he'd tell everyone about it, considering how addicted to attention he is?

RayM

511 wrote: »

Are you seriously using Boards.ie's prison forum as a measuring stick for law and order? I've seen so many people on Politics.ie, Reddit and Facebook complain about excessive and biased moderation on here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdofmoYcJNE