Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
24567…22

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Pepe LeFrits
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 15,001 ✭✭✭✭Pepe LeFrits


    He's a narcissistic douche who doesn't seem to possess any empathy at all. Should he have been banned? Do I care? Probably not.


  • Options
    #33
    GLaDOS
    Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 23,212 Mod ✭✭✭✭GLaDOS


    I suspect he's delighted he's been banned, more attention for him.

    Cake, and grief counseling, will be available at the conclusion of the test



  • Options
    #34
    flopflop73
    Site Banned Posts: 12 ✭flopflop73


    I have no idea who he is.

    Banned from Twitter?

    Who would care about such nonsense.


  • Options
    #35
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,853 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    I won't be surprised if this turns out to be Twitter's version of "The Fattening" that Reddit went through last year, where Milo's fanboys will make their own Twitter, with "free speech", doxxing and hookers.


  • Options
    #36
    D0NNELLY
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,387 ✭✭✭D0NNELLY


    Tweet doesn't deserve a ban.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    The only thing I know about this guy is the basement dwellers of the_donald over on Reddit refer to him as a "based f*ggot", while seemingly using that as a compliment for some reason or another.

    The greatest downside of this action is now it means that all you'll see on that particular subreddit is faux outrage at this.

    I still don't know what "based" and "basic" mean


  • Options
    #38
    Ush1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,465 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    speedboatchase wrote: »
    There's a difference when the follower of one religion is responsible for the deadliest mass shooting in US history. Gay people might dislike Christian bigots, but they know they aren't going to gun them down.

    There's not a difference in terms of how that religion views you and what you do. It's blatant hipocrasy, you can't have it both ways as a conservative I'm afraid though he does try very hard.


  • Options
    #39
    anothernight
    Registered Users Posts: 2,541 ✭✭✭anothernight


    Penn wrote: »
    There's pretty strong rumours he organises and directs people behind the scenes to target certain people, then he comments about it on Twitter (without breaking any actual Twitter rules himself), which then encourages more of his followers to partake in the abuse.

    Should he have been banned for his own tweets? No. Should he have been banned for continuously encouraging his followers to tweet nasty, racist sh*t? Yeah, at this stage probably, if there was sufficient evidence for same.

    This may well be what happened here.

    I'm friends with a fairly famous guy with a large international fan base, which is quite active on twitter. One of his fans became very annoying on twitter but without breaking any specific rules. She was clearly obsessed with him but if you looked at her twitter account, apart from being nasty to other people who implied that they might like him more than she did, she didn't actually do anything overtly out of line. Twitter eventually banned her, but only after my friend provided evidence of offline harassment. Things like pictures of her trespassing on his property and looking through the windows in his house. Without that evidence, Twitter just didn't care.


  • Options
    #40
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    What the fúck is going on here?
    Some bloke got banned from twitter for being mean to an actress?
    Is that it?


  • Options
    #41
    beach_walker
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 976 ✭✭✭beach_walker


    ISIS Twitter accounts, grand. This lad, not grand.

    Look Twitter is a private company and much like boards, has very obvious political leanings. Who's surprised. Don't like it, don't use it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,352 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    What the fúck is going on here?
    Some bloke got banned from twitter for being mean to an actress?
    Is that it?

    Replace "being mean" with "quite likely purposefully inciting racial and sexist abuse by thousands of his followers".


  • Options
    #43
    Adventagious
    Registered Users Posts: 570 ✭✭✭Adventagious


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    What the fúck is going on here?
    Some bloke got banned from twitter for being mean to an actress?
    Is that it?

    ...just look at the previous posts maybe?


  • Options
    #44
    Its dead Jim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 284 ✭✭Its dead Jim


    All I know is that Donald trump supporters love him and any time I hear about him he is whining about something.

    Twitter are unlikely to ban a person for nothing, there would be more to it but his followers are always looking to be outraged and see themselves as being persecuted.


  • Options
    #45
    Too Tough To Die
    Registered Users Posts: 2,056 ✭✭✭Too Tough To Die


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The only thing I know about this guy is the basement dwellers of the_donald over on Reddit refer to him as a "based f*ggot", while seemingly using that as a compliment for some reason or another.

    The greatest downside of this action is now it means that all you'll see on that particular subreddit is faux outrage at this.

    I still don't know what "based" and "basic" mean

    Based is just about the greatest honour you can bestow on a man.


  • Options
    #46
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Too Tough To Die wrote: »
    Based is just about the greatest honour you can bestow on a man.

    Eh, but why?


  • Options
    #47
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,352 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Too Tough To Die wrote: »
    Based is just about the greatest honour you can bestow on a man.

    Really? I used to work with a complete idiot until my boss said he's going to be based in a different office in a simplified role. I really don't think it was a compliment.


  • Options
    #48
    Subcomandante Marcos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    beach_walker wrote: »
    ISIS Twitter accounts, grand. This lad, not grand.

    Look Twitter is a private company and much like boards, has very obvious political leanings. Who's surprised. Don't like it, don't use it.

    ISIS accounts are deleted and banned as they are found and reported. The difference is that they have feck all followers and are harder to find than a megamouth public school boy with a hard-on for offensive nonsense.


  • Options
    #49
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,268 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    The obvious question to ask of someone who's whining about Twitter being a safe haven for terrorists and extremists is: "Why do you want even be on it in that case?"


  • Options
    #50
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,283 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Eh, but why?


    apparently its a reddit thing.


  • Options
    #51
    super_furry
    Registered Users Posts: 27,322 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    All the Gamegate crowd, 8chan trolls and the_donald crew will be screaming into their anime body pillows today and use of the word cuck will be at an all-time high. Meanwhile Twitter should be a marginally nicer place today.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,853 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Eh, but why?

    Ironically the use of the term "based" as an honour originated as a nickname for the rapper Lil B, aka "Based God".


  • Options
    #53
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    I wish there was an internet for all the normal people who aren't sliding off the lunatic left or rammed up the sociopathic right to just chat about sandwiches and Pokemon or whatever.


  • Options
    #54
    Ulysses Gaze
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,570 ✭✭✭Ulysses Gaze


    Maximus Alexander wrote: »
    I wish there was an internet for all the normal people who aren't sliding off the lunatic left or rammed up the sociopathic right to just chat about sandwiches and Pokemon or whatever.

    So you want a safe space then?







    :pac::pac::D


  • Options
    #55
    Grayditch
    Registered Users Posts: 14,347 ✭✭✭✭Grayditch


    There seem to be people on this threas that think he was banned only for this one tweet.

    The "Political Correctness gone mad" brigade who only allow themselves the headline to form an opinion.


  • Options
    #56
    fatknacker
    Registered Users Posts: 2,342 ✭✭✭fatknacker


    KEEP YOUR HATE SPEECH OUT OF THIS TWITTER! KEEP YOUR HATE SPEECH OUT OF THIS TWITTER!

    *jiggles arms


  • Options
    #57
    mansize
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,521 ✭✭✭✭mansize


    So Milo wanted a 'Safe Space' for his ranting?


  • Options
    #58
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    He led a harassment campaign and broke Twitter rules. Its there platform, so they decide what goes, just like Breitbart decides what goes, when they post complete and utter fabricated claims and present them as facts.


  • Options
    #59
    andekwarhola
    Registered Users Posts: 4,638 ✭✭✭andekwarhola


    Not sure I'd agree with anybody being permanently banned (there or here) simply for outre opinions of any political or ideological hue, although if he was deliberately orchestrating other users against his targets, maybe so.

    One thing that's profoundly depressing about this stuff is how routine it's becoming for Free Speech to be constantly defended simply for the right just to be a bully or a cnut, rather than expressing an unpopular opinion.


  • Options
    #60
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,437 ✭✭✭tritium


    Nothing really new here, Twitter has a long record of banning users who dont agree to a certain view while allowing a lot more leeway from users who do. Unfortunate thing s they've done it so badly over time that even if Milo has been doing g stuff in the background it will be hard for Twitter to avoid criticism here and Milo gets lots of free air time. I expect they'll hug and make up in a few weeks...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    I love how people who use Twitter a lot get really embroiled in this stuff, talk about how big a deal it is and get into really heated debates about it. On Twitter.

    And then they look up from the screen and realise that 99% of the people around them aren't even aware of who Milo Snuffleupagus is, don't know that he's been banned, and don't even care. That it's not even remotely an important "thing".

    My brother spends a lot of time on Twitter and sometimes he'll arrive in the pub all full of vigour to discuss some "huge" thing that blew up on Twitter. He realises very quickly that nobody is aware of it and it's not even anything resembling a big or important issue.


Advertisement