suicide_circus wrote: » i find the "its a private company, their platform their rules" argument from leftists hilarious. How far does that logic extend? To other service monopolies? and the obvious pitfall of that argument...what happens when your politics or beliefs become wrongthink, as they inevitably will..."oh well, got deplatformed due to my ideology, c'est la vie"....such short term thinking.
nullzero wrote: » I don't know where you're getting this nonsense from. I simply stated that the large platforms are hugely influential and have given more coverage to Alex Jones by banning him than he would ever have had otherwise. All services like twitter and boards.ie have terms of service and restrict free speech, but none of them endorse the views on non deplatformed individuals and plenty of other nonsensical crap is allowed to be posted on the Internet all the time. It seems that Alex Jones was to be made an example of but somewhat predictably he's now more relevant and visible than ever before. If you want to project some sort of victim mentality onto me that's your business, you're getting a little too personal and heated for somebody I've never spoken to before.
HappyAsLarE wrote: » No problem is solved by banning people. They will just unite and become a dangerous force.
Dohnjoe wrote: » I'm trying to follow the logic here So, people have a right to say whatever they want on social media platforms, but only the biggest ones, because those platforms are some sort of essential service?
super_furry wrote: » Or they'll just disappear and quietly fade away from public consciousness. Exhibit A - Milo Yiannopoulos
HappyAsLarE wrote: » Well it’s grains of sand. It manifests to voting for Trump and Brexit.
greencap wrote: » From the repeated idiotic confounding of free speech and censorship, with a private company simply rejecting you. You people aren't connected to reality. There are indeed conspiracies, loads of them, but they're normal, self serving, everyday conspiracies, mostly for business purposes. Maybe there is a conspiracy against Jones. Maybe he pissed enough connected people off, with his nonsense, and being that they were shareholders they decided to deny him use of their company's equipment. I know that if I was a major shareholder in paypal or youtube, and someone asked me why I was allowing some shill a55hole to denigrate the deaths of kids, and give out grieving parents addresses, on equipment that I own a part of, that I would immediately get on to management to pull the plug on such a scumbag.
nullzero wrote: » You lost me at "you people", you should give primal scream therapy a go, I can sense the veins in your temples bulging.
Venom wrote: » The issue so many people have is not that Jones got banned from any of the platforms but that he got banned from almost all the platforms on the same day.
Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: » It's more akin to having your chip turned off like in an episode of Black Mirror. If every major social media company works together to silence you without any due process in a court, then they are essentially shutting that person off from all forms of social internet. A bit like all the energy companies agreeing together to not provide you with electricity into your own home. You are technically free to look for alternative ways like putting a solar panel on your roof, or buying oil or wood wholesale, but it's not very feasible. These issues should be decided by laws that are there in a court by a judge/jury. Not faceless people in boardrooms.
super_furry wrote: » Rubbish. Banning Alex Jones from Twitter didn't lead to Brexit, it lead to Alex Jones losing half his audience.
HappyAsLarE wrote: » That’s true. But my point is a more general one that the people don’t like censorship.
Dohnjoe wrote: » Appears people like Alex Jones less
Dohnjoe wrote: » If you got a mod warning right now for a personal attack it would be pretty ironic considering the point you're trying to make
nullzero wrote: » A card for back seat modding might be more appropriate.
Dohnjoe wrote: » You support censorship against me? This is kinda the point
nullzero wrote: » Moderation isn't censorship, but keep on reaching.
HappyAsLarE wrote: » Well personally I hadn’t heard of him until the regressive left silenced him, ironically.
Dohnjoe wrote: » Oh right, so if someone is banned from this platform, it's "moderation" But if someone is banned from another platform it's "censorship" Gotcha
vetinari wrote: » He's already been elected once thanks to loons like this. Carrying him on your platform is an implicit endorsement of him.
nullzero wrote: » Getting an infraction isn't the same as being banned.
At least you're consistent with your condescending and nonsensical posting, keep up the winky faces, I'm looking forward to some rolleyes.
super_furry wrote: » Since where are huge multi-national companies like Twitter and Alphabet the 'regressive left'?
Dohnjoe wrote: » Yeaah, but infractions do lead to bans. There's also insta-bans Do you support people being banned from this platform or no? It was a joke to demonstrate a point, chill
nullzero wrote: » You're really reaching here pal, have a nice evening.
greencap wrote: » this thread is an ironic joke by the boards admins right? nobody real actually thinks some of this shyte. its an ironic conspiracy. the pro-jones conspiracy theorists are actually planted boards agents. and everyone else who is arguing that theres not a conspiracy against jones, is having that argument with agents of a conspiracy by boards.
nullzero wrote: » Just dipping back in here to put one thing straight, I believe in free speech, not Alex Jones, not once have I defended him. You need to get your facts straight.
