Parler
Re: Parler
Define modern conspiracies. Because, again, you are only talking about the attitude of the Q conspiracy people.
Just Ledoux it
Re: Parler
Ousy becoming lobster 2.0?
I only came to kick some ass...
Rock the fucking house and kick some ass.
Rock the fucking house and kick some ass.
Re: Parler
Oh come on.
Just cuz I’ve been trying to tell you guys that there’s a major housing crash coming this winter or sooner?
But if I may respectfully ask, what hypocrisy do you feel I’m not understanding?
I’m all for good back and for back and forth dialogue. If you’re interested in the same, I encourage you to speak up more. let’s have at it.
Just cuz I’ve been trying to tell you guys that there’s a major housing crash coming this winter or sooner?
But if I may respectfully ask, what hypocrisy do you feel I’m not understanding?
I’m all for good back and for back and forth dialogue. If you’re interested in the same, I encourage you to speak up more. let’s have at it.
Re: Parler
so, conservatives back discrimination and it’s religious freedom
liberals back kicking potus off twitter and they’re hypocrites?
liberals back kicking potus off twitter and they’re hypocrites?
Re: Parler
Not sure if PhD, TDub or I am arguing against booting Trump...( bc fuck him )...but in general, we ain't gonna get anywhere by grouping, vilifying and silencing a large section of the population...regardless if the silencing is done by a private company ( that are under federal scrutiny and regulation for content ).
Re: Parler
Trump should have been booted.
He should be impeached, removed from office, be arrested, charged, go to trial and then prison.
None of that changes the fact that ousdahl is an enormous hypocrite lacking any sign of self-awareness.
He should be impeached, removed from office, be arrested, charged, go to trial and then prison.
None of that changes the fact that ousdahl is an enormous hypocrite lacking any sign of self-awareness.
I only came to kick some ass...
Rock the fucking house and kick some ass.
Rock the fucking house and kick some ass.
Re: Parler
Good post. I’m on bored in many ways. (After all the dumb shit he’s tweeted for years now, what’s two more weeks?)pdub wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 1:03 pm Not sure if PhD, TDub or I am arguing against booting Trump...( bc fuck him )...but in general, we ain't gonna get anywhere by grouping, vilifying and silencing a large section of the population...regardless if the silencing is done by a private company ( that are under federal scrutiny and regulation for content ).
But I suppose the other side of that coin is, where are we going to get if we give a dangerous section of the population free reign to spread misinformation and hate speech and coordinate violent attacks?
It’s tricky, and not necessarily a simple answer.
But within twitter’s explanation why the banned Trump, it was mentioned there’s already another attack that the magaheads are trying to coordinate on 1/17 on the Capitol and other state buildings. Twitter feels banning Trump can help to prevent that.
“It’s paradoxical, but in a tolerant society, intolerance should not be tolerated.”
Re: Parler
Asking again - please explain why you feel I’m a hypocrite?
Re: Parler
I really enjoy that ousdahl lives rent free in so many peoples heads
Re: Parler
here is another angle of concern:
why should a handful of private for-profit corporations have so much power to silence world leaders?
why should a handful of private for-profit corporations have so much power to silence world leaders?
Re: Parler
"The real issue with covid: its not killing enough people." - randylahey
GTS Champ 2008
GTS Champ 2020*
“We good?” - Bill Self
RIP jhawk73
GTS Champ 2008
GTS Champ 2020*
“We good?” - Bill Self
RIP jhawk73
Re: Parler
Because they should. It’s been that way forever
Re: Parler
So, to recap.
A group of protesters, exercising their Constitutional right to peacefully protest, is dangerous and lawless.
Using a socially media platform to orchestrate hate speech as well as develop plans to totally upset our democracy should be protected under the same Constitutional right?
A group of protesters, exercising their Constitutional right to peacefully protest, is dangerous and lawless.
Using a socially media platform to orchestrate hate speech as well as develop plans to totally upset our democracy should be protected under the same Constitutional right?
Re: Parler
Wow. This is getting really interesting. Again, the GA results created an Order 66 to kill (figuratively) all the right wing wackos. It's the right thing ethically in this exact case, but it also kinda scares me.defixione wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 8:40 pm Parler gone. For a week, at least.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jo ... r-aws?s=01
There's been talk here before about the extremism of Trump creating an opposite but equal reaction... But I think most thought it would be from the election of Bernie or eventually AOC... Not from private industry.
Amazon's power via a combination of retail and AWS is a bit frightening. Super high cost to try to compete.
Re: Parler
And Amazon can do whatever they want, they are a private company.
But I don't know that banning extreme conservatives from all these platforms is the way to go.
I can agree with their right to do what they are doing ( as it is legally their right ), but I can disagree with their philosophy for doing so.
It's difficult because these large tech companies wield so much power in how people communicate today.
That said, an extreme conservative group is allowed to create their own server farm and websites.
And new device that runs only the apps they want on there. It would be EXTREMELY difficult to get traction because of the powers that the current industry has in squashing competition - but still possible.
It's when the government gets involved with this - i.e. forcing tech companies to ban what the government considers hate speech - that's where I would not be on board. At all.
But I don't know that banning extreme conservatives from all these platforms is the way to go.
I can agree with their right to do what they are doing ( as it is legally their right ), but I can disagree with their philosophy for doing so.
It's difficult because these large tech companies wield so much power in how people communicate today.
That said, an extreme conservative group is allowed to create their own server farm and websites.
And new device that runs only the apps they want on there. It would be EXTREMELY difficult to get traction because of the powers that the current industry has in squashing competition - but still possible.
It's when the government gets involved with this - i.e. forcing tech companies to ban what the government considers hate speech - that's where I would not be on board. At all.