Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 131 posts

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#101

Post by 0x4f3759df »

nyolfen wrote: post #81
threeseed wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then run your own hosting company and accept money via Bitcoin. You can't just force third party companies to do whatever you want.

hate speech and racism absolutely are political, they are only outside of the overton window. i despise racists as much as anyone but i don’t trust anyone with the authority to police permissible opinions, and i think anybody who does is naive and short-sighted. if you construct these frameworks for suppression, they will be used against you by your enemies the second they have the opportunity.

Hate speech is a phony political category. Hate Christians and white people? Well that's just fine. Have a Twitter account that retweets verified people saying 'kill all whites'? That'll get you banned.

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#102

Post by hsienmaneja »

boxspam wrote: post #86
hsienmaneja wrote: post #61

First off, there is compelling evidence that the Q movement is actually controlled by senior intel close to Trump Secondly, Q just posted that this is retaliation for action against @jack, amongst other claims regarding infowars Can anyone close to TWTR confirm?

Qanon is a Russian psyop and a bunch of unwitting agents.

What evidence is there that it’s a Russian psyop?

Also, who are the “unwitting agents”?

And why did this comment receive a downvote? Just asking for clarification.

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#103

Post by adamrezich »

epistasis wrote: post #22
adamrezich wrote: post #9

Does anyone still actually think that Alex Jones isn't a character or persona being put on by an actor, like Colbert's Colbert Report character? Not that this excuses anything he says or does of course (though apparently what he said here wasn't a big deal at all)... but how anyone can think Jones acts the way he does on-camera after the cameras are turned off and nobody is looking is beyond me. His lawyer essentiall…

Are you serious, have you ever run into one of his listeners? If anybody listens to him thinking it's not real, they are a tiny and insignificant minority. What his lawyer admits in court means nothing to his audience.

Yes I have, and he literally showed me his water filter and offered me a glass. Doesn't change my point one bit.

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#104

Post by adamrezich »

rosser wrote: post #36
adamrezich wrote: post #9

Does anyone still actually think that Alex Jones isn't a character or persona being put on by an actor, like Colbert's Colbert Report character? Not that this excuses anything he says or does of course (though apparently what he said here wasn't a big deal at all)... but how anyone can think Jones acts the way he does on-camera after the cameras are turned off and nobody is looking is beyond me. His lawyer essentiall…

It's somehow "better" that he behaves that way to make a buck, than because he believes it?

Did I say it was better? I was just pointing out the schtick

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#105

Post by WalterGR »

hsienmaneja wrote: post #102
boxspam wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Qanon is a Russian psyop and a bunch of unwitting agents.

What evidence is there that it’s a Russian psyop? Also, who are the “unwitting agents”? And why did this comment receive a downvote? Just asking for clarification.

Also, who are the “unwitting agents”?

You are one of them, as an example.

What evidence is there that it’s a Russian psyop?

Have you noticed that if someone disagrees with a Qanon claim the followers ask, “What evidence is there that my claim is false?”

But if someone makes a claim contrary to Qanon orthodoxy, the followers ask, “What evidence is there that your claim is true?”

You can’t have it both ways.

You can’t make claims and expect people to prove that you’re wrong when they don’t believe you, then turn around and expect them to prove that they’re right when you don’t believe them.

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#106

Post by vixen99 »

siruncledrew wrote: post #6

If Twitter wants to ban him, then they can ban him. I honestly don’t know how he gained so much publicity as a conspiracy theorist, but he sounds like someone who’s drive is to continuously poke the sleeping bear and bother people for the sake of being an asshole. Abusive behavior was his business model.

whose drive

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#107

Post by [deleted] »

HBlix wrote: post #31
marcrosoft wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"do the right thing" is difficult when you are suppressing free speech on a platform that's supposed to be all about it.

How are they suppressing free speech? They’re not the government, they get to control their service just like any business, because they are also free.

[deleted]

Re: Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour

#110

Post by mercer »

hsienmaneja wrote: post #102
boxspam wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Qanon is a Russian psyop and a bunch of unwitting agents.

What evidence is there that it’s a Russian psyop? Also, who are the “unwitting agents”? And why did this comment receive a downvote? Just asking for clarification.

I can't speak for others, and I'm not convinced this is a Russian 'psyop'.

That said, I'm subscribed to the Qanon subreddit and spent quite a bit of time looking into it, and I can't see the whole phenomenon as anything other than bafflingly insane.

It's like someone took the worst conspiracy theories, the worst of evangelical-ish paranoia, quite a bit of legitimate discontent with the status quo, and let it metastasize.

As such, I downvote pro-Q comments because as far as I'm concerned they're noise on the level of climate-change deniers, flat-earthers, and vaccine-causes-autism level comments.

EDIT: that said, I curious enough about the whole thing to hear a good argument as to why Qanon should be taken seriously. But privately, by email.

Post reply on HN