Gab will become a Mastodon fork

Post by jakelazaroff » Thu, May 30, 2019, 10:19 PM UTC

not_a_cop75 wrote: post #242

gfodor wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As it should be -- by community dilution I was referring more to mind share around Mastodon and also the likelihood that Gab's community would soften its alt-right focus if it's able to get traction with a wider audience that may lean right but is not hard right. I think this kind of federation for under-served audiences, combined with good productization, is a necessary step towards a future where fan-out 'microblog…

It's hard to really claim Gab is alt-right when the truth is really more that it's alt anything. Remember the good old days of usenet, where alt represented all the usenet "channels" that basically didn't give a damn and weren't sponsored by anyone in particular? Sure you had your flame wars, but back then no one got banned for it. The advantage of services like Twitter is that whatever agenda Twitter wants to contro…

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 30, 2019, 10:33 PM UTC

gizmo686 wrote: post #246

justin66 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would have funded Tor and 4chan had I the opportunity many years ago. > Not too long ago this was a classical liberal position. I'm not sure who or what you're thinking of, but the classical liberal position would be to support something like the Cambridge Union, Cleveland City Club, or some other free speech and debate forum where social norms exist.

The classic liberal position was also to support the rights of Nazis to march down a Jewish neighboorhood. Regarding free speech, the classic standard is "content neutrality", which means that, regardless of the media, the decision on allowing certain speech cannot be based on what the speech is.

Post by busterarm » Thu, May 30, 2019, 10:48 PM UTC

spamizbad wrote: post #253

busterarm wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And before anyone says this guy has always been a crank: he was actively being courted by Repulicans like Jack Kemp in the 1980s back when his anti-communist views were deemed politically useful. Maybe such a claim is useful to you but it really doesn't hold up to scrutiny. I grew up in the 80s, in a conservative household, and in New York City - Jack Kemp's home turf. His political career was effectively over by 1…

Jack Kemp was Bob Dole’s VP nominee and continued to praise Farrakhan into the 90s. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/1996/09/10/us/kemp-praises-farrakhan... I understand these days the conservative establishment is mostly in sync with what’s said on talk radio, but that wasn’t always the case.

Post by anth_anm » Thu, May 30, 2019, 10:54 PM UTC

UncleMeat wrote: post #228

ryanmarsh wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In spite of the fact that Gab is a known cess pool (cis pool?), I funded it because we need more alternatives to the big social networks. I would have funded Tor and 4chan had I the opportunity many years ago. Not too long ago this was a classical liberal position. Today free speech is passé. Guess I'm just old fashioned. I'm happy to see that Gab is switching to Mastodon. I think it will increase the survivability o…

Why are free speech absolutists only supporting fascists? Where are the people advocating for the destruction of intellectual property rights, for widespread declassification of state communications, for suffrage rights for felons, and for unionization and striking rights? I don't exactly see the gab users advocating for laws permitting sympathetic striking.

Post by tastygreenapple » Thu, May 30, 2019, 10:59 PM UTC

ptah wrote: post #133

scohesc wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say they're abusing the right to free speech, they're taking full advantage of it. If you don't like what they're saying, you have every right to not listen to it, promote it yourself, and you also have the right to start a movement to let people know this is going on and to bring awareness to the festering shitpiles those websites are. It's not an abuse of the right to free speech.

using free speech to agitate for removing life and freedoms from whole groups of people is abuse