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

Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#471

Post by _2d30 »

oedoedxef wrote: post #210
andrepd wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny how "I should be able to say what I please" and "I should be able to say what I please AND have no-one challenge me or criticise me" are so conflated. Don't dish it if you can't take it.

I'm fully able to take the parent's criticism. However, those who are downvoting me so that my post will be hidden, clearly are not able to accept criticism.

I’m downvoting you because the person said the comments were a swamp, not that they shouldn’t exist. You interpreted it as the letter which is clearly incorrect.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#472

Post by Spivak »

charia wrote: post #310
th0ma5 wrote: post #231

All of these HN comments are defending shouting "Fire!" falsely in a theater under the guise of it being a slippery slope before all speech is lost. I have lost a lot of respect for these slippery slope arguments because they are easy to make and ignore the obvious problem which is that some speech shouldn't be tolerated... Especially intolerant or harmful speech.

So uh, who's going to be the arbiter of what exactly constitutes intolerant or harmful speech? You? Me? Facebook? The government? Twitter? Whoever gets the power to define what's acceptable and not acceptable speech is given too much power. You might trust that arbiter now, tomorrow, but do you honestly believe their incentives will always remain pure?

I’m always confused by this opinion because this applies to literally every single instance where collective decision making is required or desired.

Who gets to decide how much we pay in taxes? You? Me? The Government? Bloomberg?

Like if you think deciding what constitutes hate speech is too much power then the people who decide the conditions someone is locked up must be gods.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#473

Post by boogies »

gameswithgo wrote: post #271
hartator wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What policies he pushed you are not happy with? Less taxes, no new wars, and leaving each state making their own decisions for covid-19 seems pretty center right to me.

1. less taxes I am not happy with 2. immigrant children in cages 3. easing of environmental rules 4. pulling out of climate deal 5. pulling out of iran deal 6. lying about the election being a fraud, and causing insurrection 7. pardoning his criminal cronies

> 2. immigrant children in cages

Who built the cages? https://lmddgtfy.net/?q=who%20built%20cages%20for%20children

You’re making https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25673162 ’s point.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#474

Post by hajile »

lazide wrote: post #203
ndjdjxjsjdjdhd wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically you are saying: - Asking for peace isn’t enough - And. He really needs to stop believing his claim of fraud? Wild. Am I crazy or is everyone else right now?

Watch the video. He spends JUST enough time saying 'go home peacefully' that someone can say he did that. However he spends all the actual time and energy saying the exact opposite - it was stolen, fight for me, etc. It is the height of disingenuousness to claim it was a call for peace or a thoughtful resolution. It was an emotional call to arms with a fig leaf on it.

These people aren't there because they think it's unimportant. They are convinced the election was stolen and nothing you (or he) says would sway their minds. Insulting would only lead to anger.

You have to acknowledge the feelings of the other individual before they'll listen. They see themselves as good, honorable people, so you address them as such. Once you have their attention in an agreeable manner (instead of an antagonistic manner), you can address the issue at hand.

Trump did precisely this. He empathized with them and their cause. After he had an agreeable mood somewhat established, he then appealed to consequences.

If he hadn't asked them to stop, congress' attempt to reconvene would have no doubt been interrupted as well. The fact that didn't happen goes a long way against the claim that it was a call to violence.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#476

Post by duxup »

rndgermandude wrote: post #452
duxup wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what the implications are as far as facilitating folks who wish to take undemocratic steps that would seem to bring us closer to far more serious restrictions, imposed by those same folks as far as how a democracy is or isn't allowed to operate. Is it someone's right to use a platform to push an agenda that leads to impacting other people's rights?

As abhorrent as the actions of Trump are, I still think it's also a massive problem when a few private companies or even single unelected individuals like Zuckerberg who effectively control a defacto monopoly of public forums online between them can regulate speech as they please without any checks and balances whatsoever. Don't get me wrong, in my opinion Trump is a traitor to the USA and democratic societies as a w…

Personally I'm having it both ways.

I don't like so few entities making such calls.

At the same time I recognize the issue of how to handle people's freedoms on a platform... when those freedoms advocate for violence or actions that restrict other people's real world freedoms

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#478

Post by chasd00 »

jmcgough wrote: post #291
jtdev wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure you were advocating for the silencing of BLM leaders who were encouraging violence during recent months too...

This was a coup attempt that involved breaking into congress to stop presidential succession. Are you suggesting the two are comparable?

i want to add again, this wasn't a coup attempt. You dilute those words and they become meaningless. It hurts the people who have lived through and suffered from real coups.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#479

Post by edoceo »

oedoedxef wrote: post #210
andrepd wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny how "I should be able to say what I please" and "I should be able to say what I please AND have no-one challenge me or criticise me" are so conflated. Don't dish it if you can't take it.

I'm fully able to take the parent's criticism. However, those who are downvoting me so that my post will be hidden, clearly are not able to accept criticism.

I'm downvoting you because of the blatant snark. It's not cool here according to the site guidelines and my own opinion.

Re: Facebook Indefinitely Suspends Trump

#480

Post by rconti »

oramit wrote: post #343
jccalhoun wrote: post #132

When people say anonymity online is bad and that having people use their real names would make people more polite, I point them to facebook comments.

Yeah, though I didn't agree with the "real names only" policy at Facebook I did think it would lead to better behavior. That backfired spectacularly.

I think it helped a lot. I still think it's a lot better than Twitter, but it's difficult to compare, because the default-public behavior of Twitter content makes it far more toxic; to find the same stuff on FB you either have to be in a private group, or read public comments on a public article. It doesn't come to you in the same way it does on Twitter.

Most of the horribly content on Facebook is fake accounts, which you can usually identify because their entire profile is around a theme. Facebook tried to make fake accounts impossible for awhile, but apparently they've given up.

Twitter doesn't try.

Post reply on HN