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

Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 1001 posts

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#721

Post by [deleted] »

sleepysysadmin wrote: post #300
fasteddie31003 wrote: post #36

I just checked out http://thedonald.win/ and it has gotten a lot more extreme since it was moved off Reddit. I think it would have not gotten as extreme if it were in the Reddit ecosystem still.

As I've been saying here in HN. The political divide is the democrats. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charts-americas-political-d... Put your finger on the Median Republican line and it either moves left or stays put. The political divide has not been the republicans. In the last year that changed for many reasons. The republicans have now moved. That political divide is now much larger. That 'more extreme' that yo…

[deleted]

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#722

Post by pmarreck »

typon wrote: post #12

Irrelevant. Most of the original users of /r/theDonald migrated theDonald.win, which became one of the top websites in the US in terms of traffic. They're behind Cloudflare and constantly DDoSd these days it seems like it. Moreover, they've gotten threats from their ISP that they have to delete certain posts or be shut down. (which seems scary to me) Also, please don't judge me, I just have a morbid curiosity to see…

I never heard of thedonald.win and took a peek over there just to see what a cesspool of banned users looks like.

JFC. It's a circus of terrible thinking and baseless anger over there. If that site is getting a lot of traffic, you folks who consider yourselves above such things better start fighting for what is actually true and good, because what is not true and not good is exactly what is festering over there, and if they don't get their vote, they WILL get violent again, just see how they attacked Lindsey Graham at the airport just now for breaking rank on principle... and sweeping these folks under the rug will not eradicate the cancer

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#723

Post by pie_flavor »

Miner49er wrote: post #562
young_unixer wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If service providers want to deplatform centers of radicalization, I think that's ok. The thing is: left-wing radicalization is tolerated by the platforms, but right-wing radicalization isn't.

Not remotely true. /r/ChapoTrapHouse was banned a while back too. If anything, they target the left more.

As an excuse for banning T_D and a bunch of other right leaning subs at the same time, and then blatantly ignored ban-evading r/ChapoTrapHouse2 for months. When they finally took them down for ban evasion, it was an excuse to ban another giant wave of right wing subs.

  EDIT: Original claim is left intact for posterity, but it is definitely wrong and I misremembered.
Reddit has its moderation oddities but claiming they target the left more is bordering on silly. r/WatchRedditDie is a great catalog of politically biased moderation.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#724

Post by newen »

proverbialbunny wrote: post #441
fl0wenol wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you got downvoted because the term/group Antifa has existed in several forms since the 30s, it was a movement started in Germany in response to the rise of the SPD between WWI and WWII.

That I did not know. I just know no one was using the term online before trump started calling the BLM protestors antifa. (However, there was a single tweet with an #antifa hashtag 2 days before trump used the terminology. I figured he saw the tweet and it inspired Trump to pick up the term, but now I do not know given the historical back stop.)

Three year old article [1]. It was used in leftist circles a lot for a long time and especially in the last four years.

[1] https://www.theroot.com/white-supremacists-killed-more-peopl...

Google trends: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&ge...

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#725

Post by stale2002 »

baumandm wrote: post #539
gfodor wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see. So if, for example, the phone company were to spy on your private conversations, and determine you are not a person they want to be associated with (say for example, you talk trash about their CEO) - if they were to terminate your phone coverage, we should just accept it in light of their property rights? It's not an analogy to imply ISPs are exactly the same, but property right supremacy when it comes to infr…

The problematic part of your example is your phone company spying on your private conversations, not them choosing not to do business with you. It's wildly different from a website company running their public business on another companies infrastructure.

> not them choosing not to do business with you.

Alright, so then you'd be OK with some phone company, that has a monopoly on a certain geographic area or town, banning anyone who has made a public social media posts that is critical of the company?

Do you see any problems with this position?

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#726

Post by ufmace »

forserious wrote: post #686
beerandt wrote: post #672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's part of the point. The left was basically allowed to freely enter the Senate building, in an attempt to sway the ongoing confirmation vote of a scotus justice, and met little to no police resistance, and it was celebrated by the media. Replace "confirmation" with "certification", and "scotus justice" with "president," and what's the difference, politically?

I said this above. You are arguing in bad faith. "basically" is doing a lot of work in your argument. No one is compelled by this. It is clear that they are two completely separate events. One was dangerous. The other was not. Again, I'll say it directly to avoid confusion. You are arguing in bad faith.

You're right, the women's march protests were far more dangerous.

At the recent "storming", all of the representatives were evacuated, and nobody was directly threatened. The one women who came a little too close to breaking into where some VIPs were was shot in the neck and died.

Meanwhile, the media and law enforcement approved of the women's march protestors. They were free to roam around the capitol and physically harass and menace elected representatives suspected of not approving of their side. Including at times cornering them alone in elevators. They bragged about all of this and cheered each other on.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#727

Post by jansan »

ufmace wrote: post #664
lamontcg wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The left wasn't being actively encouraged and incited by the sitting President.

Not by the sitting President, but by every single mainstream media organization and a pretty solid fraction of sitting Democrat Congresspeople and Senators, who spent months excusing and denying violent riots as they raged for months.

Here are two examples.

Chris Cuomo on CNN "And please, show me where it says that protests have to be polite, or peaceful"

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter "The whole point of protesting is to make ppl uncomfortable."

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#728

Post by joshstrange »

philip1209 wrote: post #426
typon wrote: post #12

Irrelevant. Most of the original users of /r/theDonald migrated theDonald.win, which became one of the top websites in the US in terms of traffic. They're behind Cloudflare and constantly DDoSd these days it seems like it. Moreover, they've gotten threats from their ISP that they have to delete certain posts or be shut down. (which seems scary to me) Also, please don't judge me, I just have a morbid curiosity to see…

Matthew Pierce from Cloudflare has notoriously dropped 8Chan after its content contributed to three mass shootings [1]. Will Cloudflare continue to protect thedonald[.]win? I think we should call Cloudflare out. https://twitter.com/philipithomas/status/1347621982758719489 -- [1] https://stratechery.com/2021/trump-and-twitter/

Seeing how they call for war, killing people, and overthrowing the government daily if not hourly I can’t imagine why CF continues to provide them services. Truly, you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. I mean you probably will on some of the *chans but it’s pretty freaking bad over at TD win.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#729

Post by doodlebugging »

saynay wrote: post #659
yxwvut wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Repeated exposure to things you know to be false or to bad arguments has been shown many times to shift your beliefs towards those false beliefs. It effectively wears your mind's defenses down. This 'repeat a lie enough and it becomes the truth' idea is a Trump specialty: 'Crooked Hillary', the wall, voter fraud, etc. Re: extermism, the far right's arguments are bad but if you're not actively exposed to counterargume…

Indeed. Repetition of phrases, images, or ideas - regardless of their truth - is the basis of propaganda and brainwashing.

Yep, I totally agree. I've always said that you can prove anything if you ignore enough facts. Law of Propaganda Design.

Just throw out anything that doesn't fit your narrative and keep your message on repeat and your audience will fall captive eventually since most are not open to doing their own fact-checking.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#730

Post by chillacy »

davesque wrote: post #580

The way people blindly defend this simplified notion of Free Speech makes it seem as though they believe it is some kind of universally guaranteed right that is like a law of physics. No, we enjoy this luxury of debating the ethics of free speech because we live in a society that permits it. Right now, that society faces an imminent threat from violent insurrectionists. We need to prevent them from organizing and car…

I'm all for acknowledging the problems of free speech but I don't like the emergency powers argument either. It's far too easy to sacrifice your virtues, whatever they might be (sacrifice some privacy to catch terrorists, sacrifice social progress to pump the economy).
Post reply on HN