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

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#851

Post by ghostbrainalpha »

sjaak wrote: post #27
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…

Isn’t it strange that you have to make a disclaimer like “please don’t judge me?”. Quite literally 1/2 of the USA voted for Trump, should you automatically be ashamed of that? (It’s easy for me to say ofc, I have no horse in this race)

"Upvote if you still believe Trump will be our President for the next four years. People are forgetting this man is a genius and has always been ten steps ahead. Now is no different."

This is one of the top threads on that site RIGHT NOW. Its easy to judge someone participating in that discussion.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#852

Post by dominotw »

germinalphrase wrote: post #184
neogodless wrote: post #114

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/896/censorship > In general, sedition is defined as trying to overthrow the government with intent and means to bring it about; the Supreme Court, however, has been divided over what constitutes intent and means. > These acts made it a federal crime to speak, write, or print criticisms of the government that were false, scandalous, or malicious. It is frightening to me tha…

One difference, of course, is that despite there being a significant number of ‘trusted’ sources claiming extensive election fraud - there has been near zero evidence presented by these same sources to defend the claims. That alone should be a red flag that the claims are mere assertions rather than statements of fact.

shouldn't the onus of proving that there was no fraud be on the govt, instead of the other way around.

In an ideal world is there way to prove definitively that there was no fraud? Or is this something unprovable.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#853

Post by wvenable »

willcipriano wrote: post #761
wvenable wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn't address my point. What about undermining the concept of ownership? You're saying that if I produce a website I should not be allowed to control what is posted there? Who is going to enforce that? I suspect you or your children would regret that sort of thing as well. Perhaps the issue isn't that black and white.

I think you are missing the point because you are thinking too short term. Reddit likely won't exist/won't be as popular in a decade or two, the current owners would still own it but it won't be part of the cultural zeitgeist in the same way. Think AM Radio, Cable TV, Friendster or MySpace. Instead it will be replaced with something else, that something else might not even be called social media, and that thing will…

Taking your South Park example, how would that work in your fictionalized world in the 90's? How does it get shown on TV and when?

There's no way your idea makes any sense. It's impossible to implement -- unless of course we have no private ownership and the government runs and pays for everything but I feel like that would be even worse.

Cable TV didn't want to run "offensive" shows because their advertisers wouldn't pay to advertise with them if they did. So who's going to pay under your plan? Who's going to pay to host all this on the Internet?

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#854

Post by creatorbytes »

Barrin92 wrote: post #800
kr99x wrote: post #319

I've been having this argument more and more lately. People keep coming around to "surely, we must prevent *THIS* content?" and every time the answer is no. Somehow, we seem to be forgetting how free speech benefits us all , but only when it is categorically FREE and there are not exceptions "just this one time" Why just the other day, I had friends blow up on me for daring to suggest that a particular type of bigote…

You, like a lot of other people, confuse free speech with "but mom, the other kids won't let me play with them!" . Actually the only threat to freedom is trying to imply that a company or any other association or institution ought to be compelled to host someone else's speech. Being able to kick the idiots out and not compelling other people to amplify their nonsense is a basic mechanism of any society that wants to…

An underlying issue is the formation of the digital world - what once was a town square is now a (ex.) Facebook page, or network of Twitter followers.

The mechanism of communication exchange have changed so rapidly, that compelling companies to abide by free speech is a tough legislative decision. Yes, they’re corporations and can decide who to have and who not.

But an emergent phenomenon are people using these services as their lens to the world. This was obvious in the last election, red or blue, it was obvious whose side big tech was on. They were not unbiased, as I think they should be.

I’d say just as AOC wanted to get a list created of trump political supporters/affiliates (not general public, but a stepping stone away) and essentially cancel them, the same rhetoric is used to ban forms of speech. “It’s for the better”.

Another reason for controlled speech is a patronizing one, that “you’re head/emotions can’t handle X form of speech”.

Let people decide what they want to see. If I want a censored Twitter, or Wild West Twitter, let me choose. Though I understand the impracticality of forcing this on a corporation.

The only thing banned should be what is illegal. Let legislatures and judges determine it.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#855

Post by x86_64Ubuntu »

koolk3ychain wrote: post #804
x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #779

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm African-American, US History is dripping with blood from the countless times whit supremacy has reasserted itself over and over again. This isn't anything new or special.

I don't really see how implicating "all white people" as complicit in modern day whit supremacy isn't basically the definition of a claim in bad faith? This kind of cryptic pseudo argument is what makes these people even more incensed. Applying your logic to your own politics would lead me to believe that "all left leaning americans" are communists who want to take my property by force, just because I saw one hammer…

Can you point to where I said "all white people"? Seems like my explicit mention of race has brought up feelings of anxiety in you and you threw out a strawman to compensate.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#856

Post by srveale »

ksk wrote: post #699
srveale wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are at worst unsubstantiated, and contain truth like how Russia interfered in the election and Trump's campaign accepted their help. Totally different than something like "the election was rigged", which was tested and failed in court, but still gets shouted from the rooftops, leading to dangerous outcomes like what we saw in DC.

Wait, are you seriously claiming Trump won because of Russia? Or do you agree that the ridiculous Russia narrative pushed by Dems was total BS? Here is a nice article on the whole situation: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-mill... >Totally different than something like "the election was rigged", which was tested and failed in court, but still gets shouted from the rooftops, leading to dangerou…

> are you seriously claiming Trump won because of Russia?

That Russia helped Trump is generally agreed upon. Was it the only factor in his win? Of course not.

But your whataboutism here doesn't hold water. Sure, there are subreddits that commonly exaggerated the truth about the Russia thing. Should they should get banned, since r/donaldtrump got banned for supporting violence? The two issues are so very different. I do not see hypocrisy in this case.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#857

Post by seppin »

CyberRabbi wrote: post #794
forserious wrote: post #649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is why having this discussion is so difficult. To anyone not invested emotionally in this conversation, it's clear that your point isn't making a valid point. They are not equivalent actions. You're pretending they are to try to lend cover to the truly harmful action that just took place. We can call a spade a spade without pretending that everything else is also a spade. To be clear, I am directly sayin…

How are they not equivalent? Both were organized protests intended on occupying the capitol for the sake of airing out their political grievances. What truly harmful action took place that was caused by the protestors? Be specific. The only difference that in can see is that during the 1/6/21 event, the police were called in. They attacked and killed 4 protestors.

Maybe you don't know that 60 Capital Police were seriously injured, 15 remain in the hospital, and one is confirmed dead from the attack.

Maybe you don't know that of the 4 rioters that died, one had a heart attack (unconfirmed), one was shot and the others were trampled (by the mob).

Maybe you didn't know that congresspeople from both sides of the isle hid in closets and under desks, terrified and afraid for their lives.

Maybe you just didn't know these things, and got them wrong. But when confronted with them, you aren't going to say "oh sorry I was mistaken." You will respond with whataboutism and other deflection, to preserve your worldview that this wasn't a mob and Trump didn't do anything wrong, etc.

Which was OP's point. This isn't a good faith discussion. You are either ignorant of the truth (and will respond poorly when confronted with it), or you know the truth and are cynically lying about reality to win a rhetorical game.

This is the nature of all bad faith political discussion, which is why I (try to) avoid it all together.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#858

Post by s__s »

jedberg wrote: post #455
bythckr wrote: post #315

This is not an original idea/thought that I have, but feel repeating it is vital: This whole censorship crusade that the Facebook, twitter & now reddit is on is a dangerous precedence we are setting for our society. Whatever they call it, this is censorship. Already due to AI suggesting similar contents on services like Facebook & Youtube and the design of sub-reddits on reddit, we have living inside echo chambers. A…

> Whatever they call it, this is censorship. By definition it is not. Only governments can censor. This is just a private entity making a decision. You have the right to say what you want, but I don't have to let you into my living room to say it.

How is such a blatantly false and quite frankly ridiculous comment not heavily downvoted after 2 hours on HN.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#859

Post by flukus »

bra-ket wrote: post #687
jakelazaroff wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps we should leave up ISIS recruitment videos, so users in liberal echo chambers can hear that differing opinion as well. /s This is not a new or exciting phenomenon. Censorship and “cancel culture” have rich histories on all sides of the American political spectrum.

[flagged]

You skipped over it, just to be clear, do you think ISIS recruitment videos should be allowed to stay up?
Post reply on HN