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

861–870 of 1001 posts

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#861

Post by seppin »

ufmace wrote: post #726
forserious wrote: post #686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 physicall…

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

This is beyond bad faith, this is an open "fuck you" to anyone that dares participate in this discussion. To shut it down, to make any sort of dialogue impossible.

And you say the left wants to censor, what a laugh.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#862

Post by seppin »

cercatrova wrote: post #353
andrewem wrote: post #232

You know what scares the shit out of me, to use your phrasing? The people on that site murdering me or overthrowing the government, so that they seize power and elections end or become irrelevant. “The free Internet” has value, but it’s not the only thing that has value. When it conflicts with other values, then there has to be a nuanced resolution.

This is the paradox of tolerance. We can tolerate having a free internet but if it leads to the intolerant taking over and making everything worse, we need to be intolerant of them now, not later.

Calls to violence were not, and are not, protected speech. It is a false argument to say they should be now.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#863

Post by camel_Snake »

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…

This article was written clearly before the Mueller report was disseminated to the public, and quotes William Barr's letter of the report which we now Mueller took great exception to. I don't think it's a great resource at this point in time.

Here is my money quote from the report:

> If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#864

Post by courtf »

allsystemsgo wrote: post #343
vmchale wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think everyone's just tired of his shit.

Everyone? Tens of millions voted for him. It was a close race.

Just because someone votes for Trump doesn't mean they aren't sick of his incompetence/dishonesty/corruption. It just means they prefer him to the alternative.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#865

Post by mullingitover »

txsoftwaredev wrote: post #783
mullingitover wrote: post #251

Twenty years from now we won't talk much about Donald Trump. However, every time we do, the sacking of the US capitol will be the top thing we link to his presidency. Probably the only thing. For many of his supporters, the only thing they will be remembered for is their support of him. Reddit isn't stupid. This is still sinking in for many, and for those ahead of the curve they're doing everything they can to disass…

If that's all you believe he'll be remembered for then you are willfully ignorant. Under his administration he has: 1. Brought black and hispanic unemployment to record lows. 2. The DOW tied the record for the most consecutive all-time closing highs in a row. 3. Signed the biggest package of tax cuts and reforms in history. 4. United States is a net natural gas exporter for the first time since 1957. 5. Reduced illeg…

As I was saying, this is still sinking in for many. I'm not saying these things won't be listed in some encyclopedia page, obviously history will give a thorough account of his time in power.

However, children who are born this year won't be spending a lot of time in history class covering Trump's mundane policy victories in school. They'll be looking at the bullet points, and the first one will be about his incitement of a mob to sack the US capitol and shed blood in his name.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#866

Post by camel_Snake »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #280
eyelidlessness wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is being censored. You’re perfectly welcome to go on 4chan or breitbart or parler or even other subreddits or just build a new platform. No one is entitled to use other people’s resources and effort to have their views amplified without moderation by those people offering that service. Edit: every time I post a comment like this here I get downvoted. I’m not complaining, downvote away. But I have to wonder if…

> But I have to wonder if the folks downvoting realize how much this site is moderated This site currently doesn't ban people just because the post is disagreeable. I've managed to respectfully discuss inflammatory topics here before, even though I'm usually the one with the unpopular opinion. On reddit people just get downvoted to oblivion or banned on sight if they post anything that offends the sensibilities of th…

> "We have also taken action to ban the community r/donaldtrump given repeated policy violations in recent days regarding the violence at the U.S. Capitol.”

From the post itself. The subreddit was banned for breaking ToS. I'd expect the same on this site if I were to repeatedly call for violence.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#867

Post by kristopolous »

dominotw wrote: post #852
germinalphrase wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There's better ways to run an election with verification systems. Venezuela does it pretty well, probably because they know there's an invasion itchy trigger finger pointed at them.*

Poll workers for instance, get drafted from a lottery right near the election instead of a voluntary system so there's no way a team of confederates could scheme behind the scenes.

There's also multiple tabulating and verification steps. The ballots are both machine and hand counted. The people and machines are chosen at random and nobody could rig all the machines because nobody has access to all of them. Nobody can coordinate an effort for subordinates to rig them because again, the teams are formed via a random draft.

Test ballots get fed through the machines by teams of observers who get randomly assigned to polling stations for surprise inspections.

Furthermore the top 6 candidates independently verify the tally. They each get essentially an open book of the records. Statistical spot check surveys are done as a further confirmation etc. There's lots of international observers, etc

Every voter gets a copy of the ballot and a confirmation number that they can go and check the record of.

Maybe someone else can find a place where corruption in the tabulation could occur but it looks pretty airtight to me

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Venezuela#Polling...

* - It's worth noting I'm not saying anything about the outcome of the elections or the politics. Voter intimidation and disinformation could still happen, lots of objectionable things. But their tabulation of votes seems to be pretty clean. Dictators, if that's your opinion here, can stay in power without lying about the vote count by, say, deciding what makes it on the ballot in the first place. For an extreme example, this election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_German_parliamentary_elec... could have been exemplary - as clean as mathematically possible, and had the same outcome.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#869

Post by arolihas »

beerandt wrote: post #846
arolihas wrote: post #827

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Innocent until proven guilty. If you are claiming an election was conducted illegitimately then you are accusing multiple election officials of fraud. This requires evidence, something the Trump legal team didn’t have.

Elections are not criminal proceedings. Even civil suits only require a "preponderance of evidence." But elections are not court actions. The results (not the overturning ) of elections must be believed to be fair with almost certainly, especially by the losing side.

I know elections aren’t court proceedings. But if you believe the results are unfair, then you’re implying some crime took place, namely fraud. You can prove that in court with a preponderance of evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt, but Lin Wood and Rudy Giuliani haven’t managed to do either.

> The results (not the overturning) of elections must be believed to be fair with almost certainly, especially by the losing side.

According to whom? What will make you think this is fair? To me it seems like the only way Trump supporters and Trump will be convinced of the results is if they say he won.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#870

Post by camel_Snake »

balozi wrote: post #487

Also lets forget that in the summer of 2020, there was nationwide protest that included arson, looting, and violent confrontation with police. Almost all of it coordinated on the same social media properties.

> "We have also taken action to ban the community r/donaldtrump given repeated policy violations in recent days regarding the violence at the U.S. Capitol.”

This is what they were banned for. Find me evidence that /r/BLM and its moderators were doing the same and I'll gladly cede the point.

Post reply on HN