Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump • Hacker News Board

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#661

Post by starfallg » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 12:43 AM UTC

sthnblllII wrote: post #616

shadowgovt wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Negative 2nd / 3rd order effects were inevitable when they made the "newsworthiness" carve-out in the first place. One rule for the king and one for the commoners isn't a very sustainable policy.

Trump was democratically elected (by commoners). Twitter was built with wealthy private investor money. The fact that Twitter banned many of the commoners who elected Trump, but couldn't ban Trump himself until now due to the fear of public backlash is a testament to how anti-democratic it is to have private control over the national means of communication.

Your right to shout doesn't override my right to not have to listen to you.

And it so happens that most people don't want to listen or give their platform to a sore loser looking to overturn a democratic election by force.

Actually sore loser is a rather generous term. In Europe we call these people fascists.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#662

Post by dillondoyle » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 12:43 AM UTC

ve55 wrote: post #44

This ban seems to heavily take advantage of the current moment, as it's obvious that he has tweeted worse things in the past. It's strange that they picked such a poor way to justify the ban when they could have made a significantly stronger case, and in doing so could have convinced millions more people that they are trying their best to apply policies evenly. For example, I have a hard time imagining why they chose…

I'm scared for the inauguration. Already lots of chat on the same forums/parlor/etc

The scaffolding and wooden structure they were on is the JCCIC built platform, and that disgusting video of the tunnel is where POTUS walks out...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJOgGsC0G9U

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#663

Post by hypervisorxxx » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 12:43 AM UTC

ve55 wrote: post #44

This ban seems to heavily take advantage of the current moment, as it's obvious that he has tweeted worse things in the past. It's strange that they picked such a poor way to justify the ban when they could have made a significantly stronger case, and in doing so could have convinced millions more people that they are trying their best to apply policies evenly. For example, I have a hard time imagining why they chose…

Patriots historically refer to citizens who have taken to arms to defend their country.

When has he ever used this term before to refer to his supporters?

It's not a good time to begin to refer to your supporters in the context of using weapons to defend the country on the heels of the capitol building being stormed and four people dying during a final election recount.

The thing about manipulation is it always claims plausible deniability. We all know this.

"It's heavily taking advantage of the moment." Umm yes. Regardless of whether you are a republican or a democrat, storming capitol hill during an election recount diminishes the validity of either party and the country as a whole. This country is the center for innovation and generally the most sought after democracy in the world. The entire world is watching. Taking advantage of the moment is exactly what he is doing. If you read about coups in the past there was never an explicit sentence that drew the line between now I am and evil dictator and now I am not. It was building an army of radicalized supporters, patriots, if you will while government officials around the person in power dropped like flies as things escalated much like what is happening now. We do not need to repeat history to say we proved he did it because by that time it will be too late.

It is clear for months trump has been warned of how this kind of inflammatory behavior will impact the people at large and potentially radicalize either side and he has been nothing but inflammatory.

If he really cared about securing democracy at large as opposed to his own power in office he would be taking extra precautions at this point.

He is doing the opposite.

I get what you mean though. Unfortunately both sides have significant radicalized sides now. And looting storming buildings and murdering law enforcement and lighting fire to buildings has been normalized now by both sides in 2020.

My parents are trumpers in the deep south and these are the things they have said to me in the past couple of days:

Mark Zuckerberg is an abusive dictator not Trump.

My mother condescendingly whispered to me poor thing noone told me all the protestors were antifa who knew if they didn't storm the building and steal the ballots that trump would win. So they were all actually secret democrats.

They both believe trump is the rightful president for the next term.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#664

Post by thefucnjosh » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 12:43 AM UTC

garyrichardson wrote: post #365

handmodel wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the logic isn't that hard. Person says bad things to whip up a mob - Twitter unsure to take him seriously or literally. Mob actually materializes and several people die - Twitter sure they now have to take him literally

Additionally I believe wholesale banning the leader of a country from a platform like twitter is not black or white. Their persona is different and requires different treatment than any other given account. I suspect two factors went into the calculus this time: he has proved himself desperately dangerous AND he's got less than 2 weeks left in his term.

I don't disagree. But sedition isn't protected speech. So if they didn't ban him they're opening themselves up for lawsuits. In no country on earth is it legal for anyone to publicly advocate the overthrow of their government. And there's already decisions on the books proving this, as well as the legal precedent of cold-war anti-communism laws.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#665

Post by sneak » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 12:44 AM UTC

Rebelgecko wrote: post #54

Is it just my perception, or is their actual justification using the 2 quoted tweets kinda weak? Interpreting his boycott of an event as a call to violence seems like a huge stretch. It seems like they wanted to shoehorn a justification using his 2 latest tweets when the actual reason goes back further.

Yes, it is a stretch. As others have pointed out, there are way better incidences of his rulebreaking than the ones they chose.

This reflects poorly on Twitter.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#666

Post by PaulDavisThe1st » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 12:44 AM UTC

allendoerfer wrote: post #167

Does anybody have a solution to the bigger underlying question of de-platforming and censorship on online platforms? As far as I can tell, there are two general viewpoints: a) Censorship is bad, free speech is good. You should counter bad arguments with better arguments. b) There are types of speech, which are proven to lead to violence in the long-run. Also, some things can be proven as untrue. Lies are bad. I have…

(c) the policies of private companies that are not subject to public utility-like regulation never amount to censorship in a way that is worth wringing one's hands over.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#667

Post by jopsen » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 12:44 AM UTC

allendoerfer wrote: post #167

Does anybody have a solution to the bigger underlying question of de-platforming and censorship on online platforms? As far as I can tell, there are two general viewpoints: a) Censorship is bad, free speech is good. You should counter bad arguments with better arguments. b) There are types of speech, which are proven to lead to violence in the long-run. Also, some things can be proven as untrue. Lies are bad. I have…

News papers have published letters from readers for many years.

They've had editorial standards. I don't know if this is much different -- it's faster for sure, but crazy people haven't always had a huge platform.

In fact, it's seems reasonable to let people say whatever they want so long as the audience is small. And I wonder isn't that pretty much how it works today?

I doubt Twitter would ban my account, if I tried to incite my 5 followers to stage a coup :D

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#668

Post by mattnewton » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 12:44 AM UTC

dredmorbius wrote: post #386

ve55 wrote: post #44

This ban seems to heavily take advantage of the current moment, as it's obvious that he has tweeted worse things in the past. It's strange that they picked such a poor way to justify the ban when they could have made a significantly stronger case, and in doing so could have convinced millions more people that they are trying their best to apply policies evenly. For example, I have a hard time imagining why they chose…

The environment has changed. Previously theoretic risks are now manifest, demonstrated, and cognizable. Actual riots, insurrection, disruption of government, assaults on law enforcement, damage to government buildings, theft of government property, violence, and deaths, have occurred. The instigator is unrepentent and non-credible in what are at best tepid disavowals. The totality of context has changed. If "he has t…

The environment has changed, most significantly in that Trump is no longer going to be in control of the DoJ in a few weeks. This isn’t the straw that broke the camel’s back, this is the last straw before the straw dispenser was relieved of power and no one had to accept straw from them anymore.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#669

Post by newguy1234 » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 12:44 AM UTC

rootsudo wrote: post #84

Comparing today's media, to the media of old - where they colluded to hide FDR couldn't walk because of the shame/and attacks it'd lead to now, where Tech companies overtook print media and now themselves control the pitchforks and direct anger at the masses. 1984 Two minutes of hate is real, so very real, and it's quite sad how most people welcomed this into the world. I've deleted my social media, twitters years be…

Yeah, I agree. I've started reducing the amount of social media I assume and deleting certain people off my networks. Way too much vile behavior on social media and it is a net negative to my life. I suggest others to do the same.

Social media is the cigarette of our generation.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#670

Post by lr4444lr » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 12:45 AM UTC

allendoerfer wrote: post #167

Does anybody have a solution to the bigger underlying question of de-platforming and censorship on online platforms? As far as I can tell, there are two general viewpoints: a) Censorship is bad, free speech is good. You should counter bad arguments with better arguments. b) There are types of speech, which are proven to lead to violence in the long-run. Also, some things can be proven as untrue. Lies are bad. I have…

The next step, I think is to ask yourself: if the problem cannot be solved, which world do you want to live in: the one where (a)'s downside comes true or (b)'s? I'd rather (a)'s.