Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump • Hacker News Board

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#971

Post by NicoJuicy » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 1:34 PM 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.

You're making the billionaire sound like he's a normal guy and everything else is undemocratic.

Who picked any of his family members in top positions? And his election was literally based on attacking the other candidate, not on content.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#972

Post by 4ggr0 » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 2:49 PM UTC

disgrunt wrote: post #340

So when Will Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez be suspended for tweeting support for violent protests? [0] [0]: https://nypost.com/2019/11/03/aoc-tweets-her-support-for-ant...

What she wrote on Twitter: "Ending mass incarceration means challenging a system that jails the poor to free the rich. Arresting people who can’t afford a $2.75 fare makes no one safer and destabilizes our community. New Yorkers know that, they’re not having it, and they’re standing up for each other."

Where exactly was she inciting violence?

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#973

Post by ashtonkem » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 2:51 PM UTC

mbesto wrote: post #233

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

Which is why interpretation of speech requires context . Yelling "fire" in an open field vs a packed cinema are obviously are easy to interpret. There's a whole bunch of grey area in the middle.

The phrase “fire in a packed theater” in the legal context is actually based on a case where someone was jailed for peacefully protesting the draft for WW1 (Schenck v. United States). It has no relation to actual violence, and is in fact a fantastic example of how “harm” by speech can be abused by a malicious government to jail people for what should be protected speech.

It’s no longer good law, thank goodness. Now we have the much narrower Brandenburg test, which requires that speech be likely to cause “imminent lawless action”.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#974

Post by zthrowaway » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 2:54 PM 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…

He’s not going to be in power much longer, so there’s no harm ruffling his feathers now. They have confirmation with the Biden certification. That’s really all it is.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#975

Post by 4ggr0 » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 2:56 PM UTC

jpxw wrote: post #692

Parler, Trump’s logical next step after Twitter, has just been removed from the Play Store. There’s a level of co-ordination at play here that should be worrying to people who care about freedom of speech. And before some idiot tells me that the 1st Amendment doesn’t apply to private companies, I’m not making a legal point here, I’m making a moral one.

I'm a leftist european who despises Trump, still have to agree with you.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#976

Post by tomerbd » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 3:02 PM UTC

Net Notrality

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#977

Post by tim44 » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 3:09 PM UTC

webel0 wrote: post #252

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.

This was my exact initial reaction. However, suppose that Bill Clinton, George Bush, or Barack Obama had declined to attend the inauguration of there predecessors. That would surely trigger a crisis worthy of de-platforming. We’ve become somewhat numb to this sort of thing. I guess my second draft would have said, “We’ve allowed DJT a platform because he is the President of the United States. In light of all that he…

Democrats have fought him tooth and nail for four years,tried to impeach him, claimed his presidency is not legit and a sham or worse. So why do they need or want some symbolic transfer of power from a foreign operative taking orders from Putin ;) It seems he is only now accepted as president at zero hour so he can symbolically pass the torch.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#978

Post by jl2718 » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 3:34 PM 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…

I think it’s called up/down voting.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#979

Post by dmwallin » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 3:41 PM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #901

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

> 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 By this logic do we not also have to delete the account of everyone prominent who tweeted anything to the effect of "no justice no peace" with respect to BLM, given that several people died there as well?

These two situations couldn’t be more vastly different.

The rally was organized by Trump, the mob that marched on the capital was there for Trump, marching with flags for Trump, encouraged and incited by Trump, and aimed at overthrowing a legitimate election in favor of Trump.

BLM was marching for lost lives that could no longer speak for themselves, organized by and for no single individual, carrying flags to honor the fallen, aimed at creating a future where less people would die unnecessarily at the hands of law enforcement.

Re: Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

#980

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 3:50 PM UTC

lostlogin wrote: post #582

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

> Mob actually materializes and several people die - Twitter sure they now have to take him literally Angry groups of protesters and resulting deaths are not a thing that started happening this week. Twitter are pathetic and have taken a stand once the writing was on the wall.

[deleted]