Parler CEO says he was fired by board

Post by MauranKilom » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 2:35 PM UTC

motohagiography wrote: post #154

newacct583 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> our societies need tools that can survive popular histrionics. Getting owned by some sanctimonious prick at Amazon is not pro level play. Seems like banning communities that led directly to an insurrection in congress should be one of those tools, no? I mean, that part was a bit more than just "histrionics" by "sanctimonious pricks". I know you won't buy this because of the environment that we find ourselves in, bu…

I'd argue the insurrection narrative is as much of a farce as Kim Jong Il hitting 11 hole-in-one strokes on a golf course, because if you voice doubt about the absurdity of the claim, it marks you as a dangerous subversive. Everybody knows it, and they're just too afraid to say so because they're worried they will get put on a list. Some conspicuously unarmed people trespassed and even managed to bring camera crews.…

Post by molbioguy » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 2:41 PM UTC

wiremine wrote: post #404

jerrysievert wrote: post #80

> We believe privacy is paramount and free speech essential, especially on social media. this, from their "technical difficulties" notice, should have been enough for him to be fired on its own. requiring some users to provide government identification, building such weak security that anyone can read and archive private messages, and not stripping out damaging meta-data from media posts are three ways to not provide…

> requiring some users to provide government identification, building such weak security that anyone can read and archive private messages, and not stripping out damaging meta-data from media posts are three ways to not provide privacy. Exactly. They weren't really interested in true privacy or free speech, they were just using those keywords to attract customers.

Post by Dylan16807 » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 2:47 PM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #388

8note wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that twitter and Facebook already exist and do their jobs well enough and have moderation Any parler type thing is only ever going to get the worst of the worst of possible users. The folks who get kicked off Facebook and Twitter aren't the people you want to build a business on

That is asserting unsettled matters of fact. Twitter's moderation has become partisan enough that it might be desirable to build a business on people they have kicked off. Notably Trump - while he was supremely unpopular on the left, opinion polling suggests he is leaving a more popular legacy than, eg, George W Bush. Maybe even George H.W. Bush. That is a pretty decent foundation for a business.

Post by lallysingh » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 2:52 PM UTC

molbioguy wrote: post #423

wiremine wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> requiring some users to provide government identification, building such weak security that anyone can read and archive private messages, and not stripping out damaging meta-data from media posts are three ways to not provide privacy. Exactly. They weren't really interested in true privacy or free speech, they were just using those keywords to attract customers.

This is misleading. The ID requirements were there to provide a 'verified' account status similar to Twitter's blue check mark. It wasn't some arbitrary requirement. I bet Twitter requires this as well for the verified status.

Post by SV_BubbleTime » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 3:02 PM UTC

molbioguy wrote: post #423

wiremine wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> requiring some users to provide government identification, building such weak security that anyone can read and archive private messages, and not stripping out damaging meta-data from media posts are three ways to not provide privacy. Exactly. They weren't really interested in true privacy or free speech, they were just using those keywords to attract customers.

This is misleading. The ID requirements were there to provide a 'verified' account status similar to Twitter's blue check mark. It wasn't some arbitrary requirement. I bet Twitter requires this as well for the verified status.