Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jack Dorsey says he agrees with reversing Trump's Twitter ban

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 366 posts

Re: Jack Dorsey says he agrees with reversing Trump's Twitter ban

#121

Post by Izkata »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #110
spicyusername wrote: post #25

Quoted post unavailable.

Removing him only removed him from your conversation. He is not silenced. Same with banning the Trump reddit forums, what this achieved was to shift them to their own platform where they, no longer hear opposing views or being challenged. And to me it seems worse than ever in their views and speech, shockingly though sometimes. Using something like the Paradox of tolerance logic is dangerous itself. People love to fi…

> Same with banning the Trump reddit forums, what this achieved was to shift them to their own platform where they, no longer hear opposing views or being challenged.

They had actually already moved around 4 months before the ban. The official action was just virtue signaling, it was already dead on reddit (I think their mods had actually locked it and prevented posting).

Re: Jack Dorsey says he agrees with reversing Trump's Twitter ban

#123

Post by beepbooptheory »

melony wrote: post #41
lalos wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone makes you rich and successful with their business advice and you work with them for multiple years, would you ignore their phone call in the future and ignore their other suggestions? It’s not about being a master mind, there is soft power in play, humans are social animals.

If somebody truly creates value out of thin air, then they deserve to be heard.

I agree. This is why labor unions need to be heard!

Re: Jack Dorsey says he agrees with reversing Trump's Twitter ban

#124

Post by [deleted] »

BuyMyBitcoins wrote: post #69
Bud wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's been proven guilty. He did it on live tv. The fact that he still has enough political power to avoid execution for sedition, or any responsibility whatsoever for this crime, does not have any effect on the truth value of my statement.

>”He's been proven guilty. He did it on live tv.” Proven guilty in the court of public perception, perhaps, but certainly not in a court of law.

[deleted]

Re: Jack Dorsey says he agrees with reversing Trump's Twitter ban

#125

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 »

unsupp0rted wrote: post #21
Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jack is a just another super-rich guy protecting his interests. He sees the political climate shifting hard right and is acting accordingly. Should there be another mob, he doesn't want to be on the wrong side of it.

I don't see the political climate shifting hard right. Twitter un-banning Trump isn't an indicator of a political climate shift, although perhaps a social shift, or perhaps simply a one-off random Elon shift.

> I don't see the political climate shifting hard right.

Supreme court repealing Roe v. Wade, Don't say gay bill, restrictions of voter rights, denial of 2020 election loss among top leaders in the GOP, the list goes on...

Not to even to mention the likelihood of conservatives gaining control of the senate and perhaps house in the midterms. This is what a hard right political climate shift looks like.

So, the unbanning is a response to this perceived shift - to get in good with the guys will soon be in power.

Re: Jack Dorsey says he agrees with reversing Trump's Twitter ban

#126

Post by throwaway0a5e »

Bud wrote: post #9
mccorrinall wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Innocent until proven guilty. AFAIK Trump has not been convicted of any "illegal activity" in that regard.

He's been proven guilty. He did it on live tv. The fact that he still has enough political power to avoid execution for sedition, or any responsibility whatsoever for this crime, does not have any effect on the truth value of my statement.

Regardless of the legal technicalities that do or don't enable it, executing or imprisoning former heads of state is counterproductive if the goal is to ensure continued peaceful transitions of power.

Re: Jack Dorsey says he agrees with reversing Trump's Twitter ban

#127

Post by aceazzameen »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #110
spicyusername wrote: post #25

Quoted post unavailable.

Removing him only removed him from your conversation. He is not silenced. Same with banning the Trump reddit forums, what this achieved was to shift them to their own platform where they, no longer hear opposing views or being challenged. And to me it seems worse than ever in their views and speech, shockingly though sometimes. Using something like the Paradox of tolerance logic is dangerous itself. People love to fi…

No, he's not silenced. He has a newsletter. But he isn't amplified to the heights that he was before either, and less likely to attract new followers. No one's reporting his newsletters.

I'm not looking forward to seeing responses to Trump tweets across social and news media when he returns. There was no escaping it then. The guy adores the limelight from daily controversies and he's going to capitalize on it again.

Re: Jack Dorsey says he agrees with reversing Trump's Twitter ban

#128

Post by a3w »

sc90 wrote: post #118

Should there be a Penal/Criminal Code for Social Media violations rather than indefinite bans? Edit: By the respective tech companies not something enforced by any branch of government.

In germany, there is. What the courts will make of those laws is still TBD.

Regimes do copy these laws to put anti state opinions behind bars, though.

It's hard to find a middle ground, mostly depending on culture and acceptable offenses by both believers in a message and feelings of people hurt by offensive proposals or hateful speech.

Re: Jack Dorsey says he agrees with reversing Trump's Twitter ban

#129

Post by andrewzah »

whitepaint wrote: post #102
fsloth wrote: post #57

Before this turns into a culture-war-fest consider this: if Twitter is to be a global platform, it probably should NOT take political sides and if it is to censor anyone permanently, it should mostly adhere to local courts and similar entities. It's not about Trump or United States. It's about everyone else. World is a really messy place. It's not very easy generally to decided if in a political conflict one or other…

How come this is not a widely held opinion? This view should be a norm. Do not ban a president of a country on social media. Period. When a private company decides to do so, it should be profusely condemned by everyone. Should Putin's twitter be banned as well?

Politicians don't have the right to be on a private website. They already have official channels to communicate.

Twitter has every right to ban Putin, or Trump, or Duterte, etc.

Re: Jack Dorsey says he agrees with reversing Trump's Twitter ban

#130

Post by NDizzle »

Take a look at the two tweets that twitter used to justify the perma ban of Trump. It's weak, at absolute best.

https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspensio...

On January 8, 2021, President Donald J. Trump Tweeted:

“The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!”

Shortly thereafter, the President Tweeted:

“To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.”

Those two tweets are perma-ban worthy? I'm glad nobody has paid attention to what I typed into region chat in MMOs for the past 20 years...

Post reply on HN