231–240 of 1001 posts
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.
They let him concede, waited a day, and then nuked him. It's too little too late, but I'll take it.
You may agree with this new power now when its used on Trump, but you might not agree with it in the future. By then it will have been too late.
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 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
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.
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.
Violate the terms, get banned. That's fair.
I am no trump fan, but reading the two tweets that got him suspended confuses me. Neither of those two tweets encourages violence in any way. What am i missing? The two listed tweets are: “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!!!” and…
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 mean, they were going to ban him on January 20, 2021 at 12pm no matter what. The last few days just escalated the timeframe.
And everyone was totally okay with Dems storming the Senate 2 years ago during the Kavanaugh hearings. Twitter allowed all the Antifa accounts to stay on their site. Even the Iranian ruler who calls for assassination is allowed.
The problem with these FB & Twitter bans is its easy to creat a new social media platform, esp if you can get exclusives like this. The main reason I joined twitter (and tiktok) is because I saw so many sites and newspapers with the links and watermarks. If Parlor or what ever site does host trump it quickly becomes a new app you should get, it doesn't shut him down, there will be fewer controls.
The market interest for networks like Parler, Gab, Voat, Thedonald.win, etc. is simply too small for any of them to succeed. Their audience is also too narrow, it's just politics and almost no discussion about anything else. If a ton of people would suddenly move to Parler it would mean the majority wants it and Twitter would respond by enabling the kind of content they are banning now.
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…
Yes, I think this is actually it. After he basically commanded them to "Stop the Steal", I said that Facebook and Twitter would ban him. I also said that nuclear war was also on the table. If he is so unAmerican that he would actually tell his mob to attack the Capitol buildings, he really doesn't care about America at all. Being as petulant as he is, nuclear war is very much on the table. That's how crazy this situa…
> High-ranking national-security officials have spent the last 24 hours scrambling to figure out how to keep their commander-in-chief, Donald Trump, from inciting further violence at home, spilling national secrets, or sparking last-minute confrontations with international foes.
> The concerns in the upper echelons of the administration’s national-security community range from fears inside the Pentagon that the president will do or say something that effectively throws the U.S. into a military confrontation with another country to anxieties in the intelligence apparatus that Trump will divulge classified intelligence on his way out, according to four officials who spoke with The Daily Beast about the matter. All requested to remain anonymous in order to speak more openly about the discussions.
> “This isn’t a hypothetical anymore,” said one senior administration official. “This is real. What happened yesterday changed the calculus. People are concerned about [the president’s] state of mind.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/after-capitol-riot-trump-offic...