351–360 of 868 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://terfisaslur.com/
trans women are women. period.
a) Against whom or for what reason that incitement is happening if irrelevant.
b) Equating defending a persons right not to receive death threats to supporting their ideology is beyond dangerous.
Ratting people out to the government is hip now... crazy times.
Imagine my surprise when after January 6th I saw more than a few articles praising people for turning in their close relatives for having attended the Capitol protest. I had thought that only happened in Stalinist Russia, i.e. turning in your parents or brothers and sisters to the State for political motives.
Denouncing crimes, especially crimes some people consider to be among the worst possible, against democracy, even when committed by close family members, is purely a matter of personal choice and conscience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the people there are far right. When you go to a website and the first thing you see is calls to murder jewish people and the n-word repeated ad nauseam, all but the far right decide to just leave. The end result is that gab/parler/etc don't become places where all speech exists but instead places where extreme racism, homophobia, and sexism suck the oxygen away from everything else.
By curiosity I've looked on Gab and I don't see any content you mention. Yes, there is something about protests against banning guns, some celebrities teaming up to support Trump, etc., which is considered to be "far right" but I haven't seen anything you mention. I might have missed that obviously during my five minutes of browsing there, as a result, if they really call for murdering Jews, could you provide a link…
Unfortunately you have to sign up to see comments, I wonder why...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And now 'they' are saying #womxn is transphobic on Twitter. So now everyone using that in the past and present is a transphobe apparently. The potential triggernometry in this complex inclusivity equation boggles my mind. EDIT: Downvoters: So this tweet is not accurate, No? [0] From the reply thread, it shows how 'they' and Twitch are now re-hijacking the artificial term 'womxn' to lose its so-called meaning such tha…
You are overthinking it too much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Adverse selection. If your differenciating feature is "you can say what you want without getting banned", your userbase is going to tend towards people who get banned on other platforms. In todays climate, that is mostly the far right. Compounding this is PR and network effects. Once they become known as the place for the far right, then more far righters go there, and more distant people avoid it.
> Adverse selection. If your differenciating feature is "you can say what you want without getting banned", your userbase is going to tend towards people who get banned on other platforms. In todays climate, that is mostly the far right. And in Hong Kong, it's anti-CCP protestors. In Iran, it is opponents of the theocracy. We can play this game all day. Tech's obsession with hating on Gab/Parler is based upon on the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Genuinely, I want to find common ground with people who don't say anyone who isn't a neo-nazi is ALL THE WAY LEFT AND A DANGEROUS PERSON
You aren't coming across as genuine, though. Textual communication loses a lot of subtlety, but you figuratively started screaming mid-sentence. Is it fair to assume that people in the past have treated you like a dangerous person? Were you screaming at them? Were you trying to shame them into condemning something, thus forcing them to either submit themselves to you, or seemingly be implicated as the terrible thing…
Are you willing to accept the challenge of accepting the rules of engagement I put forth - Acknowledge that neo-nazis are a problem, briefly state why?
---
I think the GME stuff is a bit nuts, personally. I found the whole thing entertaining, but I find it hard to believe that most participants won't be hurt in some way in the long run. I'm not sure how much small time investors understand that. Optimistically, maybe this is a collective learning experience that does minimal harm to a large number of people, and we all come away from the experience with a better idea of how the stock market works. Maybe then we can make better informed electoral decisions? Feels a bit too optimistic, but hey.
Better than meme stocks vs hedge funds, imo, would be to have a working system for accountability and enforcement at the SEC- been lacking for decades, from what I understand.
-------
Societal damage caused by data breaches. Idk, it's a bit large as a topic. Do I like that a bunch of personal data just got dumped? Not the biggest fan, no. I wouldn't want it to happen to me, certainly.
I do think it's useful to have the data there to show how much the platform is for hate and organizing around hate. It seems like there should be a better way to expose this kind of thing.
----
I'd be surprised if you also engage in a genuine discussion on your own terms.
I love surprises, but I've been on the internet long enough not to expect them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right when it comes to calls to violence, but I would prefer #DieT*rfs or #T*rfsMustDie instead. At least then freedom of speech is preserved and are is no calls for violence. > Only by discussing this can peaceful coexistence be achieved. Would love to see evidence of this and until then, please go tell that to the exclusionary T*rfs FIRST and NOT trans people fighting against them. Be a trans ally.
This is part of the reason why a sizeable portion of the population sees you as a cult of lunatics.
I'll take that any day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lol, yup, I was just thinking that after I posted. /r/conservative is hilarious in that they rail against censorship and free speech issues and yet basically self censor so strongly that only "flaired" (someone vetted to be part of the group-think) users are allowed to post in pretty much all discussions. And even flaired users who dare to oppose the group-think are quickly banned. The cognitive dissonance on that su…
I don’t think they have much of a choice. When I’ve gone there after large news events and they have unflaired people able to post it turns in to /r/politics 2.0. I have seen discussions there from people on both sides of the political spectrum where neither side was downvoted to oblivion, which is more than you can say for most of Reddit.
That's the point: they complain about everyone else except when it happens to them, and then suddenly it's totally just and necessary. As though the reason women, gays, lesbians, transgender, black, mexican etc. communities don't have their own spaces for the exact reason that otherwise they would be brigaded by no end of people who felt just overly necessary to drop in and talk about how they think none of their problems are valid.
/r/conservative isn't ridiculed because it's moderated aggressively, it's ridiculed because it's moderated aggressively by people who continuously argue that moderation anywhere else is an assault on free speech and wholly unnecessary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://gab.com/ANS https://gab.com/CNSM For example
95 and 52 followers. Is that representative of the platform?
The American National Socialist shows a huge group of Nazis plus a Swastika in their banner picture, does it really matter then how many followers they have?
Not that it's representative, but it is certainly a "feature" of gab.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Adverse selection. If your differenciating feature is "you can say what you want without getting banned", your userbase is going to tend towards people who get banned on other platforms. In todays climate, that is mostly the far right. And in Hong Kong, it's anti-CCP protestors. In Iran, it is opponents of the theocracy. We can play this game all day. Tech's obsession with hating on Gab/Parler is based upon on the…
> Tech's obsession with hating on Gab/Parler is based upon on the identity of the people in them Correct. We hate nazis.
Also, blaming problems in the country/world on a group of people identified by their racial features (white males), accusing them in abusing their privilege for oppression of other groups also defined by racial features. Where have I seen this before? Oh, right, nazis again..