Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Seongnam, S. Korea
    Joined
    03 Jun '17
    Moves
    19426
    19 Feb '19 21:51
    It's very easy for conservative posters to get bans for alleged violations, and this is true across social media platforms.

    It resulrs in double standards that negatively impact the free speech of conservatives in the public sphere.

    As noted above, of the 22 suspended individuals, only one was a Clinton supporter. This was actress-turned-activist Rose McGowan, who temporarily lost access to her account in 2017 for posting someone’s private phone number. Note that this is an unambiguous violation of Twitter’s rules, so the platform had little choice in this case. The platform does not seem to have suspended a single prominent Clinton supporter based on the substantive content of his or her expressed views.

    Of course, the existence of this disparity does not prove that Twitter is actively discriminating against Trump supporters. Perhaps conservatives are simply more likely to violate neutral rules regarding harassment and hate speech. In such case, the observed data would not serve to impugn Twitter, but rather conservatives themselves.

    Luckily, through the use of standard statistical methods—similar to those commonly applied to calculate confidence intervals in the physical and social sciences—one may determine that the underlying population disparity (i.e. the disparity between liberal and conservative behavioral norms) would have to be quite large in order for there to be any significant likelihood of observing a randomly constituted 22-point data set characterized by the above-described 21:1 ratio. Indeed, assuming some randomness in enforcement unrelated to bias, one would have to assume that conservatives were at least four times as likely as liberals to violate Twitter’s neutrally applied terms of service to produce even a 5% chance (the standard benchmark) that a 22-data point sample would yield a result as skewed as 21-1.


    https://quillette.com/2019/02/12/it-isnt-your-imagination-twitter-treats-conservatives-more-harshly-than-liberals/?fbclid=IwAR3sjZVsvN1YcS0gOa8EEZXWIfrBL4YxRxv_rHFWV4FzbpZCVccyXn_w__c
  2. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    19 Feb '19 21:59
    @philokalia said
    It's very easy for conservative posters to get bans for alleged violations, and this is true across social media platforms.

    It resulrs in double standards that negatively impact the free speech of conservatives in the public sphere.

    [quote] As noted above, of the 22 suspended individuals, only one was a Clinton supporter. This was actress-turned-activist Rose McGow ...[text shortened]... ves-more-harshly-than-liberals/?fbclid=IwAR3sjZVsvN1YcS0gOa8EEZXWIfrBL4YxRxv_rHFWV4FzbpZCVccyXn_w__c
    It's very easy for conservative posters to get bans for alleged violations, and this is true across social media platforms.

    That's because what you consider "conservative posters" includes rabid racists, white supremacists, violent hate groups, crazies, raving lunatics, conspiracy nutjobs, etc. etc. etc.

    In reality, Donald J. Trump should have been banned from Twitter according to Twitter's own Terms and Conditions, but they will not do so as he brings a lot of traffic to the site and they fear a backlash from his supporters.
  3. Seongnam, S. Korea
    Joined
    03 Jun '17
    Moves
    19426
    19 Feb '19 22:55
    @kazetnagorra said
    It's very easy for conservative posters to get bans for alleged violations, and this is true across social media platforms.

    That's because what you consider "conservative posters" includes rabid racists, white supremacists, violent hate groups, crazies, raving lunatics, conspiracy nutjobs, etc. etc. etc.

    In reality, Donald J. Trump should have been banned f ...[text shortened]... ll not do so as he brings a lot of traffic to the site and they fear a backlash from his supporters.
    I think you've set yourself up for your own sort of failure on this.

    The final part of your post belies the fact that you have an exceedingly biased and loaded definition of what is racist... Unless, of course, you're implying Pres. Trump should be banned for something that isn't racist.

    What are you suggesting Pres. Trump be banned for?
  4. Joined
    05 Nov '06
    Moves
    81406
    19 Feb '19 23:40
    @philokalia said
    I think you've set yourself up for your own sort of failure on this.

    The final part of your post belies the fact that you have an exceedingly biased and loaded definition of what is racist... Unless, of course, you're implying Pres. Trump should be banned for something that isn't racist.

    What are you suggesting Pres. Trump be banned for?
    He doesn't know...just knows the Washington elitist tell him to hate.
  5. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    19 Feb '19 23:47
    @mott-the-hoople said
    He doesn't know...just knows the Washington elitist tell him to hate.
    Does the right wing pity party ever stop?

    Here's a tear for you guys not being able to say "n*gger" like in the good ole days: 😢
  6. Seongnam, S. Korea
    Joined
    03 Jun '17
    Moves
    19426
    19 Feb '19 23:56
    Nobody wants the right to say something ridiculous like that without consequences.

    I want a world where you can believe in borders without getting sucked into some bizarre argument about how borders perpetuate white supremacy and you're a white supremacist if you believe in them.

    We've been pushed so far to the left and the goalposts have moved so far on what is racist it is no longer even useful as a descriptor word.

    You probably agree with this, yes? So you shouldn't complain about the fact that we're concerned with fair dialog and standards.
  7. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    20 Feb '19 00:28
    @philokalia said
    Nobody wants the right to say something ridiculous like that without consequences.

    I want a world where you can believe in borders without getting sucked into some bizarre argument about how borders perpetuate white supremacy and you're a white supremacist if you believe in them.

    We've been pushed so far to the left and the goalposts have moved so far on what is rac ...[text shortened]... , yes? So you shouldn't complain about the fact that we're concerned with fair dialog and standards.
    You are being dishonest; your idea of borders also includes keeping the people inside those borders of one certain ethnic group.

    When you couple that with an oft-stated belief that Europeans have a superior "culture" to everybody else, yes you are going to be correctly considered a "white supremacist".
  8. Seongnam, S. Korea
    Joined
    03 Jun '17
    Moves
    19426
    20 Feb '19 00:41
    @no1marauder said
    You are being dishonest; your idea of borders also includes keeping the people inside those borders of one certain ethnic group.

    When you couple that with an oft-stated belief that Europeans have a superior "culture" to everybody else, yes you are going to be correctly considered a "white supremacist".
    If a Muslim believes that Islamic culture is the best culture, are they a Muslim supremacist?

    Or are they just someone who esteemed their own culture and heritage?

    And if a Nigerian thinks that Nigeria should foremost exist to benefit Nigerians, and endorses their own sort of "Nigeria first" policies, aren't they just some form of a Nigerian conservative and nationalist?

    You are equating patriotism and belief in your own society and basic conservative and nationalist positions with racism.

    You are suggesting that very plain and basic beliefs that don't carry any negative baggage actually carry so much that believing in this plus something else as innocent as border walls makes you a racist.

    One plus one plus one might adds up to three, or, in this case, "nationalist."

    But you are making it sound like one plus one plus one adds up to one thousand, or, in this case, "Nazi" or whatever clown nose you're trying to put on our beliefs.
  9. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    20 Feb '19 00:56
    @philokalia said
    If a Muslim believes that Islamic culture is the best culture, are they a Muslim supremacist?

    Or are they just someone who esteemed their own culture and heritage?

    And if a Nigerian thinks that Nigeria should foremost exist to benefit Nigerians, and endorses their own sort of "Nigeria first" policies, aren't they just some form of a Nigerian conservative and nationa ...[text shortened]... o one thousand, or, in this case, "Nazi" or whatever clown nose you're trying to put on our beliefs.
    Again this is dishonest; you tie together the idea of nation with an idea of a certain ethnic group's superiority.

    And not to put too fine a point on it, but yes that is exactly what the Nazis believed.
  10. Seongnam, S. Korea
    Joined
    03 Jun '17
    Moves
    19426
    20 Feb '19 01:20
    No one is saying that the white race is the be all and end all of races.

    And president Trump and the conservative Republicans are certainly not saying that at all.

    But I understand how you NEED to cling to this idea: it's the weak glue holding your prejudice against the right wing together.
  11. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56354
    20 Feb '19 04:45
    @kazetnagorra said
    It's very easy for conservative posters to get bans for alleged violations, and this is true across social media platforms.

    That's because what you consider "conservative posters" includes rabid racists, white supremacists, violent hate groups, crazies, raving lunatics, conspiracy nutjobs, etc. etc. etc.

    In reality, Donald J. Trump should have been banned f ...[text shortened]... ll not do so as he brings a lot of traffic to the site and they fear a backlash from his supporters.
    Very well put, sir.

    That being said, I wouldnhave twitterers dragged out on the street and shot. They really do get on my tits.
  12. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    20 Feb '19 07:42
    @philokalia said
    I think you've set yourself up for your own sort of failure on this.

    The final part of your post belies the fact that you have an exceedingly biased and loaded definition of what is racist... Unless, of course, you're implying Pres. Trump should be banned for something that isn't racist.

    What are you suggesting Pres. Trump be banned for?
    Here is one example:

    To Iranian President Rouhani: NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!
  13. Seongnam, S. Korea
    Joined
    03 Jun '17
    Moves
    19426
    20 Feb '19 08:13
    @kazetnagorra said
    Here is one example:

    To Iranian President Rouhani: NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!
    This is interesting, honestly, because it is a violation of terms and policy in the sense that it does involve the concept of threatening violence...

    Yet, it is in the context of being within a politicians foreign policy and in accordance with US law... There's laws against me threatening you, for instance, but if you are Khohar Shohar Kunkeshi, the Pashtun terrorist, and I'm Johnald Druft, President of the USA, I can threaten you with violence and it makes some sense.
  14. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    20 Feb '19 16:15
    @philokalia said
    This is interesting, honestly, because it is a violation of terms and policy in the sense that it does involve the concept of threatening violence...

    Yet, it is in the context of being within a politicians foreign policy and in accordance with US law... There's laws against me threatening you, for instance, but if you are Khohar Shohar Kunkeshi, the Pashtun terrorist, a ...[text shortened]... d I'm Johnald Druft, President of the USA, I can threaten you with violence and it makes some sense.
    Trump isn't violating any law by threatening his Iranian counterpart in this way (as far as I know), but it does seem a clear violation of the terms of use of Twitter. Of course, Twitter is free to determine their own policies when it comes to such apparent violations, and in my estimation commercial interests are a strong factor in such determinations.
  15. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    20 Feb '19 16:17
    @philokalia said
    I think you've set yourself up for your own sort of failure on this.

    The final part of your post belies the fact that you have an exceedingly biased and loaded definition of what is racist... Unless, of course, you're implying Pres. Trump should be banned for something that isn't racist.

    What are you suggesting Pres. Trump be banned for?
    Being a Republican President equals racism.

    But coloring your face black and dressing up with a KKK member for fun in college is just fine, assuming you vote "D" that is.
Back to Top