Twitter purge backfires...

[AshleyAshes]

8 minutes ago, vorticalbox said:

 

But one can post anything they like and it is protected with free speech other than the following:

 

 

• To incite actions that would harm others (e.g., “Shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.”).
  Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919).
• To make or distribute obscene materials.
  Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
• To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest.
  United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
• To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration. 
  Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
• Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
  Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
• Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event.
  Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007).

I don't think that you understood any of that.  Free speech is protected from actions of the GOVERNMENT.  Not private entities such as corporations or individuals.  The Government can't say 'NO ONE CAN WEAR BURGER KING T-SHIRTS!' and punish you for it but McDonald is fully within it's rights to banish you from it's establishments for your Pro-Whopper attire.  (Though it would PROBABLY go bad for them on social media but that wouldn't make it illegal)

 

Twitter is, just encase this needs to be clarified, not the government.

[Master Disaster]

15 minutes ago, vorticalbox said:

 

But one can post anything they like and it is protected with free speech other than the following:

 

 

• To incite actions that would harm others (e.g., “Shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.”).
  Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919).
• To make or distribute obscene materials.
  Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
• To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest.
  United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
• To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration. 
  Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
• Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
  Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
• Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event.
  Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007).

If that's the case then I dare you to go make a topic about how great ISIS are in the Off Topic section, let's time how long it takes to get locked and you to get warning points. (BTW please don't do that, not even as a joke)

 

Private entities don't have to allow anything they don't like, it's "their house their rules".

[GSTARR]

The last time i used tumblr i just posted pictures i liked and got hate mail everyday because i didn't include sources, so i was plagiarizing

 

 

The irony of thinking your social blog or attention of any kind on social media is important enough that you have to credit why you're getting it is ridiculous

[AshleyAshes]

2 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Private entities don't have to allow anything they don't like, it's "their house their rules".

Well, to be clear, there are SPECIFIC SCENARIOS that they can't enforce.  Namely to deny access to protected groups.  While the McDonalds can banish your Whopper t-shirt, it can't put a sign out front that says 'NO BLACKS' or such.  But the list of these exceptions is pretty small relative to what a private individual or corporation can do.

[asus killer]

44 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

'Aliens could share more tech with us, if we warmonger less' - Former Canada Defense Minister

What a shame that CNN and BBC couldn't be trusted to bring us the truth about aliens...

i thought the craziness was contained south of the border, i guess it spread north 

[AshleyAshes]

1 minute ago, asus killer said:

i thought the craziness was contained south of the border, i guess it spread north 

The real shocker is how the Canadian Media clearly suppressed this truth but it took the brave and 100% reliable journalists at Russia Today to bring it to the world!

[DildorTheDecent]

Can't wait to see the mass triggering tbh. Black woman wrongly banned from Twitter. Good job there Jack Dorsey.

[Mooshi]

Switch to Tumblr? That place is full of more hypersensitive babies than Twitter is lol

[asus killer]

26 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

The real shocker is how the Canadian Media clearly suppressed this truth but it took the brave and 100% reliable journalists at Russia Today to bring it to the world!

i'm neither russian nor canadian or american. As an outider the dude is insane and amazes me he was minister. I get the RT hate, but i still think they're an amazing channel, just surfing youtube you can find videos of RT stories that are amazing much like the BBC.

here you have an example: 

i guess with RT or any other media you have to know how to filter the content. No one forced the dude to be crazy i guess.

[Eduard the weeb]

Genuinely curious to see if I got taken down because it been a week sense I have been on twitter lol

[Eduard the weeb]

8 hours ago, Nena360 said:

the source is RT news which is far more reputable than CNN & BBC

run by the Russian goverment so to me getting news from them is like asking PBS to give me news unbiased news about China imo.

 

EDIT Better example is getting VOX to be Unbiased towards Trump.

 

( I'm not ain't Russian FYI I am actually 30% Russian )

 

[Techstorm970]

10 minutes ago, Mooshi said:

Switch to Tumblr? That place is full of more hypersensitive babies than Twitter is lol

Agreed!  Tumblr is one big Internet piss-party, just like 4chan.  You look up anything...ANYTHING on Tumblr, and they will find some way to make it look bad.

[Methos]

1 hour ago, AshleyAshes said:

What a shame that CNN and BBC couldn't be trusted to bring us the truth about aliens...

They can't about war either. Fake since at least 1990.

 

[Delicieuxz]

1 hour ago, AshleyAshes said:

'Aliens could share more tech with us, if we warmonger less' - Former Canada Defense Minister

What a shame that CNN and BBC couldn't be trusted to bring us the truth about aliens...

 

Have you ever even watched CNN in your life? The RT interview is actually with a Canadian government official, as opposed to CNN hosting random kooks claiming they met ETs, and showing a re-creation video.

 

 

 

 

The BBC:

 

33 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

The real shocker is how the Canadian Media clearly suppressed this truth but it took the brave and 100% reliable journalists at Russia Today to bring it to the world!

You're embarrassing yourself. See the above videos for why.

[Eduard the weeb]

3 minutes ago, techstorm970 said:

Agreed!  Tumblr is one big Internet piss-party, just like 4chan.  You look up anything...ANYTHING on Tumblr, and they will find some way to make it look bad.

 

 

I loved when they went to war 

[AshleyAshes]

4 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

The RT interview is actually with a Canadian government official, as opposed to CNN hosting random kooks

I regret to inform you that Paul Hellyer hasn't held public office since 1974 and has been a 'Random Kook' since then.

[TidaLWaveZ]

9 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

 

Have you ever even watched CNN in your life? The RT interview is actually with a Canadian government official, as opposed to CNN hosting random kooks claiming they met ETs, and showing a re-creation video.

-snip

In today's news

 

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/375008-florida-school-shooting-survivor-cnn-provided-scripted-question

 

https://nypost.com/2018/02/22/shooting-survivor-claims-cnn-scripted-questions-for-town-hall-meeting/

 

http://freebeacon.com/politics/shooting-survivor-cnn-denied-question-employing-veterans-armed-security-guards-gave-scripted-question/

 

https://www.newsmax.com/us/shooting-survivors-cnn-town-hall/2018/02/22/id/844784/

 

http://www.wnd.com/2018/02/student-cnn-gave-me-scripted-questions/

 

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2018/02/22/parkland-jrotc-hero-skips-cnn-townhall-network-scripted-questions-answers-605701

[TheUzu]

1 hour ago, Delicieuxz said:

Here is Twitter's criteria for establishing whether an account is Russian or not:

 

https://www.rt.com/usa/407896-black-activist-twitter-russia-ban/

https://www.rt.com/uk/409967-russian-troll-scottish-guard/

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/408582-twitter-russian-bot-madness/

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/8x5mma/twitter-told-congress-this-random-american-is-a-russian-propaganda-troll

https://russia-insider.com/en/charge-invisible-army-kremlin-trolls/ri22111

 

 

 

What all these people losing their accounts over false accusations of being Russian (why is that even a thing to accused of? - that's McCarthyism, and is the same thing as racism), is that the numbers supposed Russia bots reported by Twitter are hyper-inflated.

 

I wonder if even 1/2 of the figure Twitter reported as being Russian bots were Russian or bots. And I personally would not be surprised if not even 1/4, or even much less of them were what they have been alleged by Twitter to be.

 

 

Most of the news that people in the West watch is either state-owned or funded. Most are just not aware of it, and have been brainwashed to treat "state-owned" and "state-funded" as buzzwords to get triggered by.

 

At least RT is staffed, produced, and hosted by US and UK personnel, whereas Canadian, British, US, European, state-sponsored news is typically prepared and delivered by the citizens of those countries, making those outlets far more biased.

 

If Washington Post were, instead of being staffed by US citizens, staffed by Russians, and the BBC staffed by Russians and not British citizens, then those outlets maybe would not be stuck in their self-confirming propaganda biases, and instead be more objective and similarly balanced to English RT, which is staffed by US and UK citizens, despite being Russia-owned. If you want to avoid state-owned and state-sponsored propaganda, then I recommend starting your boycott with those outlets (and CBC, France24, Euronews, Deutsche Well...), as they're far more biased in their staff composition, and in reporting quality.

There are multiple news sources in every country.

BBC has a bias

France24 has a bias

RT has a bias

 

Every news outlet has a bias, hence generally RT has a strong bias towards Russia in particular the current political party.

[Delicieuxz]

7 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

I regret to inform you that Paul Hellyer hasn't held public office since 1974 and has been a 'Random Kook' since then.

He's also 94. I wouldn't expect him to be working. He is still someone with high-level experience in related fields, who has opinions that could be interesting to hear. RT did an interview with a former government official whose work with the government could have directly helped form his views concerning aliens. On the other hand, CNN and BBC hyped homemade alien videos. Obviously, one presentation is classier and has more merit to it than the others.

 

Your point turned out to be a non-point, and has instead provided avenue to show that RT is better than CNN and BBC even when it comes to discussing aliens.

[AshleyAshes]

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

He's also 94. I wouldn't expect him to be working. He is still someone with high-level experience in related fields, who has opinions that could be interesting to hear. RT did an interview with a former government official. On the other hand, CNN and BBC hyped homemade alien videos. Obviously, one presentation is classier than the other example.

 

Your point turns out to be a non-point, and you have provided avenue to show that RT is better than CNN and BBC even when it comes to topic of aliens.

I just want you to know that it gives me great delight that I have managed to drive another human being into trying to argue, in all seriousness, 'what is the most legitimate way for a news agency report on extraterrestrials'.

[Nicnac]

8 hours ago, mr moose said:

My, what a tangled mess it all is.   No you can't have your cake and eat it too. 

 

I've been saying for along time that social media is a cancer that ruins the flow of real information.  Social media is just that, social, don't allow politics or business to use twitter or facebook and half your battle is won.

that is actually a really simple solution and I like it more and more the longer I think about it. You are absolutely right!

[Sauron]

Honestly I don't get why people insist on using social networks, there is so much rotten going on all the time and at best you're going to get a load of someone else's business in return for sticking through it.

 

Smaller communities such as this forum are so much better... nobody feels the need of shouting out their name, residence and everyday lives at people here.

1 hour ago, Jbonn386 said:

I thought twitter was only used for entering giveaways?

That would be the only legitimate use for it, yes.

1 hour ago, imreloadin said:

I'd say that drugs are a rung above Twitter and social media on the ladder of life wasting activities because they at least get you high

They also get you killed in most cases  

7 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

The internet is the last place where you have have some kind of free speech,but you're quick to accuse me of being right wing. People get their twitter accounts deleted for nothing at all already.

By that logic all the mainstream media that also posts their biased articles to twitter shouldn't be allowed either,which I would agree with.

The issue is that twitter tries to satisfy everyone and manages to satisfy exactly nobody in the process. It makes sense for private websites to have a code of conduct. What doesn't make sense is for such a website to present itself like the equivalent of a pub where you can talk with whomever about whatever and then whip out the banhammer.

[Monkey Dust]

Well they wanted to purge the bots, using an algorithm is the only way to do that, and algorithms are over zealous. Anyone really surprised?  

 

Also weren't they rather than just banning, they were asking the account holder to call them to verify that they were human beings?

[Brooksie359]

5 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

That's true with basically all media sources -- they all push their own personal biases and agendas rather than being impartial, which almost always leads to one-sided stories. 

It's basically impossible to be unbiased even when trying not to. Now there is a spectrum though so there is some distinction. 

[cj09beira]

i think we are in a time where things must be done to prevent giant corporations from having complete control over information, i think these companies should  be seen the same way that we see electricity and water providers, they must not dictate how you use it unless its a crime somehow, if nothing is done to uphold free speech truth wont last long and the only thing left will be propaganda