Twitter suspends account of Breitbart "tech" editor

[KrazyK923]

And why the fuck are you all so offended by the fact that I'm sad about a gay man being banned from Twitter. Isn't that what you all are about?

Hah. Him being gay has nothing to do with the topic and is just shameless "look over there" bullcrap. He wasn't banned for being gay. He wasn't banned for being a conservative. He wasn't even banned for being an anti-SJW.

He was banned for participating in the targeted harassment of a single individual. It's not hard to understand if you're being open minded and objective.

This is part of the reason why he's a detestable individual. Whenever his shitposting-in-real-life blows up in his face, him and his supporters almost immediately yell about how a gay man is being persecuted. No, an asshole is being punished.

There's a difference.

[sarahtasher]

Just one question : if your precious ''fradom of spach'' includes the right to send death threats to actress of a movie (it's true that for a Gamergater, ''yah are an ugly ape and yah should get a bullet in duh headz'' is detailed and intrical and detailed criticism : big words and books are for girls and libural degenerates), how the hell can you ignore the incredibly crude campaign organized by manchildren to ban a fairly boring and by the numbers reboot no one asked ? Because, big surprise here, Ghostbusters 2016 is [I]also /I] protected by free speech, [I]even if your MRA sites tell you it's not./I]

[AndaliteBandit]

Milo needs to take personal responsibility for his actions and accept that there are consequences for violating the ToS he agreed to, it's that simple.

[Ragnarocket]

What does it take to be found guilty of "inciting" people to harrass someone? If a legit news organization writes an opinion piece that calls someone a nazi, and that enflames people to harrass them, is that incitement? Or does one have to specifically say "harrass them"? It seems to me, that speaking negatively about anyone is a certain level of incitement against them. It seems that the "press" gets a free pass to incite people under the guise of freedom of the press.

I've read his article that everyone claims was where he "incited" his audience to go and pester her on Twitter. He has lots of criticisms about the movie, yes, and he specifically calls out Leslie's performance at one point. But nowhere in this article does he state that he thinks she needs to be shamed or humiliated over social media.

Here it is if you don't believe me: http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/0...-ghostbusters/
Feel free to point out any part of the article you believe where he told people to go mock her, cause I sure didn't see it.

Exactly why did Milo even get drawn into this? The best I can find is that she pulled him into it first claiming that he was sending followers her way with his review, and then he replied to her misspelled tweets. I don't support any of the hate she was getting, no one deserves that...but to ban this guy off of Twitter for the reasons stated seems like a weak excuse to just ban him off of Twitter.

[AndaliteBandit]

And why the fuck are you all so offended by the fact that I'm sad about a gay man being banned from Twitter. Isn't that what you all are about?

But probably not by choice. It's slim pickens for them.

And they can parade him as their token gay friend, so there's that.

Welp. /10char

[Dug]

Personal responsibility, remember? Take that L Anti-nerds

[KrazyK923]

Exactly why did Milo even get drawn into this? The best I can find is that she pulled him into it first claiming that he was sending followers her way with his review, and then he replied to her misspelled tweets. I don't support any of the hate she was getting, no one deserves that...but to ban this guy off of Twitter for the reasons stated seems like a weak excuse to just ban him off of Twitter.

He jumped in because she had the audacity to mention his dumb review, peppered with personal insults, the worst of which were directed right at Leslie Jones herself.

And then started retweeting/tweeting these mocked up fake pictures of things Leslie supposedly said. It doesn't even matter that later on he goes "lols were those fake?" He tweeted out potentially libelous things to his 300k+ followers, a lot of whom then dogpiled onto Leslie. The unfortunate thing is that she seems to be not the most familiar with how the internet worked, and was desperately trying to get somebody to help her delete the fake tweets that she thought her account was sending out.

Of course there were other people not related to Milo or his followers participating in it. 4 chan was also a big part of it. The problem is that these idiots are individual, tiny, accounts. Accounts with <10 followers. And some of these were also banned. But there's a difference between an egg account tweeting out false pictures and a "journalist" with 300k+ followers doing exactly the same. Its a lot easier to go after the more popular person due to sheer...well, size, alone.

[Celista]

Well time will tell how permanent a permanent suspension is.

Twitter has banned one of its most notoriously contentious voices. On Tuesday evening, the microblogging service permanently suspended the account of conservative commentator Milo Yiannopoulos, a day after he incited his followers to bombard Ghostbusters star Leslie Jones with racist and demeaning tweets.

Sounds like he was rightfully banned, then? Lol @ Milo trying to paint himself to be some sort of persecuted martyr for conservative causes/freedom of speech. Is he going to storm the White House like last time, demanding his Twitter check mark back?

Sorry but this made my day, he's a troll who gets off on trolling. His political ideology is irrelevant in that regard.

[TwoNineMarine]

Hah. Him being gay has nothing to do with the topic and is just shameless "look over there" bullcrap. He wasn't banned for being gay. He wasn't banned for being a conservative. He wasn't even banned for being an anti-SJW.

He was banned for participating in the targeted harassment of a single individual. It's not hard to understand if you're being open minded and objective.

This is part of the reason why he's a detestable individual. Whenever his shitposting-in-real-life blows up in his face, him and his supporters almost immediately yell about how a gay man is being persecuted. No, an asshole is being punished.

There's a difference.

And good for them for punishing him. I really don't care.

I am simply sad that he has one less platform to use because he makes me laugh.

You can get off your high horse now. Don't want you to fall over.

[Super Friendly Kitty Cat]

Just one question : if your precious ''fradom of spach'' includes the right to send death threats to actress of a movie (it's true that for a Gamergater, ''yah are an ugly ape and yah should get a bullet in duh headz'' is detailed and intrical and detailed criticism : big words and books are for girls and libural degenerates), how the hell can you ignore the incredibly crude campaign organized by manchildren to ban a fairly boring and by the numbers reboot no one asked ? Because, big surprise here, Ghostbusters 2016 is [I]also /I] protected by free speech, [I]even if your MRA sites tell you it's not./I]

People confuse "Freedom of Speech" with the ability to say whatever they want using private websites and those websites must continue to host their words and account. There is no "Freedom of Speech" in a legal sense on Twitter. Twitter is not legally or contractually obligated to provide "Freedom of Speech". It is a private website that can police and control their website in anyway they want.

[KrazyK923]

And good for them for punishing him. I really don't care.

I am simply sad that he has one less platform to use because he makes me laugh.

You can get off your high horse now. Don't want you to fall over.

My high horse? I guess its a high horse now to expect everybody to follow the TOS regardless of which political side you lean.

Shit you got me.

[Mafic]

The SJW will throw anyone under the bus.

This is why they don't really believe in free speech.

[sarahtasher]

Leslie dared to star in a movie that MRA and MIilo have swore to destroy...and failed at (it's just a boring reboot no one asked). They are angry.

- - - Updated - - -

No please explain me advocates of free speech, please explain me how Ghostbusters 2016 is not protected by your precious and universal fradom of spach. Please explain me. That's going to be fun.

[TwoNineMarine]

My high horse? I guess its a high horse now to expect everybody to follow the TOS regardless of which political side you lean.

Shit you got me.

And he's being banned. Which is good.

Have I not made this clear?

Holy shit people are dense around here.

He violated a rule on Twitter. He is now banned. Good on Twitter for banning him according to their rules.

I am sad because he is banned (regardless of why he is banned) because I think he is funny and tend to agree with is view on things.

It has nothing to do with me thinking Twitter is being a bunch of douches or anything.

Jesus.

[AndaliteBandit]

Exactly why did Milo even get drawn into this? The best I can find is that she pulled him into it first claiming that he was sending followers her way with his review, and then he replied to her misspelled tweets. I don't support any of the hate she was getting, no one deserves that...but to ban this guy off of Twitter for the reasons stated seems like a weak excuse to just ban him off of Twitter.

He tweeted fake pictures of racist and homophobic tweets supposedly from Leslie Jones. Libel.

[Super Friendly Kitty Cat]

Leslie dared to star in a movie that MRA and MIilo have swore to destroy...and failed at (it's just a boring reboot no one asked). They are angry.

Yeah, if women are so "GRRRRRL POWER!!", can they not create, write, produce and star in their own original creations?

[Dug]

He tweeted fake pictures of racist and homophobic tweets supposedly from Leslie Jones. Libel.

Pfft, you expect him to fact check every jpg that gets thrown his way? /s

[Mafic]

Leslie dared to star in a movie that MRA and MIilo have swore to destroy...and failed at (it's just a boring reboot no one asked). They are angry.

- - - Updated - - -

No please explain me advocates of free speech, please explain me how Ghostbusters 2016 is not protected by your precious and universal fradom of spach. Please explain me. That's going to be fun.

Ghostbusters has bombed at the box office and is looking at a poor second week with Star Trek opening up along with Ice Age.

[Sky High]

Yeah, if women are so "GRRRRRL POWER!!", can they not create, write, produce and star in their own original creations?

lol, Sony wanted an easy cash grab, that is obvious.

[Super Friendly Kitty Cat]

No please explain me advocates of free speech, please explain me how Ghostbusters 2016 is not protected by your precious and universal fradom of spach. Please explain me. That's going to be fun.

What are you going on about? Who is saying Ghostbusters shouldn't be protected by the 1st Amendment?

You are saying some wild things.