Twitter suspends account of Breitbart "tech" editor

[PC2]

Source required.

[BattleSaint]

So I can talk about killing you because you are black p... of s...? Just to give you an example. Would you still not want to get me punished for that and cling to absolute free speech?

incitement to violence or direct threats of violence are probably the only limit on speech i would support anything short of that is open season even grossly offensive,disgusting,racist,nasty,misogynistic etc so on. Words cannot hurt you. Literally they don't hurt and your precious feelings don't matter.

[Kronik85]

incitement to violence or direct threats of violence are probably the only limit on speech i would support anything short of that is open season even grossly offensive,disgusting,racist,nasty,misogynistic etc so on. Words cannot hurt you. Literally they don't hurt and your precious feelings don't matter.

Ummm words do hurt people and I've no idea why you would claim otherwise. Some guy once said the pen was mighter than the sword after all.

[Easo]

incitement to violence or direct threats of violence are probably the only limit on speech i would support anything short of that is open season even grossly offensive,disgusting,racist,nasty,misogynistic etc so on. Words cannot hurt you. Literally they don't hurt and your precious feelings don't matter.

Really? They don't? I guess all those people have been imagining it all the time during mankind's history.

[BattleSaint]

Because the business is in the business of making money, not providing people with a platform to use however they wish. What they have to be afraid of is lost revenue through lost traffic or whatever it is that makes Twitter their money. Your feelings of entitlement are irrelevant.

oh i acknowledge that these restrictions imposed are legal etc. i just think it's unfortunate and entirely contrary to the principles of free speech and thought. I also doubt that any platform loses or has lost money because two knuckleheads on a forum engaged in a flame war or hurt each other's feelings. The idea of free speech and its defense should be far more important than money. I know that's idealistic but there it is.

[PC2]

Ummm words do hurt people and I've no idea why you would claim otherwise. Some guy once said the pen was mighter than the sword after all.

You dont have a right to not be emotionally hurt.

You do have a right to not be damaged, which is why we already have all the laws and legal precedents set in place. You have to specifically prove the speech unduly damaged you.

[Sky High]

You don't have an argument beside "I don't like him, thus he's guilty!".

The only reason you're not convinced of it is because you aren't actually educated on the topic. You've said it yourself that you're to damn intellectually lazy, and that proven further with the "he's guilty because reasons". You're just another people jumping on the bandwagon with no clue what's going on.

no I know Milo for being a shit stirer and to say otherwise is hilarious.

as I said perviously the other chick is guilty too but you gave me some tripe about her not being milo, so that point doesn't mean anything I guess? lol. like it's really hard to figure out the situation, you mistake laziness for just not giving a fuck. there have been others that explained why they think he was banned, but you are too biased to take those examples into consideration. lol if you say so champ, hope it makes you feel better.

[Raidosounds]

Ummm words do hurt people and I've no idea why you would claim otherwise. Some guy once said the pen was mighter than the sword after all.

That "guy" was Edward Bulwer-Lytton, and it's meant to be an "indicating that communication, or in some interpretations, administrative power or advocacy of an independent press, is a more effective tool than direct violence." Which is rather ironic on this conversation haha

[Dug]

You dont have a right to not be emotionally hurt.

You do have a right to not be damaged, which is why we already have all the laws and legal precedents set in place. You do have to specifically prove the speech unduly damaged you.

Doctored images of you saying racist/anti-semetic/homophobic things are hurtful. They damage your social image and employment/future employment.

[urasim]

This really isn't an appropriate source when it has already been shown people have fabricated and distributed tweets attributed to her for the purpose of damaging her reputation. Doing as was done earlier and directly linking the tweets is.

Source required.

How many fucking times does it need to be linked?

https://twitter.com/Lesdoggg/status/...rc=twsrc%5Etfw
https://twitter.com/Lesdoggg/status/...rc=twsrc%5Etfw
https://twitter.com/Lesdoggg/status/...rc=twsrc%5Etfw
https://twitter.com/Lesdoggg/status/...rc=twsrc%5Etfw
https://twitter.com/Lesdoggg/status/...rc=twsrc%5Etfw
https://twitter.com/Lesdoggg/status/755218642674020352

[BattleSaint]

Okay but you agree to the rules when you use the website. Don't like it? No problem. suck it etc. Maybe 4chan is more up your alley they're very lax on the rules there

an entirely fair position for you to hold. I disagree wholeheartedly,i find it bizarre that any human being could support censorship at any level. I just don't "get it" it doesn't compute. I fully acknowledge the legality of private platforms to have standards,TOS etc i just philosophically oppose the concept.

[urasim]

no I know Milo for being a shit stirer and to say otherwise is hillarious.

as I said perviously the other chick is guilty too but you gave me some tripe about her not being milo, so that point doesn't mean anything I guess? lol. like it's really hard to figure out the situation, you mistake laziness for just not giving a fuck. there have been others that explained why they think he was banned, but you are too biased to take those examples into consideration. lol if you say so champ, hope it makes you feel better.

Talking shit to other people does not mean he told his followers to harass someone. That's what it means to incite harassment.

[PC2]

Doctored images of you saying racist/anti-semetic/homophobic things are hurtful. They damage your social image and employment/future employment.

Then Leslie will be able to prove in court that any damages were from speech that did not accurately represent her. The system works, the evidence has to be legit.

[Dug]

Then Leslie will be able to prove in court that those damages were from speech that did not accurately represent her. The system works, the evidence has to be legit.

And now that's opening up another can of worms in forcing someone to dish out money for legal services to salvage their reputation. You still won't answer my question of if you harass someone to the point of them deleting their account/quitting/suicide WHATEVER are you not censoring them? Silencing them?

[PC2]

And now that's opening up another can of worms in forcing someone to dish out money for legal services to salvage their reputation. You still won't answer my question of if you harass someone to the point of them deleting their account/quitting/suicide WHATEVER are you not censoring them? Silencing them?

Yeah maybe, if most of the language itself implies it is ment to chase her away, that is silencing. If it is through mass posting of critical opinions I do not see that as silencing.

[Mafic]

Yes, it's totally and actually true that lack of originality is because of wumn in Hollywood.

2016 movies like ''Independance Day Resurgence'' and ''Star Trek Beyond'' are totally new properties.

- - - Updated - - -



No. It had a mediocre opening, but far from being a disaster.

It didn't even have a mediocre opening it was below average compared to initial projections which makes it a disaster for Sony. It is going to drop 60% easily on the second weekend facing Ice Age and ST..

[Sky High]

Talking shit to other people does not mean he told his followers to harass someone. That's what it means to incite harassment.

on any platform other than twitter, I might buy that.

[Dug]

Yeah maybe, if most of the language itself implies it is ment to chase her away, that is silencing. If it is through mass posting of critical opinions I do not see that as silencing.

Pictures of gorillas, calling her a gorilla and semen covered photographs are not "critical opinions" and there's no Discourse™ to be found. We're talking about immature harassment here not somebody who won't let an argument go

[urasim]

I'm not sure why you quoted me. I clearly mentioned the fact that they had been linked. I simply said the picture was an inappropriate source for someone asking for proof that this had happened.

Then ignore that post? You're not the only one I quoted there.

Not sure why you're complaining that I quoted you. Am I not allowed to do that?

[unfilteredJW]

Pictures of gorillas, calling her a gorilla and semen covered photographs are not "critical opinions" and there's no Discourse™ to be found. We're talking about immature harassment here not somebody who won't let an argument go

When I wrote "Suzy sucks real good" on the bathroom wall it wasn't a critical opinion?

You wound me.