Twitter suspends account of Breitbart "tech" editor

[urasim]

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

Twitter is special because reasons! Can you explain ANY of your positions?

[sarahtasher]

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..

List an US comedy that did better than 50 million on the opening.

That the movie is bad and won't be profitable is not the question, BTW.

[Kraenen]

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?

Completely missing the point...

[BattleSaint]

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

what people? in what specific and precise circumstances?. I will again point out that incitement to violence and/or direct threats of violence are EXCEPTIONS to free speech. For example the Islamic Imam in Orlando that preached that gays "should be killed" out of compassion,that is an example of "incitement". Being an asshole,jerk or troll is not important in the grand scheme of things and should not be censored. Harassment is also not protected speech. harassment is clearly defined at least in the U.S. as it does cause discernable/measurable harm. Speech should be as unrestricted as humanly possible and the vague concepts of "offense" or "hurt feelings" should not be the standard.

[Kronik85]

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

Indeed, one person with a gun won't fell a nation. One person with a an idea and the tools to communicate it can and have toppled them. I just find all this ludicrous internet tough guy posturing hilarious. No one ever said anything that upset you (I don't mean you btw)? Fuck off lol, I can smell the bullshit through my monitor.

- - - Updated - - -

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.

Never argued otherwise, see above.

[Mafic]

List an US comedy that did better than 50 million on the opening.

That the movie is bad and won't be profitable is not the question, BTW.

Deadpool.

Boom.

Ghostbusters was a failure for Sony. If they were scared of continuing Amazing Spiderman it is not likely Ghostbusters will receive a sequel. Especially since Ghostbusters will not be shown in China.

[Easo]

what people? in what specific and precise circumstances?. I will again point out that incitement to violence and/or direct threats of violence are EXCEPTIONS to free speech. For example the Islamic Imam in Orlando that preached that gays "should be killed" out of compassion,that is an example of "incitement". Being an asshole,jerk or troll is not important in the grand scheme of things and should not be censored. Harassment is also not protected speech. harassment is clearly defined at least in the U.S. as it does cause discernable/measurable harm. Speech should be as unrestricted as humanly possible and the vague concepts of "offense" or "hurt feelings" should not be the standard.

I have no words to even argue. Ok, you win, go ahead and believe that words can't hurt. xD

[Dug]

Deadpool.

It also has Marvel slapped on it. They could record wet dog shit drying in the hot sun for 3 hours and so long as its Marvel people will come to see it.

[Sky High]

Twitter is special because reasons! Can you explain ANY of your positions?

it's built from the ground up to be a site where messages get passed around and responded to. he didn't write an article he didn't even make a blog post (as far as I'm aware) in response. he put it on a site where it was 100% going to be passed around and responded to by him, his followers, and other people. also not sure why my position, if any needs to be fully explained to you. my opinion on the matter is here for you to read.

[BattleSaint]

Over time, the corrosive nature can spread and drive away users or discourage new users from joining via reputation. It's not about any individual instance in and of itself. I'm not suggesting it necessarily happens, but I think it's a legitimate concern on the part of the business. I also don't think it's even a little bit damaging to free speech to exercise one's property rights, unless they try to stop you from being able to exercise your right anywhere, even beyond the scope of their own property. Your vision of "free speech" is not something that can reasonably exist in the real world, nor is it desirable that it should, as it not only likely has a contradiction embedded in it (depending on the exact parameters you have in mind), but is little more than a request that nobody be responsible for themselves, even when their speech goes beyond simple ideas and moves into antagonism and directly attacking (I do not mean mere criticism here) others.

you know what? i find this to be a thoughtful and engaging opinion on the issue. It has me rethinking my position on the matter somewhat. I still doubt the concept of "corrosion" heavily and i personally feel that "directly attacking" another poster isn't a good enough reason per se for censorship but i appreciate your opinion and it has given me food for thought. Free speech is a delicate balancing act and i tend to err on the side of more speech regardless of its "quality" i guess you could say.

[urasim]

List an US comedy that did better than 50 million on the opening.

That the movie is bad and won't be profitable is not the question, BTW.

1989 Ghostbusters II $56,263,557. HAHAHAA! Omg, that's funny.

Finding Dory 2016 $54,746,405 opening day.

1987 Beverly Hills Cop II $54,881,246.

[BattleSaint]

I have no words to even argue. Ok, you win, go ahead and believe that words can't hurt. xD

thank you i will continue to believe just that as it is objectively so. With the noted exceptions of course. I think that this statement i made earlier is entirely reasonable:

Speech should be as unrestricted as humanly possible and the vague concepts of "offense" or "hurt feelings" should not be the standard.

[urasim]

it's built from the ground up to be a site where messages get passed around and responded to. he didn't write an article he didn't even make a blog post (as far as I'm aware) in response. he put it on a site where it was 100% going to be passed around and responded to by him, his followers, and other people. also not sure why my position, if any needs to be fully explained to you. my opinion on the matter is here for you to read.

Almost like a forum or facebook is designed to pass messages around? You're really not making a good argument here.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

actually yes when you disagree with an action that another person/people or company makes ,you as a free person have the right to speak out and address that issue,give your own opinion and i know God forbid OPPOSE the action taken to silence someone for a dumb ass reason. I dont give a shit if Twitter is a private company. Anyone organization that imposes stupid rules on speech is violating the principles of free speech/thought and should be opposed and fought against.

So, if a McDonalds customer starts harassing other Mcdonald's Customers...McDonalds would be violating the principles of free speech by telling the harasser that he/she is no longer welcome in their establishment?

[urasim]

It also has Marvel slapped on it. They could record wet dog shit drying in the hot sun for 3 hours and so long as its Marvel people will come to see it.

Is Ghostbusters a shit franchise then?

[Sky High]

Almost like a forum or facebook is designed to pass messages around? You're really not making a good argument here.

yes, and with Milo's reputation and following to say he didn't intend to create a shit storm is laughable, and like I give a fuck what you think is a good argument or not. you're floundering around this whole thread is nothing but entertainment.

[urasim]

yes, and with Milo's reputation and following to say he didn't intend to create a shit storm is laughable, and like I give a fuck what you think is a good argument or not. you're floundering around this whole thread is nothing but entertainment.

Yeah, no. I've made my case clear. You can even argue against it. You just say "he's guilty because reasons!". You haven't shown him inciting harassment at all. All you did is say he's guilty by association and he's an asshole. Well, I agree that he's an asshole, but he didn't actually do anything wrong.

[BattleSaint]

So, if a McDonalds customer starts harassing other Mcdonald's Customers...McDonalds would be violating the principles of free speech by telling the harasser that he/she is no longer welcome in their establishment?

what i described above is objectively NOT harassment. Harassment is an exception to free speech and in most Countries/Jurisdictions it is clearly defined as it can cause discernable/measurable damage. In regards to the Twitter incident it was essentially a public argument between two people and later their followers or "fans". It frankly wasn't that serious and any good lawyer could argue it didn't go on long enough or reach deeply enough into the affairs of either side to cause lasting "damage" that's actionable. Your Mcdonalds example would be harassment compounded by trespass....at least in New York where i live.

[Sky High]

Yeah, no. I've made my case clear. You can even argue against it. You just say "he's guilty because reasons!". You haven't shown him inciting harassment at all. All you did is say he's guilty by association and he's an asshole. Well, I agree that he's an asshole, but he didn't actually do anything wrong.

lol you're cute.
you're case is Milo didn't cause a shit storm even though that is his MO and he's built a following on doing so. I say that's bullshit, and that's it.

[urasim]

lol you're cute.
you're case is Milo didn't cause a shit storm even though that is his MO and he's built a following on doing so. I say that's bullshit, and that's it.

Causing a shit storm and inciting his followers to harass someone is two VERY different things.