Twitter removes verified status from controversial users

[Deleted]

Good about time Twitter

So now Twitter can control which opinions are allowed and which are not? That totally doesn't sound like fascism.

[Deleted]

So now Twitter can control which opinions are allowed and which are not? That totally doesn't sound like fascism.

You see the irony in saying this on here don't you?

[Teevo]

So when do we ban the women users that talk about killing white guys? Or ostracizing them from society? Or all the users that condone violence against right wingers?

I remember it being commented that this kind of talk is "whataboutism" in another thread, but I've seen these kind of tweets. If evidence exists of it, then it's not whataboutism.

That being said, as long as we're banning assholes on either side, I'm all for it. Fuck those racist pricks.

[snplisk]

MMO-C doesn't apply the same rules differently, generally. The problem is less the rules and more that they aren't applied equally.

Saying "Fuck all white men" and "Fuck all black men" here will both get you infracted, but that's not the case on Twitter.

Even if it were the case on MMO-C, which it is sometimes if we're being honest, it still wouldn't be the same because Twitter (like Google, Facebook, etc...) has become an absolute monopoly that, in combination with the others, form the foundation of our modern technology-based society. This kind of blatant partisanship on display by said companies, while being in the position that they're in, only serves to exacerbate and hasten the division between people on the political spectrum. It is eroding the fundamental aspect of society: social cohesion.

[satimy]

It would be one thing if twitter was impartial about "hate speech" but you can be black and threaten to kill white people and thhey wont do anything. Meanwhile talking about actual real life issues is "racist" and "taboo". I guess that's what we should expect from the self proclaimed intellectual class of phds in black and gender studies. When did street smarts completely abandon the liberal brain? This new aged censorship is everything you fought against, everything that made being a liberal the positive western idea that has allowed America to flourish

[NicoWolf]

Since you put it like that, if the resident left-wing denizens of this forum are finally willing to admit that they're just a bunch of pedophile supporters, then far be it from me to withhold my earnestly held belief that pedophiles should be banned from participating in all sorts of stuff.

Since you put it like that, if the resident Jews of this forum are finally willing to admit that they're just a bunch of filthy dirty greedy slime, then far be it from me to withhold my earnestly held belief that Jews should be banned from participating in all sorts of stuff.

Since you put it like that, if the resident whites of this forum are finally willing to admit that they're just a bunch of racists, then far be it from me to withhold my earnestly held belief that racists should be banned from participating in all sorts of stuff.

Since you put it like that, if the resident feminists of this forum are finally willing to admit that they're just a bunch of man-hating fat cunts who couldn't get any in middle school, then far be it from me to withhold my earnestly held belief that feminists should be banned from participating in all sorts of stuff.

Since you put it like that, if the resident black denizens of this forum are finally willing to admit that they're just a bunch of bike-stealing crack smokers, then far be it from me to withhold my earnestly held belief that blacks should be banned from participating in all sorts of stuff.

Since you put it like that, if the resident asian denizens of this forum are finally willing to admit that they're just a bunch of slanty-eyed math wizards, then far be it from me to withhold my earnestly held belief that asians should be banned from participating in all sorts of stuff.

See how absolutes fail to hold in an argument?

I mean, go ahead, tell yourself whatever makes you feel right about all this, but it won't change the fact that being liberal or conservative is not inherently better than the other. It's no different than a christian and a muslim arguing over which one is right; both have their faith that tells them their belief is the correct one. That's the futility of all this. We're so damned focused on who is right about the inane bullshit of this forum, and make no mistake; it is bullshit. Off-Topic might as well be renamed Steaming Pile of Poorly Managed Shit because that's really all it amounts to; a bunch of whiny narcissistic keyboard warriors like Mall Security who claim they'd murder people who disagree with them and Tennisace who thinks that every single social faux pa is worthy of a social revolution. It isn't and nothing here will amount to little more than people becoming more entrenched in the ideas and perceptions they had when they came in.

Fucking pathetic.


[Infracted - Flaming]

[NicoWolf]

If Twitter wasn’t a private company you MIGHT have a point.

I posted this in the Baked Alaska Twitter thread and I'll let you take a gander:

No one is forcing people to use twitter, BUT...

Twitter is a system of influence.

Consider this: imagine a new organization that specifically filters news stories to its core audience based on opinions and information favorable to those views. This description is equally applicable to Fox and CNN alike, along with every news organization out there. They choose which stories to run and how to frame the information to present a particular view.

Twitter is no different; a system of voluntary involvement by the public that presents and filters a specific viewpoint. Now if that viewpoint is favorable to your perceptions, worldviews, and beliefs, you're likely not going to challenge it because it's reinforcing those perceptions. But what if there is important information that proves you wrong, so much so that it could detrimental to your life as well as the lives of others and this company withholds that information or shapes it in such a way that it does not appear as serious as it really is. Whether or not they are an "opt-in" system of information becomes irrelevant; it becomes a matter influence and how you are subject to that influence.

Companies such as facebook and twitter have every right as businesses to filter information, but the average person stupidly believes that somehow this filtering is done with every altruistic intention in mind; are people so stupid and mentally lazy to think that such powerful companies who actively take political stances would be "unbiased" and show information unfavorable to their positions, both political and financial?

[Chinese Bootlickers]

Here's hoping they aren't selectively blind.

Oh who am I kidding, of course they'll be selectively blind.

[Theodarzna]

Here's hoping they aren't selectively blind.

Oh who am I kidding, of course they'll be selectively blind.

Rules only matter in so far as the people enforcing said rules care to enforce them.

[runique]

I'm not a fan of either of the two examples, but anyone with a brain can see Twitter only likes it's tick on left wing, PC celebrities

The issue with "right vs. left" is that the biggest names of the far right constantly promote conspiracy theories and lies and fuel many arguments with pseudo-logic based on emotion, where as most people on the left that pull that crap are either ignored or understood to not be actual leaders of a political movement. Especially on twitter.

- - - Updated - - -

Here's hoping they aren't selectively blind.

Oh who am I kidding, of course they'll be selectively blind.

You're comparing mostly celebrities to the accounts of actual far-right political heads. I guess the leader of the right is literally a reality star celebrity though so it makes sense.

[Slybak]

**Gibberish Omitted**

I'll go out on a limb and propose that "fascists are bad" is pretty reliable as far as absolutes go.

- - - Updated - - -

*yawn* Sorry, but it's not a government run entity. They have no more obligation to give everyone a voice than any news network. You can't go demand time on Fox News right now, why should you be allowed to demand time on Twitter?

Its easier to believe that Twitter and Facebook (and YouTube) are part of some vast Jewish left-wing I definitely meant left-wing conspiracy to silence the noble right-wing than it is to believe that Twitter and Facebook are just corporations looking to monetize their platforms via third-party advertising, and that an overwhelming number of advertisers consider relying on platforms where right-wingers can blather on about white genocide or feminazis to be detrimental to their bottom line.

Its easier to believe that you're being silenced than it is to believe that your opinions are just dogshit and no one wants to listen to you.

[Slybak]

There is so much retarded about this I don't even know where to begin.

You can begin with fucking your own mother.

(Infracted) ~ Entirely inappropriate

Okay Uh let's see first of all you equated anyone thinking that censorship is bad to Nazi conspiracy theorists that think the Jews run everyone, super classy.

If you don't want to be lumped in with a bunch of reactionary antisemitic vermin, stop sticking up for reactionary antisemitic vermin. This isn't rocket science. Most of you fuckin people aren't even giving the perfunctory "let me just hold my nose for a minute while I defend the sacred rights of ethnic-cleansing enthusiasts" canard that dipshit Useful Idiot "centrists" like David Rubin regularly deploy.

Secondly of course advertisers don't want hateful assholes, but that applies to both ends of the political spectrum... So it doesn't really make sense that if this was a purge to help ad revenue they wouldn't also ban hateful left-wingers.

Its possible... and I know its a stretch here but stay with me... that the 10 people who retweeted UNKLE BUKK's "WHITE PEOPLE KAN DIE KUZ" are less representative of the Twitter left than the 80,000 people who follow Richard Spencer are to the Twitter right, and that the former isn't nearly as big of a problem for advertisers than the latter.

Third of all you said above that these companies were silencing these hateful people... and then right afterwards implied they aren't being silenced, it's just that nobody wants to listen to them... so which is it?

That the extent to which right-wing ideologues are being "silenced" on private commercial platforms is the extent to which right-wing ideologies are considered remarkably vile by a majority of potential consumers who use those platforms. Its not hard to understand. There just aren't many customers for pre-packaged dogshit.

Oh and fourth jesus fucking christ dude, critical thinking skills. Not everyone who disagrees with you is a neo-nazi meme.

You do know the activity of the people who were banned and de-verified, right? How many times does Tim Gionet have to post pictures of people he doesn't like in gas chambers or chant the 14 words before it gets through your thick head that maybe... just maybe... he's a bit Nazi-ish? How many literal Neo-Nazi rallies does Jason Kessler have to organize before it dawns on you that his primary ideological focus isn't tax policy or the proper level of business regulation? This isn't a mystery for the ages.

[Ragedaug]

Fascists and bigots are welcome to create their own Twitter and call it Twatters

Everyone who disagrees with adam86shadow is a fascist bigot...got it.

[NicoWolf]

I'll go out on a limb and propose that "fascists are bad" is pretty reliable as far as absolutes go.

So...instead of actually addressing the issue of defining people according to your personal perceptions, you decide to address something not being debated?

But, in the spirit of your logic, I'll just go with all Liberals support pedophiles, seeing as you chose not to debate it.

So, how does it feel to support pedophiles?

[Ragedaug]

I posted this in the Baked Alaska Twitter thread and I'll let you take a gander:

No one is forcing people to use twitter, BUT...

Twitter is a system of influence.

Consider this: imagine a new organization that specifically filters news stories to its core audience based on opinions and information favorable to those views. This description is equally applicable to Fox and CNN alike, along with every news organization out there. They choose which stories to run and how to frame the information to present a particular view.

Twitter is no different; a system of voluntary involvement by the public that presents and filters a specific viewpoint. Now if that viewpoint is favorable to your perceptions, worldviews, and beliefs, you're likely not going to challenge it because it's reinforcing those perceptions. But what if there is important information that proves you wrong, so much so that it could detrimental to your life as well as the lives of others and this company withholds that information or shapes it in such a way that it does not appear as serious as it really is. Whether or not they are an "opt-in" system of information becomes irrelevant; it becomes a matter influence and how you are subject to that influence.

Companies such as facebook and twitter have every right as businesses to filter information, but the average person stupidly believes that somehow this filtering is done with every altruistic intention in mind; are people so stupid and mentally lazy to think that such powerful companies who actively take political stances would be "unbiased" and show information unfavorable to their positions, both political and financial?

I just wish they'd be up front with their biases. Too many people are too stupid to know that anyone who says "I have no biases" is probably the most biased person you'll meet that day. So I understand why they don't say it...'cause the stupid people and what not.

[Orbitus]

Maybe Twitter should distance themselves from these 2 while they're at it. Oh wait. Their bias is already showing.

Does that mean they should ban Trump? Since he still has 14 women that have allegations making their way through court. Or do you really want to die on this bullshit hill?

[NicoWolf]

*yawn* Sorry, but it's not a government run entity. They have no more obligation to give everyone a voice than any news network. You can't go demand time on Fox News right now, why should you be allowed to demand time on Twitter?

Didn't say anyone had the right to demand time on a private corporation; not the argument being presented either.

The issue is a concern for objectivity in how information is distributed. If someone comes along and says 2+2=3, a fact we all know to be objectively wrong, and yet twitter shuts down all disproving statements to the contrary, the only information being shown to people is factually wrong. That's the issue I'm focusing on; the objectivity and verifiable authenticity of distributed information. The moment you shape information to fit a certain perspective, that information is no longer factually sound; it becomes an opinion.

This is important because entities like twitter and facebook transcend the usual definition we apply to a private organization. They are in the business of social media, which is about the transmission of data. If a company chooses to withhold information from its users about certain issues that they need to be aware of, that is unethical and worthy of consideration in how those businesses should be allowed to control the flow of information. If Facebook and Twitter were liberal-only websites, then sure, let them control the flow of data to be restricted to liberal information only, but it isn't; its open to everyone.

With Net Neutrality going the way of the dodo here soon, it won't matter much, though. You may have to switch internet providers based on what sites they allow you to visit. Imagine having to pay extra to visit this site because it's not the approved list of things you can visit? But hey, its not a government website, so why should that matter, right?

- - - Updated - - -

I just wish they'd be up front with their biases. Too many people are too stupid to know that anyone who says "I have no biases" is probably the most biased person you'll meet that day. So I understand why they don't say it...'cause the stupid people and what not.

Because if they did, they would lose so many subscribers so quickly. They can't be outright honest about their biases so easily. Same reason this forum sin't honest about how its biases are presented. Its the reason certain subjects that paint those biases in a negative light can't be discussed, but I won't risk going further on that; we're not allowed to talk about it.

[Orbitus]

https://imgur.com/a/hRT59

Goes against their rules and guidelines.

What was that in reply to? Eliminating them from what? The planet? Or a competition? That is entirely suggestive there without the rest of the context of the thread.

[Garnier Fructis]

Fuck ethnonationalists.

[primalmatter]

Its just how the cookie crumbles.

Seasons change and ideologies raise and fall.