Centrist Liberal Grifters Permabanned From Twitter

[Priestiality]

Twitter has permanently banned prominent anti-Trump brothers Brian and Ed Krassenstein, alleging that two of the biggest stars of #Resistance Twitter had broken the site’s rules about operating fake accounts and purchasing fake interactions with their accounts.

“The Twitter Rules apply to everyone,” a Twitter spokesperson said in a statement. “Operating multiple fake accounts and purchasing account interactions are strictly prohibited. Engaging in these behaviors will result in permanent suspension from the service.”

The suspensions are a major loss for the Krassensteins, who had used their massive Twitter followers and ability to quickly respond to tweets from Donald Trump to make themselves internet celebrities. Ed Krassenstein had roughly 925,000 followers before he was banned, while Brian Krassenstein had more than 697,000.

The brothers appeared to be unusually good at getting attention on Twitter. While the Twitter statement doesn’t explain what the Krassensteins allegedly did to illicitly promote their accounts, “fake interactions” could engage buying bots to retweet their posts, or buying fake followers to inflate their profiles on the site.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/twitte...-fake-accounts

I'm sure Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin, and the usual suspects will jump to their defence for this egregious violation of their First Amendment rights.

[Skroe]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/twitte...-fake-accounts

I'm sure Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin, and the usual suspects will jump to their defence for this egregious violation of their First Amendment rights.

The entire Twitter anti-Trump contingent is a farce. The Krassensteins, Seth Abramson, Counterchekist, Malcom Nance, Scott Dworkin, Peter Daou are all grifters. There's a few more whose names I can't remember.

Still waiting on Louise Mensch's Marshal of the Supreme Court to arrest Trump.

[bladeXcrasher]

I'm sure they will be all over this *wink wink nod nod*

[Dextroden]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/twitte...-fake-accounts

I'm sure Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin, and the usual suspects will jump to their defence for this egregious violation of their First Amendment rights.

I'm more interested in "Corporations can ban whoever they want" people suddenly getting their panties in a twist.

[Wermys]

Wait, you equate buying bots and interactions to influence a platform to the free speech rights of an individual? You're the type that would argue money in politics is speech, lmao.

Being a dishonest cunt, is bad. I despise Trump, I think the alt right live in a wierd alternate reality to what most people live in. But reguardless making excuses for those just because you agree Trump is a fucking idiot doesn't mean they should have carte blanche forgiveness when they do something like this either.

[Dextroden]

Wait, you equate buying bots and interactions to influence a platform to the free speech rights of an individual? You're the type that would argue money in politics is speech, lmao.

There are no bad tactics, just bad targets.

-Movie Bob in the Gamergate era

[Endus]

I'm more interested in "Corporations can ban whoever they want" people suddenly getting their panties in a twist.

I get that you might not have principles you stand for, but a lot of us do.

There's no reason those of us who stand up for civil rights would "get our panties in a twist" over this. The guys broke site rules, and were banned. That's how it works. Why would we defend these guys? Are you under the impression that one must defend people who are on your "side", even when the facts are against them? Because that'd say a hell of a lot more about you than anyone else.

[Polyxo]

I get that you might not have principles you stand for, but a lot of us do.

There's no reason those of us who stand up for civil rights would "get our panties in a twist" over this. The guys broke site rules, and were banned. That's how it works. Why would we defend these guys? Are you under the impression that one must defend people who are on your "side", even when the facts are against them? Because that'd say a hell of a lot more about you than anyone else.

I really don't know why everything normal, from banhammers usage, to anonymity of press sources has suddenly become shocking and extremely controversial to right wing dudes and dudettes.

[Dextroden]

I get that you might not have principles you stand for, but a lot of us do.

There's no reason those of us who stand up for civil rights would "get our panties in a twist" over this. The guys broke site rules, and were banned. That's how it works. Why would we defend these guys? Are you under the impression that one must defend people who are on your "side", even when the facts are against them? Because that'd say a hell of a lot more about you than anyone else.

Because of the OP mentioning free speech, meaning they expect someone to defend them. And I expect that people who scream "Corporations can ban anyone" wouldn't even pay attention to this.

But, they hate Trump so banning them was a no no. Hence why this thread is here.

- - - Updated - - -

Feel free to point them out.

I haven't seen any yet.

#AlternateReality ?

There in the same reality where the OP resides since he thinks free speech covers this.

[DarkTZeratul]

Because of the OP mentioning free speech, meaning they expect someone to defend them. And I expect that people who scream "Corporations can ban anyone" wouldn't even pay attention to this.

But, they hate Trump so banning them was a no no. Hence why this thread is here.

If that's what you think the OP is about, then I question your reading comprehension.

[Dextroden]

If that's what you think the OP is about, then I question your reading comprehension.

I'm sure Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin, and the usual suspects will jump to their defence for this egregious violation of their First Amendment rights.

Weird. I wonder why he said all this. I wonder why people expect people to call this a free speech violation if they don't think it is one.

Could be he's pissy #resistance got hurt.

[Dextroden]

I'm actually wondering now whether you make your arguments intentionally obtuse or if you're really unable to grasp the similarity between OP's case and the right trying to claim frozen peaches.

I feel like this is going to be wasted effort, but let me try to explain:

Typical Scenario
1. <Person> breaks the site rules by doing something incredibly offensive or something that harms the platform they're on, such as: death threats, posting hardcore porn, threatening violence, flaming, doxxing, etc.
2. Platform bans person for violation of rules
3. A certain group of people starts complaining about "Freedom of Speech".

Right-wingers on Social Media in a nutshell.

So, why didn't a right wing person make this and bitch about freedom of speech if that's the process?

Again. This wouldn't be a thread if the OP wasn't mad.

[Felya]

Because of the OP mentioning free speech, meaning they expect someone to defend them. And I expect that people who scream "Corporations can ban anyone" wouldn't even pay attention to this.

But, they hate Trump so banning them was a no no. Hence why this thread is here.

Those are all your expectations due to your bias. This thread is what happens when your expectations are not met. It’s not that you accept being wrong, you simply ignore reality and pretend it still happened.

- - - Updated - - -

So, why didn't a right wing person make this and bitch about freedom of speech if that's the process?

Again. This wouldn't be a thread if the OP wasn't mad.

This wouldn’t be a post, if you were not mad. You are projecting, because your biases are not being confirmed.

- - - Updated - - -

Weird. I wonder why he said all this. I wonder why people expect people to call this a free speech violation if they don't think it is one.

Could be he's pissy #resistance got hurt.

You are wondering why alt right is not freaking out over this and your conclusion is pissy #resistance? WTF?

[Edge-]

Because of the OP mentioning free speech, meaning they expect someone to defend them. And I expect that people who scream "Corporations can ban anyone" wouldn't even pay attention to this.

Did you read his post? Because he called out the conservative and "woke independent" "free speech warriors" on their hypocrisy, as this is what they've called "censorship" in the past.

He's not talking about progressives/liberals.

[Dextroden]

Did you read his post? Because he called out the conservative and "woke independent" "free speech warriors" on their hypocrisy, as this is what they've called "censorship" in the past.

He's not talking about progressives/liberals.

And "Corporations can ban anyone" people shouldn't care since they don't have a problem.

I guess he's mad no one came to agree they shouldn't be banned. Or his bait failed massively.

[Felya]

Did you read his post? Because he called out the conservative and "woke independent" "free speech warriors" on their hypocrisy, as this is what they've called "censorship" in the past.

He's not talking about progressives/liberals.

Because this is the reaction of “woke independents”, blame “#resistance” for altright not being consistent in their bitching about free speech.

[Dextroden]

Yep. Everyone is extremely pissed the bait failed.

[Felya]

And "Corporations can ban anyone" people shouldn't care since they don't have a problem.

I guess he's mad no one came to agree they shouldn't be banned. Or his bait failed massively.

He is mocking the alt right for not having an issue with this. You are projecting that he is mad to come to your weird conclusion.

[Edge-]

And "Corporations can ban anyone" people shouldn't care since they don't have a problem.

You're the one saying that folks like me (who agrees with that sentiment when it comes to social media companies), shouldn't care.

You're right, I don't care.

Do you have any evidence of folks like me "caring" about this hypocritically? Or is just a load of hot air because you want to take pot-shots at "leftists"?

I guess he's mad no one came to agree they shouldn't be banned. Or his bait failed massively.

Again, he's pointing out the hypocrisy of "free speech warriors" who don't actually give a damn about free speech, only the speech they like.

[Dextroden]

You're the one saying that folks like me (who agrees with that sentiment when it comes to social media companies), shouldn't care.

You're right, I don't care.

Do you have any evidence of folks like me "caring" about this hypocritically? Or is just a load of hot air because you want to take pot-shots at "leftists"?



Again, he's pointing out the hypocrisy of "free speech warriors" who don't actually give a damn about free speech, only the speech they like.

The OP existing and not being made by right wing people?

I mean, if the Uber smart Rochana is right, they should jump on this since it's totally free speech to be banned for buying bots.

- - - Updated - - -

Because they only complain about anything when it targets their own tribe.



The sarcasm in the OP's post is quite obvious.

"It's just a prank, bro!"