Milo Yiannopoulos banned from Twitter.

[Imperializt Russia]

You heard it here first, folks. The act of banning people on a website is the first step towards dictatorship.

I mean, how can you not see the clear path?

Alright. Maybe I used my words wrong. I'm mostly talking about how the Regressive Left have been acting up by censoring anything they don't agree with...

Or maybe I'm just being stupid...

...
I'm not sure you know how censorship or free speech works.
In fact, I know you don't know how they work.

Because Milo can still say what he wants. Anywhere he likes that isn't Twitter. He is not censored, his free speech is not at risk.

He has no right to demand Twitter gives him a platform.

[Minzerland]

You might as well repeal the First Amendment, because someone called me an 'idiot'.

Well, if a pejorative can cause unignorable damage to the mental state of the victim of said name calling; then why do we allow people to say such things?

[Alvecia]

Well, if a pejorative can cause unignorable damage to the mental state of the victim of said name calling; then why do we allow people to say such things?

I suppose that you're of the opinion that verbal abuse towards children should not be counted as child abuse?

[Hirota]

You're the one claiming he's being punished for not toeing the party line.

I'm arguing there's no evidence he broke their terms of service, that their terms of service are routinely broken by people who align with their politics without any action on their part, that their anti-conservative bias is well known, and that as a result the only conclusion to be made is either that they made a mistake, or are silencing opposition.

As evidence, I submit some of twitters "Trust & safety council":
Anita Sarkessian has been mentioned on this thread multiple times. I'm not going to comment on if she is really as bad as Milo, but Feminist Frequency is absolutely in the "disagreement is harassment" camp:

(SOURCE)

Randi Harper is also a member of the council, and has advocated death threats, doxxing, harassment (at least using her fellow members definition of harassment). It's worth noting pointing out this harassment on Twitter leads to account suspensions.

And this isn't even the first time this has happened.

People are correct that as a private organisation Twitter is free to do as they wish, nonetheless there is systematic and endemic double standards within twitter where ones account is suspended or given a free pass based upon their ideology.

[Ostroeuropa]

Alright. Maybe I used my words wrong. I'm mostly talking about how the Regressive Left have been acting up by censoring anything they don't agree with...

Or maybe I'm just being stupid...

...
I'm not sure you know how censorship or free speech works.
In fact, I know you don't know how they work.

Because Milo can still say what he wants. Anywhere he likes that isn't Twitter. He is not censored, his free speech is not at risk.

He has no right to demand Twitter gives him a platform.

The blurring of the lines due to corporatism and the revolving door between legislative government and corporate oligarchy means this is debatable, I would say.

One can easily make the argument that we are governed by corporations, at which point, they are legally obligated to observe our human rights.

[Jochizyd Republic]

I didn't see that one, sorry. Where is it?

And no. I hate racism against whites. BLM does it and Liberals in general do it all the time. I'm not supportive of it.

I reckon' it was this post: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=384351&p=29392835&sid=2ccd35e8e9d81d07ac891bc8b221af8c#p29392835

Wow. That's fucked up.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

That's great but what I want to know is if he was actually being racist, i.e. was he specifically saying things that discriminated that person on the basis of race, or was he banned for arguing against someone of a different race?

Let me clarify just a bit. Was he banned for racism or banned for arguing against someone, winning, and then being accused of racism on the basis the person was a different skin color because he lost?

Just from what I recall having read an article about it the other day, for one, he flat-out said a black female actress in the new Ghostbusters movie was shit at her job and only got it because she was black. This being an entirely unevidenced accusation. He basically went on a sickeningly childish and aggressive rant against this woman for no conceivable reason apart from his own racism, and ended up siccing his entire twitter following on the poor girl.

Which is fucked up. Twitter is a private company that is totally entitled to ban someone repeatedly and egregiously violating their terms of service. That's how it works.

And either way it happened I don't really care. People should be allowed to hold any political view they please so long as the person doesn't cause any direct harm to an individual because of it.

Twitter isn't the fucking Inquisition. They in no way demanded he change his views. His views didn't get him banned.

If they stay within the realm of the law, i.e. not going out and lynching blacks then that person should be allowed to hate blacks all they want.

There is a reason "incitement to riot" is a crime.

For instance: You're aware Charles Manson never committed a single murder? Do you think he should be walking free? He never directly harmed anyone...

[Imperializt Russia]

Melissa McCarthy is obese. Leslie Jones is not. She's muscular, no doubt, and solidly built, but she's not obese. Please actually know which person is being discussed before you attempt to add to the conversation.

She appears to me as at least slitghly obese. She's overweight, that's for sure. She definitely have some meat on her bones, it's like her body is actively fighting thin privilege.

Altho I tried to google her BMi, but couldn't find it on the first page so I concede that point. Sorry. She's not fat. She's perfectly healthy.

What is this.

This is enough internet for today.

[Jochizyd Republic]

I believe so.

I'm actually being honest when I say I agree. I believe you should be able to do that, without legal repercussions.

I also believe the black family should be entitled to retaliate with whatever action/degree of force necessary to stop you - without having to worry about legal repercussion. Which is not to say I advocate such retaliation (much less your initial act).

I don't understand why anyone would want a world like this.
Just opens up for ways for the weak to be exploited.

But maybe that's for another day.

[Minzerland]

You might as well repeal the First Amendment, because someone called me an 'idiot'.

Are you being harassed? You should report that to the mods, it's against this sites rules as well.

No. However, you said that it can cause 'unignorable damage but not of the physical variety', to paraphrase; because someone can experience someone calling them an 'idiot'. Couldn't that cause 'unignorable damage but not of the physical variety'? Or is that only the result of repeated name calling?

[Costa Fierro]

Personally, I think its about time this hateful, bigoted person was banned, and hopefully other websites will follow.

Perhaps they should ban Leslie Jones too.

[Jochizyd Republic]

Yes, you're an anarchist. We get it.

I haven't been around much lately, thought you guys might've forgotten

Good to see you again tbh.

I thought things didn't seem right.

[United Dixieland Territories]

I reckon' it was this post: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=384351&p=29392835&sid=2ccd35e8e9d81d07ac891bc8b221af8c#p29392835

Wow. That's fucked up.

Yeah, days like this I wonder what my Grandpappy's Pa went through as an overseer. Mind you, not from some sort of unconscionable "ENSLAVE EM' ALL" malarkey; because Good Lord, the KKK is seven types of retarded squared; I'm just curious about what sorts' a crap he witnessed from a behavioral analysis standpoint. Did this sort of mentality spawn from Jim Crow Laws being overbearing, or did it have it's roots in the way back?

[Ragnarum]

Personally, I think its about time this hateful, bigoted person was banned, and hopefully other websites will follow.

Perhaps they should ban Leslie Jones too.

On the contrary, this is the post which got Milo banned

[Alvecia]

Are you being harassed? You should report that to the mods, it's against this sites rules as well.

No. However, you said that it can cause 'unimaginable damage but not of the physical variety', to paraphrase; because someone can experience someone calling them an 'idiot'. Couldn't that cause 'unimaginable damage of the unimaginable variety'?

Did I say unimaginable?

Because punching somebody causes actual, unignoreable harm. If I harass someone on the internet (I have better things to do with my time, however),, you can block me. And if I go down the street behind you, insulting you yet posing no threat, you can ignore me. Punching someone causes harm; insulting them does not.

Yet harassment on the internet can still cause unignorable harm. Not outwardly physical, but harm nonetheless.

The difference between an insult and harassment in this example is the difference between a poke and a punch.

[Costa Fierro]

Perhaps they should ban Leslie Jones too.

On the contrary, this is the post which got Milo banned

That looks fairly tame compared to some of the bile you find on Twitter.

[Alvecia]

Perhaps they should ban Leslie Jones too.

On the contrary, this is the post which got Milo banned

Is that what Twitter specified?

[Imperializt Russia]

...
I'm not sure you know how censorship or free speech works.
In fact, I know you don't know how they work.

Because Milo can still say what he wants. Anywhere he likes that isn't Twitter. He is not censored, his free speech is not at risk.

He has no right to demand Twitter gives him a platform.

The blurring of the lines due to corporatism and the revolving door between legislative government and corporate oligarchy means this is debatable, I would say.

One can easily make the argument that we are governed by corporations, at which point, they are legally obligated to observe our human rights.

Astounding.

You know, nothing's stopping Milo from setting up his own alt-right Twitter that he can't get banned from.
That is why this isn't an attack on free speech. He is not being prevented from having those views.

Why does Twitter have to give Milo a platform? It doesn't have to give me a platform.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Personally, I think its about time this hateful, bigoted person was banned, and hopefully other websites will follow.

Perhaps they should ban Leslie Jones too.

We have the context of the tweets that got Milo banned. I ask two things:

1) What was she replying to?

2) Why do you think that Milo was banned for racism, when we've repeatedly shown that he was banned for participating in a massive trolling campaign against Leslie Jones?

[Minzerland]

No. However, you said that it can cause 'unimaginable damage but not of the physical variety', to paraphrase; because someone can experience someone calling them an 'idiot'. Couldn't that cause 'unimaginable damage of the unimaginable variety'?

Did I say unimaginable?

Oops, that was an accident, sorry. I'll edit it.

Yet harassment on the internet can still cause unignorable harm. Not outwardly physical, but harm nonetheless.

The difference between an insult and harassment in this example is the difference between a poke and a punch.

Is it is the repeated chanting that causes the 'unignorable damage' or is it the insult (i.e idiot) that causes the 'unignorable damage'?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

On the contrary, this is the post which got Milo banned

That looks fairly tame compared to some of the bile you find on Twitter.

It wasn't the only tweet he sent that night as part of the mass harassment, nor was it the first tweet that he'd sent to specifically troll her.

[Alvecia]

Perhaps they should ban Leslie Jones too.

We have the context of the tweets that got Milo banned. I ask two things:

1) What was she replying to?

2) Why do you think that Milo was banned for racism, when we've repeatedly shown that he was banned for participating in a massive trolling campaign against Leslie Jones?

Also fair to point out that Leslie Jones quit twitter, so banning her at this point would be somewhat pointless.

[Alvecia]

Did I say unimaginable?

Oops, that was an accident, sorry. I'll edit it.

The difference between an insult and harassment in this example is the difference between a poke and a punch.

Is it is the repeated chanting that causes the 'unignorable damage' or is it the insult (i.e idiot) that causes the 'unignorable damage'?

Why does it have ot be one or the other

[Minzerland]

Oops, that was an accident, sorry. I'll edit it.


Is it is the repeated chanting that causes the 'unignorable damage' or is it the insult (i.e idiot) that causes the 'unignorable damage'?

Why does it have ot be one or the other

Well, then why do we allow people to insult others?

[Alvecia]

Why does it have ot be one or the other

Well, then why do we allow people to insult others?

Why is poking someone not considered assault?