Milo Yiannopoulos banned from Twitter.

[The Skye Corporation]

That's a consequence of the medium. It's not the fault of users that Twitters design lends itself to groups ganging up on people. Is there any evidence milo incited this? No.

Is there any evidence he organized it? No.

All there is, is Twitter doing what Twitter does, but since it's a SocJus victim this time, they act outraged and start banning people.

"Only WE can mob people! Not you!"

I agree that there are many more people who probably should be banned from twitter. People on all sides of the political spectrum. Doxxing, harassment and the sort of widespread ugliness that we see flare up there all the time are reaching ridiculous levels. I can't speak to Milo specifically, I find everything he stands for reprehensible so I ignore him and his lot as much as possible. Really was just saying that 'poking' can and should be considered assault when performed en mass and for a sustained period.

[Imperializt Russia]

To me it seemed like you were saying Twitter don't ban so-called Islamic State recruiters because they don't challenge 'soc-jus ideology', but are happy to ban Milo because he does.

That appears to be the case yes.
I'd say it's outright proven that Twitter simply doesn't rank organized international violent terrorist activity on their site as a big issue compared to someone mocking feminists and BLM. Why else would Milo receive action before ISIS?

When you look at whos on their committee, it's fairly obvious why this has become the case.

I wouldn't say that they support ISIS. Just that they don't care.

I'd be interested in seeing how you arrive at the conclusion that IS does not "challenge soc-jus ideology".

Because that sounds fascinating.

[Ostroeuropa]

That's a consequence of the medium. It's not the fault of users that Twitters design lends itself to groups ganging up on people. Is there any evidence milo incited this? No.

Is there any evidence he organized it? No.

All there is, is Twitter doing what Twitter does, but since it's a SocJus victim this time, they act outraged and start banning people.

"Only WE can mob people! Not you!"

I agree that there are many more people who probably should be banned from twitter. People on all sides of the political spectrum. Doxxing, harassment and the sort of widespread ugliness that we see flare up there all the time are reaching ridiculous levels. I can't speak to Milo specifically, I find everything he stands for reprehensible so I ignore him and his lot as much as possible. Really was just saying that 'poking' can and should be considered assault when performed en mass and for a sustained period.

Which is why if you made a device that allowed people to long-distance poke someone, it might be worth thinking "hey, maybe this is a bad idea."

[Wolfmanne2]

To me it seemed like you were saying Twitter don't ban so-called Islamic State recruiters because they don't challenge 'soc-jus ideology', but are happy to ban Milo because he does.

That appears to be the case yes.
I'd say it's outright proven that Twitter simply doesn't rank organized international violent terrorist activity on their site as a big issue compared to someone mocking feminists and BLM. Why else would Milo receive action before ISIS?

When you look at whos on their committee, it's fairly obvious why this has become the case.

I wouldn't say that they support ISIS. Just that they don't care.

Ok.

[The Skye Corporation]

I agree that there are many more people who probably should be banned from twitter. People on all sides of the political spectrum. Doxxing, harassment and the sort of widespread ugliness that we see flare up there all the time are reaching ridiculous levels. I can't speak to Milo specifically, I find everything he stands for reprehensible so I ignore him and his lot as much as possible. Really was just saying that 'poking' can and should be considered assault when performed en mass and for a sustained period.

Which is why if you made a device that allowed people to long-distance poke someone, it might be worth thinking "hey, maybe this is a bad idea."

[Ostroeuropa]

That appears to be the case yes.
I'd say it's outright proven that Twitter simply doesn't rank organized international violent terrorist activity on their site as a big issue compared to someone mocking feminists and BLM. Why else would Milo receive action before ISIS?

When you look at whos on their committee, it's fairly obvious why this has become the case.

I wouldn't say that they support ISIS. Just that they don't care.

I'd be interested in seeing how you arrive at the conclusion that IS does not "challenge soc-jus ideology".

Because that sounds fascinating.

They're opposed to it, but it isn't their focus and current target. So it isn't SocJus' focus either.
Similar to how they don't constantly rail against the catholic church and only bring it up when the church says something they disagree with.

ISIS' focus is on "Imperialism" of the west and spreading Islam.

[Apollinis]

To me it seemed like you were saying Twitter don't ban so-called Islamic State recruiters because they don't challenge 'soc-jus ideology', but are happy to ban Milo because he does.

That appears to be the case yes.
I'd say it's outright proven that Twitter simply doesn't rank organized international violent terrorist activity on their site as a big issue compared to someone mocking feminists and BLM. Why else would Milo receive action before ISIS?

When you look at whos on their committee, it's fairly obvious why this has become the case.

I wouldn't say that they support ISIS. Just that they don't care.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... ism-online

[Ostroeuropa]

That appears to be the case yes.
I'd say it's outright proven that Twitter simply doesn't rank organized international violent terrorist activity on their site as a big issue compared to someone mocking feminists and BLM. Why else would Milo receive action before ISIS?

When you look at whos on their committee, it's fairly obvious why this has become the case.

I wouldn't say that they support ISIS. Just that they don't care.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... ism-online

It would appear my information is outdated. It doesn't change the other examples I've brought up in this thread to show that Milo is being singled out.

[Alvecia]

I'd be interested in seeing how you arrive at the conclusion that IS does not "challenge soc-jus ideology".

Because that sounds fascinating.

They're opposed to it, but it isn't their focus and current target. So it isn't SocJus' focus either.
Similar to how they don't constantly rail against the catholic church and only bring it up when the church says something they disagree with.

ISIS' focus is on "Imperialism" of the west and spreading Islam.

That the TOS were broken is what? A convenient excuse?

[Imperializt Russia]

I'd be interested in seeing how you arrive at the conclusion that IS does not "challenge soc-jus ideology".

Because that sounds fascinating.

They're opposed to it, but it isn't their focus and current target. So it isn't SocJus' focus either.
Similar to how they don't constantly rail against the catholic church and only bring it up when the church says something they disagree with.

ISIS' focus is on "Imperialism" of the west and spreading Islam.

The oppression of women and execution of homosexuals in areas they control certainly sounds like "challenging soc-jus ideology" to me, but oh well.

[Ostroeuropa]

They're opposed to it, but it isn't their focus and current target. So it isn't SocJus' focus either.
Similar to how they don't constantly rail against the catholic church and only bring it up when the church says something they disagree with.

ISIS' focus is on "Imperialism" of the west and spreading Islam.

That the TOS were broken is what? A convenient excuse?

In which tweets did he break the TOS.

It's not an excuse, it's a lie.

Further, other people actually DO break the TOS regularly, but since they politically align with Twitters committee, it doesn't result in anything.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

Twitter has closed north of 100,000 ISIS associated accounts. Is your whole nareative of "twitter only cares when people directly attack liberals" screed so flawed that you literally have to make up facts to support it?

[Wolfmanne2]

They're opposed to it, but it isn't their focus and current target. So it isn't SocJus' focus either.
Similar to how they don't constantly rail against the catholic church and only bring it up when the church says something they disagree with.

ISIS' focus is on "Imperialism" of the west and spreading Islam.

The oppression of women and execution of homosexuals in areas they control certainly sounds like "challenging soc-jus ideology" to me, but oh well.

Along with the targeting of Yazidis and Christians for genocidal slaughter.

That the TOS were broken is what? A convenient excuse?

In which tweets did he break the TOS.

It's not an excuse, it's a lie.

Further, other people actually DO break the TOS regularly, but since they politically align with Twitters committee, it doesn't result in anything.

If this was true, I'd tell you this: life is not fair. Get over it. And Milo is a person who has rallied a fan base that believes life should be less fairer for others, so I find it hard to be sympathetic.

[Alvecia]

That the TOS were broken is what? A convenient excuse?

In which tweets did he break the TOS.

It's not an excuse, it's a lie.

Further, other people actually DO break the TOS regularly, but since they politically align with Twitters committee, it doesn't result in anything.

Fucking hell man.
I mean, all of the consipracy red flags are going off right now, it's not even funny.

[Gravlen]

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

Actually, under EU law, twitter might have difficulties. Yes, twitter is a US organisation, but non-US users are handled in Ireland, and thus fall under EU law

You say EU law, yet fail to specify which part of EU law supposedly would compel Twitter to provide a platform to any and all users.

[Ostroeuropa]

In which tweets did he break the TOS.

It's not an excuse, it's a lie.

Further, other people actually DO break the TOS regularly, but since they politically align with Twitters committee, it doesn't result in anything.

Fucking hell man.
I mean, all of the consipracy red flags are going off right now, it's not even funny.

It's not a conspiracy. It's institutional bias.

[Gravlen]

Are you insinuating what I think you're insinuating?

I can't read minds. I'm pointing out that the only thing seperating milo from all these examples of people currently using twitter, is he openly criticizes socjus. That's what he was banned for.

He also posted screenshots of fake Twitter messages. Twitter does not approve of such shenanigans.

[Ostroeuropa]

I can't read minds. I'm pointing out that the only thing seperating milo from all these examples of people currently using twitter, is he openly criticizes socjus. That's what he was banned for.

He also posted screenshots of fake Twitter messages. Twitter does not approve of such shenanigans.

Did he do that, or did people attacking the ghostbusters actor do that.

[Alvecia]

Fucking hell man.
I mean, all of the consipracy red flags are going off right now, it's not even funny.

It's not a conspiracy. It's institutional bias.

That's the conspiracy here.

[Gravlen]

He also posted screenshots of fake Twitter messages. Twitter does not approve of such shenanigans.

Did he do that, or did people attacking the ghostbusters actor do that.

He did.

[Imperializt Russia]

It's not a conspiracy. It's institutional bias.

That's the conspiracy here.

It is a literal conspiracy.

[Wolfmanne2]

The neoliberal-feminist consensus strikes again.

[Vassenor]

The neoliberal-feminist consensus strikes again.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Encouraging users to send people abuse and posting fake screenshots to try and stir people up? Having received two previous warnings? Got banned? The poor dear.

[Ostroeuropa]

That's the conspiracy here.

It is a literal conspiracy.

Is patriarchy a conspiracy too?