Mr. Musk? I saw that investment of his in the news today. If you are a multibillionaire, you can buy a way to have your own censorship. Wrap your head around that. Is that what Musk intends? We'll see.
well clearly Twitter took it seriously enough to ban them over it . . . if it were really "amateurish," I'm pretty sure Twitter would ignore it
The Taliban, Iranian Mullahs, Russian war propagandists are all happily using Twitter. But supposedly, the Bee violated the TOS. How, specifically?
Don't really understand what you mean. Twitter will not ignore stuff that gets a lot of clicks and violates their TOS. Whether it's good writing or not makes no difference.
unlike Arab terrorists on twitter who play by the rules https://www.counterextremism.com/co...dists-and-inciters-violence-operating-twitter
Why is it that all of those examples are images of tweets and not links to the tweets on Twitter itself? Are the tweets not available anymore, for some reason? I wonder why that would be.
I don't think people understand Twitter's policies - that it only bans accounts that violate its terms of service. Even if they apply that standard equally, they are accused of being the ministers of truth or hypocritical for banning one person from one political group but not another. Twitter doesn't ban accounts for what they belong to, they ban based on the content being posted and whether it violates their TOS, which every user agrees to abide by when they sign up. This is what I never understood, if you agree not to post nudity, hateful, or information that will glorify violence or lead to harm, then how do you cry your free speech is being violated when you break that agreement? And why is it that the Taliban can figure out how to abide by Twitter's TOS but people far more educated can't???
The dude is a walking hypocrite. Who cares what his opinion is? A private social media company can make their own rules and ban people who violate them. They have rules meant to promote an environment that is safer for all. Musk also spoke out against government subsidies and tax incentives for US businesses. Musk said the government should "just delete" all subsidies from the $1 trillion infrastructure bill President Joe Biden recently signed into law. However, over the years, Musk's companies — Tesla Motors, SpaceX, and SolarCity — have received billions of dollars from government loans, contracts, tax credits, and subsidies. Face it, he's a hypocrite. https://www.businessinsider.com/elo...idies-tesla-billions-spacex-solarcity-2021-12
sounds about right https://www.mediaite.com/news/twitt...lowed-to-remain-if-he-doesnt-get-too-violent/ I still don't get what happened to the Babylon Bee though
not sure I realized that this was the actual story that broke Twitter's back . . . apparently this was "hate speech" https://www.forbes.com/sites/peters...that-made-its-story-go-viral/?sh=3b9e5ce209db
Purposely and explicitly misgendering a transgender person is a flagrant insult, in my opinion. Pretending that, no, it's actually a "parody" is just stupid. Whether this qualifies as "hate speech" in public setting is up to the society to decide. Twitter can define it however they wish on their platform, which they have done: Twitter's policy on hateful conduct | Twitter Help We prohibit targeting others with repeated slurs, tropes or other content that intends to dehumanize, degrade or reinforce negative or harmful stereotypes about a protected category. This includes targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals. We also prohibit the dehumanization of a group of people based on their religion, caste, age, disability, serious disease, national origin, race, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation. Seems to be a pretty cut-and-dried violation.
I appreciate the link, that's a fun read. includes this gem: Twitter’s mission is to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information, and to express their opinions and beliefs without barriers. Free expression is a human right – we believe that everyone has a voice, and the right to use it. Our role is to serve the public conversation, which requires representation of a diverse range of perspectives. not sure I realized Twitter's terms of service is a satire site also! the more you know
Is your point that "representation of a diverse range of perspectives" contradicts restricting hate speech? Or are you just disagreeing over whether purposely insulting a transgender person by going out of your way to misgender them qualifies as hate speech? Personally, I would draw a clear distinction between permitting a diverse range of perspectives, and permitting targeted trolling that is intended to demean someone. You wouldn't?
It's a good thing then that Twitter isn't actually a town square. And being on twitter isn't essential to democracy. Musk though is free to change Twitter's terms of service if he becomes majority owner.
As opposed to claiming you're you're the party of small government and pro business and pushing for more government regulation and interference in private businesses?
