D
Deleted member 365
Guest
Never have I claimed that owners of Twitter couldn’t make policy. Therefore, there is no hypocrisy on my end. Clearly there’s a difference between reporting publicly available information on Musk’s location vs inciting an insurrection or lying about children being murdered. Cmon, stop being so obtuse. Furthermore, if Musk wants to be known as the free speech absolutist that he claims to be, he shouldn’t be banning folks for posting public information. You're defending him because you see him going after your perceived enemies, “the left.”This edit...
"If conservatives like you want me to treat them as good faith actors and not trolls, you can’t do this. Cc @One Brow this Is EXACTLY what I’m talking about. Buck isn’t being honest or arguing in good faith here. If “conservatives” on this site want to be treated respectfully and not easily dismissed as trolls by me, then they need to do a better job than this. This post was merely a troll job to illicit an emotional reaction rather than accurately and honestly debate. Do you disagree? @One Brow? I hope you hold conservatives to a similar standard you hold me. One shouldn’t be making hasty troll job posts, lame attempts at “gotcha” rather than seriously debate issues in a respectful and honest manner."
I took the below quote from you reading it as personal "cancel culture" and not as company policy. If I was wrong, I would like to apologize.
"If only there was some sort of term that could describe this action of canceling others whom Musk disagrees with. A type of culture that cancels unpopular opinions. Hmmm"
When it comes to terms of service, I don't view as what degree of the offenses is, just that it violated the terms.
I posted the reason Trump was banned by twitter. Once again, I don't care about the degree, but he was banned after tweeting this:
"To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th."
The Biden Administration and All Things Politics
Who on the alt-right requested these be removed? Genuinely asking. It focused on 1 person Andy Ngo, a far right antifa journalist (if you call him that). You mean Ngo is anti-Antifa of course. I don’t know otherwise, he’s the only one mentioned. Do you agree Red? Should people be suspended...jazzfanz.com
I posted the policy in this thread:
Musk's Twitter starts banning journalists
View: https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1603551884748460034?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1603551884748460034%7Ctwgr%5E13cbf50db75f20540939b7465c3ab8fa6513f371%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fboardgamegeek.com%2Fthread%2F2989333%2Ftesla-electric
I also posted Aaron Rupars sub stack stating he posted the information in the forum as well:
Musk's Twitter starts banning journalists
View: https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1603551884748460034?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1603551884748460034%7Ctwgr%5E13cbf50db75f20540939b7465c3ab8fa6513f371%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fboardgamegeek.com%2Fthread%2F2989333%2Ftesla-electric
I even posted the warning the day before, from Elon, in this thread:
Musk's Twitter starts banning journalists
View: https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1603551884748460034?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1603551884748460034%7Ctwgr%5E13cbf50db75f20540939b7465c3ab8fa6513f371%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fboardgamegeek.com%2Fthread%2F2989333%2Ftesla-electric
Twitter Bans Alex Jones And InfoWars; Cites Abusive Behavior
Twitter said it has "permanently suspended" the conspiracy theorist and his InfoWars outlet, citing tweets and videos posted Wednesday that violate Twitter's policy on abusive behavior.www.npr.org
From the link Twitter posted:
Twitter linked to its page detailing its policy on abusive behavior. That policy states, in part: "You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. We consider abusive behavior an attempt to harass, intimidate, or silence someone else's voice."
They both violate the terms of service. Easy. Once again, the degree of offense is different, but both did not follow the rules.
After you became personal calling people, like myself "Those defending him are just tribal babies who’ve had their brains rotted out by partisanship."
You stated that in post #13. Then I responded in post #18.
I don't think you were reading my posts. I added lots of context, information and links so people can see more of the story than a partisan post from twitter.
You’re not responding rationally or in good faith here. You’re arguing for the sake of arguing. I gave you a chance and now it’s back onto the block list. Arguing with you is worthless as you’re not listening to my pts nor adjusting your talking pts to what’s being presented. You’re regurgitating the same nonsense page after page after page. Waste of time.
I never directed a message to you. You jumped the gun and got personal in a lame attempt to “get me” on some pathetic attempt to expose hypocrisy when none exists.
Per usual on this site, “conservatives” cannot debate the facts rationally and circle the wagons. The conversation devolves into personal attacks and emotional outbursts to defend their tribe and attack perceived political enemies. It’s getting old. And now the thread is off track with you and Al hoping to extract their pound of flesh. Really, I’m flattered. But perhaps others in this thread would like to read good material rather than a pissing match?
Last edited by a moderator:
