Trump permanently suspended from Twitter

[Looch City]

Proof that CANCEL CULTURE has gone too far?!?

[psyang]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I'd like to know why curves2000 attributed "selling snake oil and herbal teas as cure to Covid" to podiatrists. Did I miss something in the news, or have ankle/foot specialists been particularly involved in peddling sham cures?

I'm guessing he meant reflexologists?

[Mull]

Originally Posted by Macman

Twitter stock drops.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1348668495358267403

Corporate or personal there is a saying- Morals and values only mean something when it costs you something to enforce them.

Twitter would of fully realized the stock implications by this action prior to taking it.

That said, I am not really trying to make a pro-twitter post given how long they waited, or they they may only be doing this to reduce other financial downstream risk -just an interesting example of the expression.

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by Macman

Twitter stock drops.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1348668495358267403

The price has recovered somewhat since opening, but is still down nearly seven percent at the time of publication.

It’s already 1/3 back.

[PepsiFree]

Aside from the hilarious podiatrist comment, curves' post has value in the sense that it shows us an example of the problem being more than just failure to ask questions.

Fake stuff populates the internet readily. There are countless people out there who see something, take it at face value asking no questions, and believe it to be true. That's one way misinformation spreads. It's obviously a problem.

But there are also countless people who we can call the "just asking questions crowd." These people either do not understand what it means to think critically about something. They believe that asking questions is enough, but fail to do the absolutely essential thing when you find yourself asking questions: look for answers.

Many of these questions aren't difficult, either.

Those who discovered Invermectin did indeed win a Nobel prize... for the discovery of a treatment effective against human parasites (larvae, roundworm, etc). Because it won a Nobel prize, does this treatment automatically gain credibility in the treatment of completely separate diseases or conditions? The discovery/develop of Insulin and In Vitro Fertilization both won Nobel Prizes too. Should we be using those for COVID-19 without any proper study?

It's also FDA approved. Like Ibuprofen and Viagra. My god, Viagra is even produced by Pfizer, the make of a COVID-19 vaccine, surely we should be using FDA approved Viagra for treatment from experts who know something about COVID-19, shouldn't we?

As for the reports and studies, the "vast" amounts are actually incredibly limited, with (I believe) not one following the accepted scientific method for the study and testing of treatment related to the disease they're trying to apply it to. And they're response is "we don't have time and don't think it's important." There are already people questioning the vaccine approvals. Imagine if, instead of following the proper scientific process, Pfizer and Moderna came out and said "we don't have time and don't think it's important, just take our vaccine!" It would be insane. But they didn't. Because they are reputable.

There is truth and good intention in curves' post. Social media should be looked at with a critical eye, there are many problems that need to be addressed. But has curves' identified them correctly through his questions? Has he even bothered to read the terms and conditions related to usage of those platforms? Does anyone? Statements like "they allow whatever whenever" or "the President was silenced rightly or wrongly" or "what is their limit, who may be next" shows someone more interested in questions than answers and someone with conclusions formed solely off of a lack of information or outright misinformation.

But hey, they're asking questions, so that's what's important, right?

It happens here all the time so you can just imagine how pervasive it is elsewhere. It's infuriating. "We need to be asking questions" or "People should be considering this (very obvious) thing!" No, if you are that person, you need to be intelligent and go find your answers. Especially when it's clear you're drawing conclusions without them.

"Just asking questions" is a joke. And it's no better than people who ask no questions at all. The only difference is that these people believe their thinking is elevated for it. And that's how you get to countless people believing a fair election was fraudulent, or at very least, questioning it to the point where they take action against the Capitol out of their own stupidity and laziness.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Boreal

It’s already 1/3 back.

Yeah, people are going to buy it up fast at that discount. No doubt some right wing conservatives sold because of this.

One person's loss in another's gain.

[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by macman

twitter stock drops.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1348668495358267403

buy buy buy!

[CaptainCrunch]

too late already starting its recovery.

[The Fonz]

I’d like to buy just based on principle, supporting them for finally doing the right thing.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

But hey, they're asking questions, so that's what's important, right?

I've said for a long time, that it's ok to ask questions, you should ask questions, ask as many questions as you want, ask as many questions as you like, it should be encouraged.

ON ONE CONDITION

You listen to the answers.


If you ask the question "Don't you think the COVID vaccine is rushed, how can it possibly be safe when other vaccines take years, YEARS to develop?!"

That's a perfectly fine question, so long as you listen to the answer about funding, exposure, mDNA development, proteins, etc.


Asking questions = fine, so long as you're listening to the answers. You can critically analyze the answers, but you can't just reject them because it doesn't fit the narrative you want to be true.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

too late already starting its recovery.

You can always jump into the Parler IPO. Oh wait...

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Oh lord.. to have that fly on the wall POV footage of Trump's reaction to all this.

I wonder how childish his tantrum was. More than the passenger blocked from flying? Probably.

Have you seen a heroin user frantically trying to find their dealer?

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It's also FDA approved. Like Ibuprofen and Viagra. My god, Viagra is even produced by Pfizer, the make of a COVID-19 vaccine, surely we should be using FDA approved Viagra for treatment from experts who know something about COVID-19, shouldn't we?

One could argue that having the male population saddled with indefinite boners would significantly improve their compliance with a lockdown.

[JohnnyB]

I think it's pretty reasonable to think Trump deserved to be deplatformed, be glad that it has happened, and yet still be uncomfortable about how it has happened.

Merkel seems to be uncomfortable with it too, even as the leader of a country with very strong interest in curtailing hate speech. This is from her spokesperson:

"This fundamental right can be intervened in, but according to the law and within the framework defined by legislators—not according to a decision by the management of social media platforms," Seibert said. "Seen from this angle, the chancellor considers it problematic that the accounts of the U.S. president have now been permanently blocked."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...ht/ar-BB1cEQZa

Personally, I have been really looking forward to the day that Trump's platform was closed down, but I'm not comfortable with how it has happened either. I wish it had been something arrived at through a legal process by democratically elected representatives rather than private corporate management.

Big tech companies own the infrastructure of our intellectual world. Engagement in society depends upon access to that infrastructure. That is tremendous power to wield privately, and seeing it successfully exercised in deplatforming a head of state who is still legally in office is a bit of a disturbing demonstration of the extent of that power. Should that type of power rest in private hands?

Would it be okay for private companies to own all our roads and pathways with the power to make private decisions to stop people using them without a judicial process? If it is, would we consider being allowed to go where you want as long as it's only cross country on public lands a reasonable standard of freedom of mobility?

It seems obvious to me that Trump being silenced and removed is good for society, but these dramatic, cross-platform bans without judicial processes or involvement of elected representatives doesn't feel like rule of law either.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

It seems obvious to me that Trump being silenced and removed is good for society, but these dramatic, cross-platform bans without judicial processes or involvement of elected representatives doesn't feel like rule of law either.

These are private companies who host platforms that you don't have to use - it's not a legal requirement for being a citizen. They have terms of services. They are free to do as they choose you can go along with it or not. Why does this need lengthy legal processes? Tech platforms are not guaranteed in a constitution, so why does this have to be more complicated than it is?

If someone is driving like an #######, I'd prefer the vehicle gets impounded, rather than go through the debate about the person's right to drive even if they can't do it responsibly. And just because someone is a celebrity doesn't give them extra wiggle room.

I believe the right decision was made - one of the few right decisions by companies like Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, etc. where clean-up of material was long overdue.

[AFireInside]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

I think it's pretty reasonable to think Trump deserved to be deplatformed, be glad that it has happened, and yet still be uncomfortable about how it has happened.

Merkel seems to be uncomfortable with it too, even as the leader of a country with very strong interest in curtailing hate speech. This is from her spokesperson:


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...ht/ar-BB1cEQZa

Personally, I have been really looking forward to the day that Trump's platform was closed down, but I'm not comfortable with how it has happened either. I wish it had been something arrived at through a legal process by democratically elected representatives rather than private corporate management.

Big tech companies own the infrastructure of our intellectual world. Engagement in society depends upon access to that infrastructure. That is tremendous power to wield privately, and seeing it successfully exercised in deplatforming a head of state who is still legally in office is a bit of a disturbing demonstration of the extent of that power. Should that type of power rest in private hands?

Would it be okay for private companies to own all our roads and pathways with the power to make private decisions to stop people using them without a judicial process? If it is, would we consider being allowed to go where you want as long as it's only cross country on public lands a reasonable standard of freedom of mobility?

It seems obvious to me that Trump being silenced and removed is good for society, but these dramatic, cross-platform bans without judicial processes or involvement of elected representatives doesn't feel like rule of law either.

Even believing that the election was rigged, etc, Trump could have easily stayed on all these platforms while rattling off his lies. Maybe this is a wakeup call that you don't get to lie to people to the point that it causes chaos and death, for profit. It's not like he wasn't given warning, and it's not like they didn't give him WAY too many chances. Regular people get banned from twitter everyday for FAR FAR less.


If Trump went live on NBC to address the nation and began swearing up a storm, he would be removed.

If someone went on twitter going crazy with white power rants, etc, they would be removed.

If someone went on Grindr and went off with a homophobic rants they would be removed.

If someone goes on instagram and posts even a semi nude photo, the photo gets removed.

The list goes on.

You don't get to do whatever you want, whenever you want, anywhere in society, it's not just social media. This isn't a situation, where he was banned out of nowhere for nothing. Trump still has a ton of outlets, and ways to get his message out, and he needs to act accordingly. Getting people hurt is unacceptable, and certainly with this situation, putting the country in such a dangerous spot is unacceptable. This could have EASILY been way worse.

[PepsiFree]

If I take a dump on the counter in a few McDonalds and I get a lifetime ban from all McDonalds, are they not responsible for taking away my right to feed my family? Are we comfortable with them having this power?

Surely we need to look critically at McDonalds. If they can ban me and take away my right to purchase food simply for taking a dump on the counter, what's next? They could come for you too. The power imbalance is striking.

[Muta]

I can't be the only one that's never heard of Parler before last week.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If I take a dump on the counter in a few McDonalds and I get a lifetime ban from all McDonalds, are they not responsible for taking away my right to feed my family? Are we comfortable with them having this power?

Surely we need to look critically at McDonalds. If they can ban me and take away my right to purchase food simply for taking a dump on the counter, what's next? They could come for you too. The power imbalance is striking.

Disagree.

If the employees aren't getting banned for putting #### on the counter, why are you?

[afc wimbledon]

I have been uncomfortable with the power and influence of twitter facebook and instagram for years, that we are now having a discussion about whether not being able to use these platforms constitute an attack on free speech is an indication the platforms are the problem not whether people can access them, society, democracy cannot function if we get our information from platforms like these, as a species we are too stupid, to prone to panic, rumor and xenophobia to function is we are getting an endless stream of fake bull#### fed to us daily