slug.com slug.com

9 4

Here's a list that Amazon submitted in support of their shutdown of parler.

What would happen if somebody stood on a corner and said this to other passerbys?
Would you condemn the police for taking them off the street?

What if someone was visiting your home and started saying this in front of your kids?
Would you condemn your spouse for kicking them out of your house?

TheMiddleWay 8 Jan 13
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

9 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

2

On Agnostic.com it was said Trump supporters should be shot like dogs. Should we close down agnostic.com?

On Facebook and Twitter similar comments were made against many groups, Jews, blacks, woman, whites, christians...

Have Amazon shut down their severs used by Facebook and Twitter?

This is NOT about a small number of out of context posts by a small number of obscure people everyone else ignores.

This is about censoring political views contrary to your own.

@TheMiddleWay
You really seem to struggle with context don’t you?

@TheMiddleWay
Simply because making comments about the topic is irrelevant with you. It either flies over your head or you deliberately pretend not to understand.

You make extremely wild assumptions in your last post.
You either have an actual inability to read context or you are has lighting.
We have had this discussion before.

@TheMiddleWay
I explained to you in detail why I post here.
Did that also flew over your head?

@TheMiddleWay
Oh not al all.
Just because you don’t learn does not mean I don’t learn.
However the amount of things I am learning by engaging with you is decreasing so I will probably engage less with you going forward.
Although I can also say that some of our interactions were also entertaining and thank you for that. And sorry for the times I lost my temper. It happens.

I used to engage a lot with Ricky Wiles, however much less now as there is not much left to learn from engaging with him. You will see i ignore many others are there is very little to learn from them nor is it fun.

@TheMiddleWay
Ah, thanks for that. Your last response answered the last questions I had about you.

You REDUCED hundreds of communications we have had to a simple “you have not engage me at all if all you can offer is your opinion of me...”. Completely ignoring the many conversations we have had, where you actually stated to others when they questioned why I am so patient with you, that I discuss the point with you, and not do ad hominem etc.
You simply ignore or forget that in order to reduce the problem to a simplified form you can deal with.
That is how your brain work and how you were trained as a scientist. Nothing wrong with that when trying to understand particle physics.

Then you further reduced my comments as ad Hominem, as you try to understand why I don’t agree with you. No, the original comments were not ad Hominem at all, but trying to explain why your arguments don’t hold water. Sure, later I did make an ad Hominem but that was more to explain to others why you keep making the same arguments no one else understands.

However, it also means you reduce other facts and information as you have stated just here into black and white boxes. It explains why you struggle to distinguish between degrees of severity and the importance of scale between different events.
It explains why you struggle to differentiate between say the BLM protests and what happened at Capitol Hill.
Or why you think that closing some left wing extremists Facebook and Twitter account is equal to deplatforming a whole community. Or asking what law or logic cares about degrees of scale? All laws by the way cares about degrees of scale ( that is why sometimes you get a fine and other times you go to jail) and it is completely logical to accept all events are not equal in scale, severity or frequency and therefore not equal.

You have reduced the information into packages you can understand, however you end losing all the fine detail that keeps you from actually understanding.

It explains why on some post you are reasonable easy to discuss, and other times you appear the opposite.
In your eyes you see no difference, however it is just the way your brain works.

It explains why you draw conclusions from others posts that does not follow with what they actually wrote, and that is simply because you removed the context in an attempt to reduce the problem.

Anyway, that was very interesting to see how you think and respond and was much more interesting than any actual conversation topic we actually had in the past. Your though process is not uncommon and I have met several scientists and engineers like you.
Thanks for that.

There may still be some things to learn so I will still interact with you on occasion if you are still inclined to discuss with me.

2

Out of context. Wow, why doesn't this surprise me? We've all seen worse on Facebook and Twitter. I have to agree with another poster here who said let's see the whole thing. I can't believe these were all one offs posted in Parler, with no responses. More likely they were posted as replies to some other statement. What a crock of shit when something out of context and with no support is expected to be taken as truth.
I guess.. when the lie becomes the truth..print the lie.. has meaning?

2
  1. I have no idea if these were REALLY on Parler or not. I have no idea if they are real comments or not. I have to trust Amazon that they were real and on Parler, when I have no particular confidence in Amazon.

  2. Assuming they were real, and on Parler, I don't know what the response of the Parler community was to them. Was there push back or support? Did lots agree? Did lots disagree?

  3. We listened to "fry'm like bacon" over the summer. This isn't about 'whataboutism', it is about hypocrisy. Don't tell me your offended when others said worse but you were ok with it - because you AGREED with it.

  4. Speech that offends, speech that scares, speech that is disgusting, is still speech that is allowed. At least the government can't disallow it. And for the few that get to say Amazon gets to decide who can use their services, I recall a lot of people complaining when a baker tried to make the same stand.

  5. I have supported businesses telling people they can't use their services. I have supported it and stood for the freedom of ANY business refusing ANYONE service for ANY reason. So if a Woolworths wants to say who can and can't eat at the counter, of if a pool says who can or can't use the water, or if a service provider decides who can and can't use their facilities - fine.

  6. If you want to grant a special class to groups and force others to serve them regardless, then prepare for boycotts and marches. And because there are evil people on every side - damage. Punish them, throw the book at them for destruction of public and/or private property. But what you can't do is stand on both sides of the argument and expect people to think you are a paragon of virtue.

As suggested, if there is a social media site that is free from violent vitriol I haven't seen or heard of it. When there are 10,000 members, it might be possible to police it. When there are 100,000,000 members, it becomes all but impossible.

WE, here on this site, have had our share of violence promoters and as far as I know, the community not only didn't support them, but they got kicked off. But lots of others that were, are, offensive still remain. I find that to be acceptable because as long as we agree that some people can't speak, MY liberty to do so is under threat.

@TheMiddleWay I don't read every post, certainly not every comment. if the topic or tone doesn't appeal, I move on so there are times when I won't see something egregious. Because I don't comment on it, doesn't mean I accept it. Of course, a thumbs up doesn't mean I agree with something or someone either - I use it here as an acknowledgment. It isn't really a good option but I want the poster to know I at least read it.

A generic 'kill all *' isn't going to get my ire or concern. The person is an idiot not worthy of my time. One of the reasons I don't spend much time on GAB, and I was an early member, is that there is so much anti-Semitism there it is hard to plow through it all. They have tried to cull the worst of it, but still.

I agree there has to be a standard. Beyond a specific threat to a specific individual, I start having issues. I'd rather not see ANY threats, but what I find non-threatening others my react strongly to. Given I was bullied heavily when I was younger, you'd think I'd be more sensitive to bad-speak, but for me there was a very big difference between those that used language and those that used physical action. I could ignore the former, the later left marks.

So, specific threats to specific people, cull. General rants....ignore. They are attention seeking and I won't grant them that - if there were a 'thumbs down' option, I'd use it.

1

Most people can detect what the social norm is and most will conform to it. Most of the people can be fooled into thinking what the establishment wants them to think some of the time, some of the people all the time but not all of the people all the time. There is little relationship between intelligence and being fooled by propaganda. The smarter you are the better able you are at detecting what is in your best interest to believe and to assimilate it and justify it, cognitive dissonance be dammed. There are some people however who are disinterested in belonging to the establishment. Some because they belong to groups that the establishment shuns, some because of paranoia, some that are just antisocial, some because they have autistic traits that do not allow them to care about anything but facts, in the last group you will find the people who are geniuses. Under the right circumstances geniuses will detect what is dysfunctional in the establishment and become thought leaders. We have systematical excluded the people who should have been thought leaders with a society wide endorsement of safe spaces. Our leaders are head girls who love conformity with the rules. It's what happens when the Yin comes to dominate society. What Jordon Peterson calls the smothering mother. You can trace the shift at least back to prohibition. The new prohibition isn't against destructive drugs but non conformity.

The problem is that if you want to find the "truth" you have to look for non conformists. Where you find them is the problem most people cannot overlook. They are found among the shunned, paranoid, the antisocial, those with autistic like traits, or people that society in general is uncomfortable with. For the most part normal society lives a lie. Be that religious, political, ideological, or simply popular.

2

Freedom can be ugly, eh?
The alternative is worse.

What Amazon allows on their servers is their business. Now.... let's take a look at all the stuff that they've chosen to allow on their servers...
Selective outrage is not very convincing, nor compelling as a "rally cry".

@TheMiddleWay how 'bout if they are serious about cleaning house they actually clean their house?

>Now.... let's take a look at all the stuff that they've chosen to allow on their servers...

This goes for all these Big Tech Hypocrites.

@TheMiddleWay only if you're not full of shit about your desire to clean house, which was my point.
I'll be happy to say I was wrong when they pull Facebook from their servers.

@TheMiddleWay so by your logic, why don't we call all your whining 'Wharaboutism'?
What makes your case so special you can ignore blatant hipocracy?

@Tom81 Matthew was the first Whataboutist (that I know of...):
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"

@TheMiddleWay I believe you would have a point, if I was trying to excuse Parler's content by pointing at Facebook's.
My comment is about Amazon... questioning their sincerity about "concerns" over content on Parler. If they were sincere, they would have the same concerns over content elsewhere.
They don't.
Therefore, they are not sincere.
That can't be determined without comparison.
I'm trying to imagine supporting any assertion with sound logic, that does not include testing propositional implications that way (e.g., if that were true... then this would be true.)

@TheMiddleWay To say: "Parler should be dropped, but not until Amazon adopts a consistent standard that also applies to everybody else", does not equate to "What about Facebook, they're doing it!"
... it's a simple appeal to maintain a level playing field.
"Rampant" is not an actionable threshold, neither is "violent" an objective standard. I have zero faith that every other platform has objective algorithms or moderators that effectively keep "violent" posts below the "rampant" level, or that it's any more "rampant" on Parler than anywhere else.
If Amazon's standard is simply that they "try", then that's Amazon's prerogative, like I said. That would be a level playing field.
But, more to the point, I don't share your faith that Amazon's objective at this point in the Ideological Big-Tech wars has anything in the world to do with this red herring.

@TheMiddleWay well it needs to be actionable or they can't do anything with it. And if it's not going to be objective, why don't they just say "we're pulling anything we don't like" and be done with it?

That's why I used your words... to disagree.
"Make one standard that applies to Facebook as well as Parler" is not about Facebook or Parler, it's about the standard... specifically: having one.

@TheMiddleWay I think Parler's only argument in court, would be whether Amazon violated whatever bilateral contract they had with Parler.
Amazon is under no obligation, that I'm aware of, to treat every client "fairly". But if they yanked Parler for political reasons, and now hide behind the claim of "urgent necessity, to suppress the rampant violence that is unique to Parler..."; then they might have to back that up with some objective comparative analysis, or be found in breach of contract.
In the end, they can do whatever they want with their infrastructure... but they need to honor their agreements like everybody else.
If Parler doesn't want to abide, they can establish their own infrastructure, which I believe is underway.

2

The excerpts aren't distinguishable from fabrications...lies. Reconstitute and republish the source texts--the whole of parler--and we'll view it all in almost proper context.

Reconstitute and republish all of the canceled and deleted Facebook, Twitter, youtube....

Replatform the whole of the conversation and we can continue the conversation.

Any less and you're rejecting the possibility of real conversation.

You're dictating the narrative.

@TheMiddleWay

So long as the source text and context remains censored And obscured, no excerpts are trusted .

How is trust reestablished?

I don't know.

@TheMiddleWay You know... how we would usually do it on Tiwtler with Screen Grabs/Retweets (Much harder to fake)... Seeing as how this is not possible now that the site is shut down

You are asking us to only believe Amazon's word. Why would we do that? Even a Screen grab Could be faked but Its 100 times more legit than just words on a screen.
You are the one wanting objectivity in another thread. What are you smoking?

Yes big brother who Silenced the COMMANDER IN CHIEF I believe EVERYTHING YOU SAY.

@TheMiddleWay

Do you have screen shots of the whole of this site?

@TheMiddleWay Yes, I had a Parler for about 6 months but Twitters UI was much more refined so I typically didn't use Parler.

90% of the screen-grabs I take are of people I highly disagree with and I'm attempting to make fun of them. I have no reason to screen grab the calls to violence on Paler which I had never come across...
Now this platform on the other hand (IDW)...
I haven't seen more Brazen Jew hate anywhere online besides 4chan.

This website only exists still because its not trafficked enough to be a target.

2

This is all about power! Its not about right or wrong. Its mob rule and that mob has the power at the present to do exactly what they want to do. There will be no other way but their way. So if you do not go with the party line (communist) you get fired from your job and other things will happen to you like loss of business and on and on. There no free speech in the USA anymore! Look what they can do to a billionaire and the president.

2

I'd roll my eyes, socially distance and say to myself this is why I don't go downtown Unarmed...

Is it possible these quotes were taken from Parlays that were posted then later taken down... you know like what moderators typically do?

This same shit could be found on #Twitler... and then the mods take it down... but people still get screen caps... so...? These aren't even damn screen grabs, this is #AgiProp as far as I'm concerned from these hypocrites.

1

Would you tear up the street corner? Or arrest those driving by?

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:172388
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.