When it's so easy to predict who in this forum will defend this guy
Sauronich wrote:
People seem to paint him as this great anti-SJW figure but really he is just an attention whore (oh, sorry, "provocateur") who has found a welcoming audience during Gamergate and decided to exploit it to the max.
The less extremist assholery on both sides, the better. I think I'm just fucking tired of GG, both the SJW crazies and the overly eager anti-PC crusaders who think they are so much better. I wish people would either have a civil debate or shut the fuck up, but evidently that's too much to ask.
I used to mostly like him because he makes feminists look ridiculous during interviews with them but his campaign in the US has had me frowning quite a lot - he actually had Ann Coulter and put her in a positive light which had me going "wait a fucking minute, that woman is a horrible bitch, why the fuck would you like her?" and then I realized that while he has many good points about the hypocritical nature of society favoring women and minorities, he often blows it by being a real dick.
People seem to paint him as this great anti-SJW figure but really he is just an attention whore (oh, sorry, "provocateur") who has found a welcoming audience during Gamergate and decided to exploit it to the max.
The less extremist assholery on both sides, the better. I think I'm just fucking tired of GG, both the SJW crazies and the overly eager anti-PC crusaders who think they are so much better. I wish people would either have a civil debate or shut the fuck up, but evidently that's too much to ask.
The moment you pay attention to the PC police, the SJW's, the GG movement, BLM, any other sort of movement you realize people like Milo, who don't toe the line, who do have a voice in the media are more important now than ever. Right now it's all clickbait bull shit, the SJW's the BLM, the PC police are getting the spotlight because it gets publications money. But the sad side of that is that the idiots out there who don't realize any of that take it as gospel. One day ghostbuster remake sounds like a terrible idea, the other an all female cast of ghostbusters is good and here are 10 reasons why you're a misogynist if you don't think so, number 3 and 9 will shock your virgin, basement dwelling soul.
And that's the problem. It's becoming wide-spread. It's in the print medium, electronic medium, hollywood, video games, music and everywhere where it can be exploited. It can't be ignored, it can't be avoided and it just grows and festers. Echo chambers are formed. Violent groups are formed. Hatred grows. For every Anita, Zoey, Frank, and John out there... there needs to be one as obnoxious, as ludicrous, as vulgar as them. In this situation it's Milo. Hey may have whored him self out, he may have exploited GG, but guess what... it brought us Based Mom, UFC host mr. Stereoids, Ruben and several other prominent figures in social media/academia/music industry.
So hate on that guy all you want, he saw an in to exploit, he used it, got e-famous, got popular, got important, and he fought the snowflakes. He had a podium. I say let anyone with a podium to stand on to exploit the groups they want to support. Because that's what is needed. A voice that can be heard. Not a voice that can be blocked, muted, shunned, ignored.
You want a civil debate? Don't have on those who have a voice. Hate on those who shut it down.
You get it, Waldo. Some other commenters base their opinion on the permaban based on whether they like the person or not. "Haha, I don't like him, so fuck him, good that Twitter banned him, serves him right lol, who cares about him tbh"
This is more about Twitter and the way social media are going and less about Milo. The two videos I posted framed the discussion very well I thought. Until the standard "Twitter is a private company and they can do what they want (it would only annoy me if I agreed with that guy)" responses.
@jack We will start a rival service if this keeps up because @WikiLeaks & our supporters are threatened by a space of feudal justice.
First response I see:
Quote:
@wikileaks Seriously? You're defending racism, misogyny and harassment.
lmao ... yeah, that's what Wikileaks are doing. Thinking about starting a media platform with free speech and not agenda-driven, in order to .... defend racism, muhsogyny and harassment This fucking world
Good luck with making it popular if, racism, misandry and harassment will be prevalent on there due to "free speech".
but they're already prevalent on twitter.
So what else does wikileaks have to offer then? That you can do it openly without consequence? Either way, good luck trying to compete with twitter which is already an established platform if you don't have anything to offer.
VGAdeadcafe wrote:
Mr.Tinkles wrote:
Good luck with making it popular if, racism, misogyny and harassment will be prevalent on there due to "free speech".
Are you implying that the prevalent social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Youtube etc are not RIFE with all that?
I'm saying that there is no free speech, you can't just say whatever the fuck you want to. There are consequences which are set by the ones governing the service.
Yes, but for many people this isn't the free speech and opinion diversity they were promised by the owners and liberal entrepreneurs of these services. So let's call it like it is, Twitter is another agenda-driven social platform, pandering to specific audiences for brownie points. They decide that some opinions (conservative) are unacceptable and some other racist movement (BLM) is the best thing that ever happened for example.
So they are the ones that steer the "mainstream" here and there, instead of just providing a service.
Free speech doesn't mean hate speech or illegal activities or calling for violence. Milo did none of that afaik. I agree that you cannot say whatever the fuck you want.
You get it, Waldo. Some other commenters base their opinion on the permaban based on whether they like the person or not. "Haha, I don't like him, so fuck him, good that Twitter banned him, serves him right lol, who cares about him tbh"
This is more about Twitter and the way social media are going and less about Milo. The two videos I posted framed the discussion very well I thought. Until the standard "Twitter is a private company and they can do what they want (it would only annoy me if I agreed with that guy)" responses.
On the other side of the coin, you guys paint him as some kind of crusader, as a beacon of light in an ocean of darkness, who's being oppressed for daring to voice his opinion.
But no. The world isn't engulfed in darkness just because you see people with a different opinion than yours, and he's not being oppressed, he still has the ability to express himself in hundreds of way.
The dude got banned from Twitter. That's it. It ain't nothing important. This is a storm in a teacup.
I would agree if he was systemically silenced everywhere he went, but that's just not what's happening. It's not even CLOSE to being what's happening. He just acted like an ass on one website and got banned.
Are you implying that the prevalent social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Youtube etc are not RIFE with all that?
I'm saying that there is no free speech, you can't just say whatever the fuck you want to. There are consequences which are set by the ones governing the service.
There are only consequences if you don't fit into their political agenda/bias. So there is "free speech"... For those who either believe in the same crap or those who pretend to.
The problem isn't that Milo got banned, who the fuck cares right... The problem is that he gets banned while there are far worse known accounts on the site that don't get banned... Because they fit within this shitty political bias that Twitter wants to promote. They spew racist sexist hate speech all the time and are somehow exempt from the same rules that got Milo (and many others) banned.
But if that's what people are truly mad about, the right way to handle it isn't to turn Milo into a martyr, claim that they're being oppressed and spam #freemilo. Instead, they should focus on #BanEveryone.
Which I'd actually support. Ban everyone who's an asshole, clean up the mess.
The boar "actress" that is acting butthurt is the one unleashing its fans against someone with the command GET HER!!
Then when a bigger fish mentions her negatively and some hate comes pouring in, she suddenly can't take it and said she's leaving Twitter
But of course Twitter can't think about banning her or blacks' accounts calling for cop deaths or cheering when they happen, that minority is untouchable.
Then the "mainstream" is surprised by endless millions of shitlords that vote for Brexit or for Trump or whatever the fuck in a desperare attempt to avoid the shit they are force fed. You isolate so many people that you are then the minority and literally can't even. We all saw how democracy stopped being cool when they couldn't win, people calling for only the elite people to be able to vote. With a straight face. Imagine this regressive thinking, heh.
Are you implying that the prevalent social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Youtube etc are not RIFE with all that?
I'm saying that there is no free speech, you can't just say whatever the fuck you want to. There are consequences which are set by the ones governing the service.
There are only consequences if you don't fit into their political agenda/bias. So there is "free speech"... For those who either believe in the same crap or those who pretend to.
The problem isn't that Milo got banned, who the fuck cares right... The problem is that he gets banned while there are far worse known accounts on the site that don't get banned... Because they fit within this shitty political bias that Twitter wants to promote. They spew racist sexist hate speech all the time and are somehow exempt from the same rules that got Milo (and many others) banned.
Let's hope they're just getting started then and Milo was only the first who will get banned.
Watch this from 7:03 to 11:48 to learn what Milo really thinks. The part around 10:25 is really good as well. I definitely laughed at the bit around 11:00. I found it hard to disagree with him, and I share most of his points (in this video anyway).
So I wrote a long and well articulated response to the drivel you just wrote but then I deleted it as I thought this response would be more fitting.
Ok, since you do not understand how social media works. Since you chose to ignore the whole social justice movement at the moment. Since you have really no idea what is going on twitter. Your opinions come of as old man yells at cloud.
No matter how articulated your response will be - if you feel that Twitter has it's own set of rules and it follows them to a T and henceforth why Milo was banned - your well articulated response would still be wrong.
Do you know how many people get banned from sites every hour, every day for shit reasons?
If he broke some rule that he accepted when he got his account, he knew he would get banned.
They banned him for that reason, their reason, live with it, he probably will.
If he got banned because he is white or a man you would have a reason to whine, but he was banned for other reasons.
Honestly, if someone is preaching a different view than what is considered popular/acceptable, that's fine. And if he plays the role as an extremist, especially as a joke, that's fine too. I won't judge him since I've done the exact same thing.
But when you start launching personal attacks, you can't hide behind that right or your right to express yourself. When you start making it personal and insulting specific people, you deserve to get banned.
And yes, that's true for everyone. Ban the SJWs if you want, complain about not banning the SJWs if you want. But let's not pretend that Milo shouldn't be banned, that he should be allowed to keep doing what he was doing it before, or that he's innocent and was merely "expressing his opinion".
If you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. Milo was a troll, trolls get banned. Now ban the rest and let's move on from such a silly story.
So I wrote a long and well articulated response to the drivel you just wrote but then I deleted it as I thought this response would be more fitting.
Ok, since you do not understand how social media works. Since you chose to ignore the whole social justice movement at the moment. Since you have really no idea what is going on twitter. Your opinions come of as old man yells at cloud.
No matter how articulated your response will be - if you feel that Twitter has it's own set of rules and it follows them to a T and henceforth why Milo was banned - your well articulated response would still be wrong.
It was a response to VGA's bullshit comment.
And like others have said, twitter can start banning everyone not following the rules, not just Milo.
Yes, but for many people this isn't the free speech and opinion diversity they were promised by the owners and liberal entrepreneurs of these services.
Who promised what and where?
Quote:
Welcome to Twitter.
Connect with your friends — and other fascinating people. Get in-the-moment updates on the things that interest you. And watch events unfold, in real time, from every angle.
This is twitters front page. I don't see any promises...
VGAdeadcafe wrote:
So let's call it like it is, Twitter is another agenda-driven social platform, pandering to specific audiences for brownie points. They decide that some opinions (conservative) are unacceptable and some other racist movement (BLM) is the best thing that ever happened for example.
Wrong, so wrong. They are not in it for "brownie points", silly. They are a capitalist company, they want MONEY. And no, they didn't decide some opinions are acceptable and some aren't, IMO they ban whoever creates too much problem. If enough users feel frustrated about a certain idiot, enough to drive them away, they ban the idiot. It happened before, it will happen again.
Yondaime wrote:
Twitter has always been a shitty site. They only ban people who go against their agenda... Rules aren't rules for those who follow their narrative. If you troll white people it's fine, if those white people are women then it's not fine, if those women are against Twitters diversity bullshit narrative, then it's fine, et cetera.
... Let’s get two things clear: 1) Azealia Banks deserved to be banned. 2) Azealia Banks’ ban is not because she’s pro-Black. Banks cannot be pro-Black while laying misogynoir solely at the feet of Black men (no matter how painful their antics become), and she certainly cannot be pro-Black with her proclivity for verbal abuse towards other disenfranchised groups. ...
ok, good. But:
Quote:
While I celebrate that festivals have dropped Banks as a headliner and Twitter promptly suspended her account for her actions, I find it absolutely disgusting that I can pull up my mentions right now and point out several white people who have tweeted to me that I am a worthless nigger with no future and looking for a handout—and no matter how many times I report them, the response is the usual, “this is not a violation of policy.” Oh-ho really? Raise your hand if you have ever been personally victimized by white privilege on social platforms. Everybody who isn’t a straight white male better have both hands waving in the air, lemme tell you, but Twitter and Facebook won’t see you. They’re too busy vigilantly protecting our rights!
That is, they’re protecting the rights of every of every male user who threatened to rape and murder women during the infamous Gamergate. That’s “freedom of speech,” but heaven forbid a woman posts a picture of her breastfeeding to Facebook. That’s like porn or something! They’re protecting the rights of that one white female user I reported to Facebook, who called me a hateful nigger bitch and let me know in no uncertain terms that she had a Glock next to her with my name on it. Alrighty then, that’s free speech? But heaven forbid someone type “Black Lives Matter.” Facebook was so vigilant on censoring these words that Mark Zuckerberg actually sent a letter to his employees to tell them to chill out.
Yet, for their commitment to free speech, they are equally committed to getting rid of hate speech. That’s why all those Pro-Black Facebook pages are erased and the Black Panther party is referred to as a terrorist group. Never fear though, those white power and pro-men’s-rights-to-rape groups are still going strong. YAY FREEDOM! DOWN WITH PC CULTURE! We must protect the Ku Klux Klan (who, unlike the Black Panthers, have started no community projects beyond a bloody history of torturing and lynching). They’re simply a group with an unpopular opinion, am I right or am I right?
From a moderator perspective: You're all a bunch of cry babies who will never be satisfied. Both sides will always complain and feel victimized. It's really really hard to draw the line between free speech and barbarism.
P.S. How is this worldnews? I am moving it to general.
Nope not really, I always had this kind of teasing (others would call it abusive, I guess) kind of humour. When it feels wrong it feels funny. Though not the American way, where they just throw fucks and bad language at you for shock value. That's a bit cheap. Sadly that's what we mostly get from comedies these days.
It was a response to VGA's bullshit comment.
And like others have said, twitter can start banning everyone not following the rules, not just Milo.
but that's the problem. it doesn't.
you have killallmen but not killallwomen
you have killallwhites but not killallblacks
you have menareshit but not womenareshit
you have 'feminists' doxing people and it's praised.
you have trolls doxing feminists and it's banned.
You have feminists sending out death threats and it's YOU GO GIRL!
you have men sending out death threats and it's all over the news and their lives are ruined.
you can't say twitter can start banning everyone not following the rules when that's not the case. they ban people who do not subscribe to the same think. I'd be all for if people like zoey quinn, who sends people after people who she doesn't like, got banned. I'd be for if people like FreeBSDgirl, who publicly doxes and harasses people, got banned. But that's not the case. A mass blocking tool on twitter is 'illegal' and yet certain people subscribe to them. Once an aggblocker was set out it got shut down by twitter, yet a ggblocker is still a thing.
the wage gap has been disproven, and yet talking about it is a bannable offense.
rape culture is not even a thing, and yet talking about it is a bannable offense.
Same goes for facebook.
SJW's got jobs at these companies and they protect their own.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Sorry, I can't help my 'bad' humor. 
