By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
 

Is free speech suppressed on the internet's main public squares

Yes 56 53.85%
 
No 44 42.31%
 
Undecided 4 3.85%
 
Total:104
Spade said:
padib said:

Why are you so upvoted? This community is strange.

The bullet points are notes from the Twitter live, none of it is my opinion.

I'm not going to elaborate on anything, I don't owe you anything. Neither do you owe me anything, relax. I already spent enough time making this breakdown for this community. If you want my opinion, it wasn't worth it.

Didn't you create alts and upvote yourself WITH supporter status too?

Yes and got banned for it (and paid almost 150$ to level the playing field, all thrown in the garbage), what does this have to do with the thread and will a moderator take care of you?

I hope so. There are 3 that are here and getting all involved, their priority are posts like yours spamming this discussion thread.



Around the Network
padib said:
Spade said:

Didn't you create alts and upvote yourself WITH supporter status too?

Yes and got banned for it (and paid almost 150$ to level the playing field, all thrown in the garbage), what does this have to do with the thread and will a moderator take care of you?

I hope so. There are 3 that are here and getting all involved, their priority are posts like yours spamming this discussion thread.

Take care of him for what exactly?

You just labelled the community strange for a comment being upvoted but you created TWO alts with supporter status to manipulate the upvote/downvote system, I think calling out hypocrisy is fair here and directly links to statements made in your own post. As long as it doesn't dominate the conversation, take the L and move on, don't label everyone who liked that comment as strange and not expect a bite back.

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 14 December 2022

padib said:

It's clear that he assumed that it's my opinion and that I must defend it. He's free to discuss it, but let him understand very clearly that I made an effort to post a report to inform people, I don't have any duty to defend it at all.

Clear?

I'm not saying you have a duty to defend it. I'm just asking questions, because it's weird that you don't seem to understand why Machi replied and why people appreciated his reply.

A lot of people here take joy in attempting to debunk questionable claims, and others take joy in seeing other people debunk or at the very least ask questions when something doesn't make sense.

Like if I were to post a video about a flat earther, whether I agreed with it or not, I wouldn't be terribly surprised to find that someone took 10 minutes to debunk all of the claims in the video. And I would probably like their post myself, because I appreciate that kind of effort put into debunking things.

But for some reason, you seem to be confused.

>Why are you so upvoted? This community is strange.



padib said:
Machiavellian said:

That sounds great but this bullet point, is it something from your opinion or are these actual facts.  Most of it seems like a wish list more than things actually getting done.  Lets take each one at a time.

  • Aim: Move civilization towards truth and transparency. Make twitter competitive and lead to competitors fighting for who will manage with most accountability, as a value of the service offered.
    • What exactly does this even mean.  Its not like Twitter is the only Social network site so what exactly is transparent today then before.  It would be different if Elon showed all documents not curated documents that would be transparent including his own decisions.  When you control the truth, then is it really truth or what you try to paint it.
  • Defeat bots and agencies, exposing the agencies which steer public discourse.
    • This is still debatable since we do not have enough data to know, if anything really has been done with bots, I still get spammed just as much now then I did before the buyout.
  • Focus on making twitter healthy and setting high traction on engineering and delivery of new features.
    • When we see new features you let us all know.  If the new feature is the blue check mark which was a total crap feast, I am waiting to see something of real substance.
  • Thanks made to Elon for stopping child pornography on twitter in only 30 days vs many years problem under the last lead.
    • I know this one isn't true, because I have seen so much pornography on Twitter without even trying and getting spammed by it.
  • Mainstream media not giving props to Elon about the Twitter files, exposing the higher-ups of the original twitter team and how they managed the Hunter Biden laptop story and covered it up. Gaslighting Matt Taibbi.
    • Yeah, only let 2 select people see the files if that is what you call transparency, I believe you need to check the definition again.  This is what we call control.  You control who sees it, who reports on it and thus you control the narration of the information.  These are the tactics MSM have done for years and now you are champion it from Elon.
  • Questions about what will come in episode 2 of the Twitter Files. What other hidden files can be looked at? 6Gen, Covid.
    • Selective narration as I stated.  He is picking and choosing the topics instead of just opening everything up.  I would give Elon props if he opened it up for all decisions so we get a complete context of how Twitter managed information.  Only distilling info on select topics just give the feeling of pander to a certain base and control of the narration.
  • Advertisers stopped advertising on twitter, Apple resumes and others too when realizing that there was no problem with how Musk was managing Twitter. Ad expenditures drop, need alternative sources of revenue. Advertisers were scared by certain lobbyists, then returned after realizing that values are aligned & waters are safe. Advertisers can tailor ads to non-ad content that they are comfortable associating with.
    • Actually I believe advertisers were iffy because of Elon jumping in saying a lot of stuff but then having to run those statements back once the money got short.  If Elon wanted to make Twitter like Gab, he found out real quick, that is a one way street to losing 44 billion dollars.
  • Make Twitter more fun and welcoming, suited to various tastes & free of bots.
    • I will take this as pure opinion because nothing really changed with Twitter as of today.  Not sure what has changed that has made twitter more fun can you elaborate on that one.
  • Label Mainstream Media state media. If biased, it should be clear.
    • So only MSM is state media or are you saying only MSM are bias not sure what this really mean because media in general is pretty much bias since the majority of them give mostly opinions instead of just stating the facts of the items they report.
  • Let ppl know when government is targeting people. Post should show what the events around it are (government asks to remove, etc.)
    • Hmm, exactly what government asked for any post to be removed.  Could you elaborate on this one.  From Matt Taibbi, even he said the Government was not involved with Hunter Laptop story.  Cannot say Biden because at the time he was not in the Government.

Why are you so upvoted? This community is strange.

The bullet points are notes from the Twitter live, none of it is my opinion.

I'm not going to elaborate on anything, I don't owe you anything. Neither do you owe me anything, relax. I already spent enough time making this breakdown for this community. If you want my opinion, it wasn't worth it.

Who knows, I personally do not care about up or down votes.  So the twitter live is pretty much just an opinion piece as I stated then anything else.  You do not have to elaborate at all, I said what I said to those points, you have a chance to say what you want or nothing at all.  I am not looking for your approval nor am I looking for what you feel is worth my time just like you posting the twitter live bullet point.  You are on a forum, you can expect people to either agree or not agree, respond or not respond.  You can relax as well.  If you feel offended someone did not agree to your post, then you have a chance to defend it or not or just do nothing as you say.  Either way, its not going to make a difference to me.



Machiavellian said:
ConservagameR said:

This is so much funnier actually. It was a simple joke. Let me make it boring though and explain.

Main stream media has boring or nothing burger stories that they often call bombshells, which is ridiculous, to the point of poking fun at.

I made a joke about The Twitter Files being bombshells because that's the type of thing the main stream media would say.

Yet the main stream media is barely talking about it though, which is even funnier because it's totally main stream type news.

All you'd have to do is change the Twitter info wording from left to right or Biden to Trump and it would be getting covered 24/7.

Then you unexpectedly took it seriously yet expected a serious answer to explain what was so bombshell about what was a joke.

You clearly knew it doesn't make sense from a serious perspective, because it's a joke, but you still didn't get it's a joke after my reply and wink.

It was just a joke about the main stream media. You can relax.

Hmm, but its not just MSM that says nothing burger, I see a lot of conservative's media saying the same thing.  So do you only look at the MSM or do you selectively only look at what support your opinion.

I did not unexpectedly take it seriously.  I took what you stated and wanted clarification on it.  If you just stated I am joking and leave it at that, I would not respond.  If you throw in some opinion, I might not agree with then there is a chance I will give you one back.

Jokes on text is hard to tell from context.  If you believe everyone can magically understand your joke, you must be new to forums.  There is nothing to relax about, I am no more serious then you are.  I did not get your joke, even after you gave context, I still do not get the joke but as long as it made you happy that is fine but then again not all jokes are funny or witty like a lot of people tend to believe.

Was said by Louella Parsons over 50 years ago through the main stream media as a gossip columnist. Then the main stream continued with it. Fox started using it eventually like the rest of the media these days because it became the newest hit word again for a time.

Unexpectedly from my point of view. I don't see how it makes sense from yours since you didn't get it. If I explained it was a joke right after the joke that would make it a terrible joke. It's also not clear that me explaining things is always good enough, as some tend to need much deeper detailed breakdowns.

If the context doesn't make sense, you very well might have missed something. If you believe some people are bad based on poor reasoning, it's more likely you'll misinterpret what they're saying. You used, exactly, 3 times in your 4 short sentences when asking what I meant in your first reply. Sounded fairly serious to me. Not all jokes are funny, and while the audience usually gets the final say, if they didn't get the joke then they really don't have much say about it.



Around the Network

Captain Free Speech strikes again; bans journalists under paper thin pretenses. Also just so happens to suspend the account of Twitter's growing competitor, Mastodon. That honestly gives me some incentive to actually check the latter out and maybe sign up.



TallSilhouette said:

Captain Free Speech strikes again; bans journalists under paper thin pretenses. Also just so happens to suspend the account of Twitter's growing competitor, Mastodon. That honestly gives me some incentive to actually check the latter out and maybe sign up.

I think anyone paying attention can see that Elon really isn't about free speech but more about control.  He bought Twitter so he can pretty much do whatever he wants as long as he stays within the laws of the different countries twitter operates in.  I believe we are seeing that Twitter under Musk actually really isn't all that much different from Twitter under previous management when it comes to content control.



Germany's Federal Foreign Office complained about the situation on Twitter today. If this guy can't manage to control his ego it won't take long until at least Europe will do something. This guy might understand some things about business and how to get investors to invest billions in his projects but he's also just insane.



TallSilhouette said:

Captain Free Speech strikes again; bans journalists under paper thin pretenses. Also just so happens to suspend the account of Twitter's growing competitor, Mastodon. That honestly gives me some incentive to actually check the latter out and maybe sign up.

Lol what a fucking loser. How long until he accuses people of being pedos?



ConservagameR said:

Was said by Louella Parsons over 50 years ago through the main stream media as a gossip columnist. Then the main stream continued with it. Fox started using it eventually like the rest of the media these days because it became the newest hit word again for a time.

Unexpectedly from my point of view. I don't see how it makes sense from yours since you didn't get it. If I explained it was a joke right after the joke that would make it a terrible joke. It's also not clear that me explaining things is always good enough, as some tend to need much deeper detailed breakdowns.

If the context doesn't make sense, you very well might have missed something. If you believe some people are bad based on poor reasoning, it's more likely you'll misinterpret what they're saying. You used, exactly, 3 times in your 4 short sentences when asking what I meant in your first reply. Sounded fairly serious to me. Not all jokes are funny, and while the audience usually gets the final say, if they didn't get the joke then they really don't have much say about it.

First, I did not respond to your joke, I responded to your reply.  You made a declaration statement on what the MSM is and isn't reporting which I was more interested in then your original statement. Then you seem to call that one a joke as well which as I stated, doesn't seem to be a joke and if it was, I did not get the context of it.  You stated Bombshell news as if this context meant anything outside of whatever meaning you believe the words mean.  I was trying to deduce which media actually used this statement from MSM which was the point you made within your post.  As I stated, I did not see the connection since I have been following all MSM as well as other media sources on this topic.  Thus contextually, what you consider a joke lack context to the topic we were talking about.

Like I said, most people who make jokes always believe someone gets it and if they do not there is a problem with that person.  The joker never consider that the problem could also be the person making the joke.  Your whole line appear to be, well you did not get the joke, so sucks to be you.  Mine line is that your joke was neither funny, witty, cleaver and lacked imagination.  Who is to say which person would be correct in this situation either way does it really matter.  Its probably one of the reasons I rarely if ever tell jokes over text to strangers since I have no clue who I am talking to and whether or not they would understand if I am joking or not.  Most jokes are contextual so they either hit or miss depending on the audience.

Also, how exactly can you tell if someone is serious when reading text.  I always wondered why people make such comments.  There really is no way for you to tell how someone is serious concerning a subject just by reading a text.  

When you make a comment about relax as if you know me or know how I currently feel just makes me believe you are projecting your own emotions.  You will never see those statements from me because I have no clue what you are feeling thus I will never guess on it.  Text is way to impersonal to gleam anything more than a point either side is trying to get across.