Gab is a free speech platform.
Free speech != white supremacist
Free speech != white supremacist
That doesn't seem to be Gab's goal.
People like asparagirl will not join a free speech platform because her speech isn't really restricted from the non-free speech platforms. The people who have the biggest incentive to join these platforms are the one which are kicked out from all the other networks.
As to these platforms: the whole argument is essentially build on this slippery-slope fallacy that banning vile racism, anti-semitism, etc. inexorably leads more restrictions on speech, and (eventually) the end democracy.
That's demonstrably false: there have always been restrictions on speech (such as obscenity laws), so there really isn't some bright red line that would be crossed, and these restrictions have also not lead to the end of free speech.
There are restrictions on almost any other activity if you expand your definitions to the extremes: the right of peaceful assembly is just as central to democracy, but nobody is bothered by the restriction that you can't hold your protest in the Oval Office.
So maybe these people should consider being kicked out of all these platforms not as an incentive to change platforms, but to rather think about how far they must have removed themselves from society. Seriously: if the people who think youtube comments are worth it ban you, it's time to start listening more and posting less.
I am saying that if you create a product NEW, and hope to lure away people from product OLD, the only people who will migrate to the new platform are the people who have problem with product OLD which product NEW solves for them.
In case of the 'free speech' platforms, the group which has the problem and need of 'free speech' are the ones which are restricted in their speech.
Then they sit back and wonder how they can get those people at the ballot box too.
I don't know how this ends, but people like Asparagirl are clearly the sort of people Trump means when he talks about mobs. They will presumably never stop trying to shut down anyone she identifies as an enemy. This probably ends with some sort of legislative solution, in the long run.
Choosing to disassociate from speech you don't like is yet another use of free speech, as is banning groups that use speech you don't like from your private platform.
So yeah, gab, Reddit, and Facebook are exercising their right to free speech.
There are a lot more people who have the ability to shut down a website, regardless of hosting company choice, than have the ability to shut down dissemination of a flyer or stop a speaker from speaking.
Yes, a TOS is freedom of association. That doesn’t mean it’s a good thing for society when unpopular speech gets banned from every web host they use, in order.
However, this seems to be drifting off topic. Gab’s web site didn’t get shut down, they just got cut off by a payment processor.
Per tptacek's comments, the founder does appear to be an asshole, but that doesn't make him a neo-Nazi.
It's pretty accurate. They sound like Nazis. Take a look at
https://twitter.com/ClenchedFisk/status/1027690034718224384
https://mobile.twitter.com/getongab/status/10565833547645214...