Hacker News Reader

The policing of speech got to this level when the site owner expresses no responsibility for contributing to the murderous radicalization of its members.

View on HN

Far worse content is seen in Twitter, and they keep their domain. How so.

edit: immediate downvoting with no response. Really? So isn't there abhorrent content divulgated by Twitter/Facebook/YouTube/etc? Are any of their domains threatened by it? Any of the downvoters, feel free to engage in discussion.

The difference is Twitter is willing to remove the "far worse content" while Gab is not.

Is there any chance they don't yet have the tools to police it? It's taken a fair amount of time and resources for other platforms to do it, to the point that YouTube/Twitter rely on users to do so.

And when threatened, they've done so:

https://www.geekwire.com/2018/gab-user-deletes-anti-semitic-...

Again, seems to me we're holding to different standards.

If you read interviews with Gab’s owner you will see there is no intention to mitigate the site’s extremism or radicalization of its members toward violence.

The shooter's content was scrubbed and gab notified the FBI once they were made aware of it. What else were they supposed to do?

The difference is that the worst stuff you generally see on Twitter is the stuff that is highest-voted content on Gab.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com