Hacker News Reader

Comment by AnonDataSci | Hacker News Reader

You can't deny half of the electorate a platform to speak out and expect none of them to get angry.

Science curricula does not platform flat-earthers and gravity deniers

You're equating fringe groups with a mainstream political movement. Those kinds of caricatures are only possible because half of US voters have been totally deplatformed and are unable to speak for themselves. I am very worried that is a recipe for violence.

a) They aren't denied a platform b) They have Parler and MeWe - Parler has been banning certain hashtags, as well as users

Somehow I doubt that these people will be satisfied with a "separate but equal" policy.

Those people literally created those platforms specifically to separate themselves, because they didn't want to consider their speech equal to that of their critics.

You're quite literally posting in a thread about Twitter deplatforming people. I don't understand how you can argue about people leaving Twitter for other platforms "just because."

No, this is a thread about Twitter limiting the degree to which users can interact with misinformation and propaganda from the White House, which you decided was about deplatforming.

Your assertion that Twitter has somehow "deplatformed" half of the electorate, despite even a cursory look at the site showing a vast amount of Republican and pro-Trump content, and the fact that far less than half the country even voted for Trump to begin with, is ridiculous, and it's obvious from your comment history that you're a troll account anyway.

But yes, Parler, Gab, Voat and other alternative platforms were created by right-wingers specifically to have a "safe space" where they could post freely without having their views confronted. They were not deplatformed to those sites, they left for those sites willingly.

Good day AnonDataSci.

No, you can't be Twitter, a platform under the law and enjoying all the associated perks, and then censor the New York Post story about Hunter Biden's laptop. You step into publisher territory at that point and open yourself up to liability. You also can't go and ban the whitehouse press secretary, same deal.

If Twitter would act honorably and allow open conversation, conversations that obviously don't contain death threats, etc, then there would be no need or even desire for an alternate platform.

The problem is that Twitter is acting illegally with its censorship, since it enjoys platform status and all the perks associated, but can ban conservative content.

Everyone should be on Twitter, saying whatever non-illegal political content they want, but they can't because Twitter is disobeying the law.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com