RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments"

RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Greta75 -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 4:50:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer There seems to be a strange sort of view that whining at lefties here and in society at large about their 'political correctness' is somehow an excellent strategy for resolving the issue. It isn't. The only answer is to kick up enough fuss with Twitter to get them to change their decision. That's really all there is to it. Or simply boycott twitter. Which is what I do anyway. I do not have twitter or facebook or instagram.

Edwird -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 4:54:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird There are millions of people on twitter, facebook, etc. Regardless of whatever ban, what is it about Milo that you think makes him more worthy than at least 100,000 other posters who say things ten times smarter than he does? Oh right. I almost forgot who I was talking to here. Bottom feeders seek bottom feeders. His not special, but his specific message that the victim complain to twitter is racist, is NOT racist at all, that's my point. And they are banning him for racism. I don't give a crap if he is racist or not. All I have to do is visit Illinois or New York or Iowa or wherever if I want ubiquitous racism. "but his specific message that the victim complain to twitter is racist" I have NO idea what you are saying there, but 'll take a guess that you saw the word 'victim' and saw a guy screaming loudly, so you found a connection.

bounty44 -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 4:57:46 AM)
that rates right up there with one of the most partisan naïve statements ive seen on the boards---as if liberals have a corner on justice in particular, or all things good in general. among (many) other things, you might find some worth reading about "democratic plantations."

Kaliko -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 5:08:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer The reason Milo got shoved was because he was an unpleasant little turd with views that made everybody want to go out and wipe their shoes on the kerb ... but, most of all, because Twitter didn't think he was good for business. If you don't like that, take it up with Twitter. You're not going to get far a) banging at me about my PC principles then b) banging at me about not using those same principles to defend you and people like you, old boy - seriously, now are you? Oh, I don't know. I think we can all think of some examples in history when being what the majority considered to be "an unpleasant little turd" was actually the catalyst for some real change. That really, really shouldn't be included at all in a reason to silence somebody. Because he didn't abide by TOS? Sure. Because he says something unpleasant? Nope.

Edwird -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 5:20:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 Actually, I don't follow the guy at all. But you made it a point to start a thread for a guy whom you 'don't follow at all.' Just as you want the US to vote for a guy all of us have been familiar with as a clown for thirty years, but since you came to awareness of him six months ago, anybody who says the truth about him is only being 'influenced by liberal media.' It's time for your nap, sweetie.

Greta75 -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 5:27:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird But you made it a point to start a thread for a guy whom you 'don't follow at all.' I make threads of people that I don't follow all the time. Because they just happen to be embroil in a situation that interest me that I read in the news. I am just not a social media person, so I don't follow anybody.

PeonForHer -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 5:27:45 AM)
quote: Oh, I don't know. I think we can all think of some examples in history when being what the majority considered to be "an unpleasant little turd" was actually the catalyst for some real change. That really, really shouldn't be included at all in a reason to silence somebody. Because he didn't abide by TOS? Sure. Because he says something unpleasant? Nope. It isn't the majority that counts here, though, is it? It's Twitter's directors - what they think looks bad for them; legalities ... and the bottom line, their profits, of course. Twitter's directors are the 'powers that be', in this case. It's useless to have a go at lefties on this forum, or at lefties in general. It amounts to just empty bellyaching and goes nowhere.

Kaliko -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 5:43:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: Oh, I don't know. I think we can all think of some examples in history when being what the majority considered to be "an unpleasant little turd" was actually the catalyst for some real change. That really, really shouldn't be included at all in a reason to silence somebody. Because he didn't abide by TOS? Sure. Because he says something unpleasant? Nope. It isn't the majority that counts here, though, is it? It's Twitter's directors - what they think looks bad for them; legalities ... and the bottom line, their profits, of course. Twitter's directors are the 'powers that be', in this case. It's useless to have a go at lefties on this forum, or at lefties in general. It amounts to just empty bellyaching and goes nowhere. Two points on that. 1. But really - isn't this the place for bellyaching? It's a discussion forum. And 2. Well, companies who know what they're doing in social media (and I have to assume Twitter does) monitor the internet for conversations that mention them. I know that this particular forum may not be included in those target results, but bellyaching actually does have more power these days than when we used to sit around the lunch counter griping to the same five people each day. (I know. I used to be their waitress.) Companies pay more and more attention to social media discussions. Anyway, having not read the comments in question myself, I can only assume that Twitter had good reason to do what they did, if for no other reason than to limit their liability if anything more comes from it. They had to do something. I may not like that they had to, but they had to. If something were to ever come from it, Twitter cannot chance being seen as negligent in dealing with the potential issue, assuming that there really have been repeated TOS violations. Again, I don't like that we've become the litigious society that we have, but yes - I can see why Twitter would do it.

Edwird -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 5:53:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness Are you saying black people deserve slavery? Just askin. Are you eating that crap out of your toenails again? Just askin.'

PeonForHer -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 6:03:25 AM)
quote: I know that this particular forum may not be included in those target results, but bellyaching actually does have more power these days than when we used to sit around the lunch counter griping to the same five people each day. (I know. I used to be their waitress.) Companies pay more and more attention to social media discussions. Well, I hope for Milo's sake that Twitter doesn't look at this forum, then. They'd see some of the foul-mouthed berks who support him here and think, 'Ah - no. We definitely don't want him and his sort back.'

Lucylastic -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 6:07:01 AM)
Just shows how much throwback neanderthal dickheads moan like hell. I think that was almost an emotional breakdown

Edwird -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 6:08:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 Every business can ban who-ever they want. But is their decision just? Doesn't matter. That's just how the free market works, sadly. If they consider Milo is bad for business, he's out, and that is that. So removing a gay man's voice on social media is good, but not baking cakes for gay people is bad. I mean, do you even see the fucking bullshit that you write? Do you ever read it back and think that maybe you're just a tad fucking inconsistent and that your position doesn't even have a whiff of rationale behind it? Unbelievable. What a moron. WHAT a fucking moron. So, you think milo is the only gay man on social media? I mean, do you even see the fucking bullshit you write? Unbelievable. What a moron. WHAT a fucking moron.

Edwird -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 6:17:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kaliko quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer The reason Milo got shoved was because he was an unpleasant little turd with views that made everybody want to go out and wipe their shoes on the kerb ... but, most of all, because Twitter didn't think he was good for business. If you don't like that, take it up with Twitter. You're not going to get far a) banging at me about my PC principles then b) banging at me about not using those same principles to defend you and people like you, old boy - seriously, now are you? Oh, I don't know. I think we can all think of some examples in history when being what the majority considered to be "an unpleasant little turd" was actually the catalyst for some real change. That really, really shouldn't be included at all in a reason to silence somebody. Because he didn't abide by TOS? Sure. Because he says something unpleasant? Nope. Rush Limbaugh, forever. Never suppress the voices of reason.

Kaliko -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 6:22:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 Every business can ban who-ever they want. But is their decision just? Doesn't matter. That's just how the free market works, sadly. If they consider Milo is bad for business, he's out, and that is that. So removing a gay man's voice on social media is good, but not baking cakes for gay people is bad. I mean, do you even see the fucking bullshit that you write? Do you ever read it back and think that maybe you're just a tad fucking inconsistent and that your position doesn't even have a whiff of rationale behind it? Unbelievable. What a moron. WHAT a fucking moron. So, you think milo is the only gay man on social media? I mean, do you even see the fucking bullshit you write? Unbelievable. What a moron. WHAT a fucking moron. Actually, (and I know this may be difficult to believe LOL), I thought pretty much the exact same thing as Awareness when I read that. I immediately thought of the gay cake debate and saw the similarity of the two situations. And I thought to myself - how blind are these people, really?

PeonForHer -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 6:51:32 AM)
quote: Actually, (and I know this may be difficult to believe LOL), I thought pretty much the exact same thing as Awareness when I read that. I immediately thought of the gay cake debate and saw the similarity of the two situations. And I thought to myself - how blind are these people, really? Then you, as well as Awareness, read some moral point into what I was saying that wasn't there. I made a pretty simple and obvious comment about the mechanics behind what had happened; you both decided that I was talking about what should have happened. You were both seeing what you wanted to see - in Awareness's case, the better for him to burst his bladder in a fit of outraged pissyness.

Awareness -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 7:12:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 Every business can ban who-ever they want. But is their decision just? Doesn't matter. That's just how the free market works, sadly. If they consider Milo is bad for business, he's out, and that is that. So removing a gay man's voice on social media is good, but not baking cakes for gay people is bad. I mean, do you even see the fucking bullshit that you write? Do you ever read it back and think that maybe you're just a tad fucking inconsistent and that your position doesn't even have a whiff of rationale behind it? Unbelievable. What a moron. WHAT a fucking moron. So, you think milo is the only gay man on social media? I mean, do you even see the fucking bullshit you write? Unbelievable. What a moron. WHAT a fucking moron. How do you have time to post when your tongue is constantly lubricating Peon's ass?

PeonForHer -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 7:14:32 AM)
quote: How do you have time to post when your tongue is constantly lubricating Peon's ass? How do you have time to post when your tongue is constantly lubricating your own ass?

Awareness -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 7:24:10 AM)
You don't let your lubricator speak for himself? Or is his tongue busy right now?

Lucylastic -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 7:28:34 AM)
If they were removing milo because he was gay, you might have a point. But it isnt. He's sucking up the hate all the way to the bank.

MrRodgers -> RE: Milo banned from Twitter for alleged "Racist Comments" (7/21/2016 3:12:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bondageerone who the f... is milo. I was thinking the same thing. Testimony to how detached and regulated by the digital...the modern western world is today. A N. Korean escapee comes to the US and simply can't believe how western people are so completely disconnected here, except only...by their device. Oh and the creators of Twitter have long since cashed out somewhere around $74/share, saw the decline as fast as the rise, now have some insecure, white collar homophobic, bonus baby, college nerds as profit protectors who gleefully shuck any of the unwashed, capitalist proletariat from exposure to their weak spineless, sanguine digital memes who they think are buying products from those who 'monetized' [sic] the stock to $74 share to begin with.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875