Is Facebook killing freedom and liberty?

[Cunt]

Is facebook correct to ban these folks?

Milo
Laura Loomer

Or are there ANY unfair bannings on facebook? Is it disturbing to anyone that they can arbitrarily ban or limit someone who is speaking to political issues, or even running for office?

[Svartalf]

It's a private organisation, they ban whomever they want based on whatever criteria they want to uphold at the time.

[Cunt]

It's a private organisation, they ban whomever they want based on whatever criteria they want to uphold at the time.

That is why I have managed my personal account and public activities the way I have. (NO facebook reliance)

You would be surprised how many people insist that I should have a facebook for this or that.

To me, they seem quite open about their political activities and the fact that their owners can affect elections. To others, they stop seeing facebook at all, and just enjoy their feed.

[Hermit]

It isn't a misrepresentation. He said Tommy Robinson had called for beheading.

Until you provide a time stamp where you allege he said that, it is a misrepresentation of what was said.

https://youtu.be/BBOO7cpy82I?t=2426

That's Kaarsholm citing the beheading bit. I want the time stamp where Münster mentions any specific thing Tommy said. You claim he did. Point out to me where he did.

It's also the bit I quoted from in my earlier post, except I took it from the primary source: the complete Kaarsholm - Münster interview.

It was in fact Kaarsholm, quoting the Guardian, who raised the allegation that "it is because Tommy Robinson, on Facebook, has encouraged the decapitation of Muslims." (9:56) Münster reiterated what he said in other words less than a minute earlier: "...there isn't one particular post where we can say that this is THE post ... we made the decision based on a number of different signals." (10:11) He then went on to list some of those signals in a general way.

I time stamped it properly, as I time stamped the other quotes I provided. I even linked to the full interview at the bottom of that post. Perhaps you should take your information from it rather than the extracts as edited by Rebel News. You'll discover that the Facebook representative gave the reason for banning Robinson (quoted and time stamped in the above post), and none of them included a single citation of a specific thing Tommy said. You got it all wrong.

[Cunt]

No, I would say HE has it all wrong. I was just caught being misled.

That's less relative to facebook. (though thanks for the correction).

Now, there are rumours (but I've not seen much evidence) of him being a terrible human. I've heard him say plenty that I disagreed with, but I didn't think it should have him removed from social media. It simply moves the conversation somewhere I think it is less productive.

But that's just another way it makes itself irrelevant. Back to my other question, have there been any unfair bannings?

Is there anyone that was banned from their platform who IS worth defending? Or is this thread now all about a contraversial brit journalist?

[Hermit]

No, I would say HE has it all wrong. I was just caught being misled.

Is that your way of saying that you now realise that your assertions:

the interviewer asked the facebook rep [Münster] why, the rep gave his reason, citing a specific thing Tommy said.

and

He [Münster] said Tommy Robinson had called for beheading.

turn out to be factually untrue?

Back to my other question, have there been any unfair bannings?

I save repeating myself I'll just refer you to this post explaining why fairness is not a factor in deciding who gets banned.

[Cunt]

Yes, it turns out to be factually untrue. That's why I thanked you.

I know it isn't a factor, but so many people trust it as a source of some kind, it does tend to have an outscale effect. It's like a giant unregulated newspaper, owned by a foreign government.

[Hermit]

Too many people trust what[/] as a source of some kind? Rebel News? The innerwebs generally?

[Cunt]

Too many people trust what[/] as a source of some kind? Rebel News? The innerwebs generally?

I meant facebook, but I change my answer to 'the innerwebs generally'.

It means more information, but WAY more disinformation.

I've been bothered about that exact thing in the context of getting fit. Most of what is known is corrosive to the main goals. Mostly, you can ignore anything about exercise invented in the last hundred years or so.

And do just fine.

Compare that simplicity to the blizzard of 'information' shared by people with...varying levels of knowledge and varying motivations.

[Hermit]

Too many people trust what as a source of some kind? Rebel News? The innerwebs generally?

I meant facebook, but I change my answer to 'the innerwebs generally'.

It means more information, but WAY more disinformation.

I've been bothered about that exact thing in the context of getting fit. Most of what is known is corrosive to the main goals. Mostly, you can ignore anything about exercise invented in the last hundred years or so.

And do just fine.

Compare that simplicity to the blizzard of 'information' shared by people with...varying levels of knowledge and varying motivations.

This is where filtering is useful. For that you need a questioning, sceptical mindset. With enough experience you learn to recognise flags indicating whether something is true or false. It's not simply what someone writes. It's more a case of what several sources have written on the same issue, then weighing each in comparison with the others. In other words, it's a matter of drilling down for more information. I regard the innerwebs generally as by far the most useful tool for doing that.

[pErvinalia]

I base my opinions on memes.

[Cunt]

Sceptical, eh? I guess wishing for more of that is ok, but in the meantime, people are dying early due to very preventable health problems.

Tim Pool discusses tech censorship issue often. He does a daily podcast/vidcast, but it would really only be touching on that stuff occasionally.

When you say 'you need a sceptical mindset', that is what has led me to be so suspicious of the claims made about Trump. Then I looked into them specifically, and enjoyed finding out the ways most of them are quite deliberate lies.

It gave me a whole new respect for the man, and the outrage saying so sparks is pretty damned informative, too.

I would still prefer a good democrat to a good republican, still lean left over right, but the fact that it's damned near impossible for people to be moderate about it suggests a problem in their factory settings.

Same as mine, but I fucked with mine. I deliberately found some 'righty' sources to enjoy, and voila! They became people. Every bit as brilliant, or stupid as any leftie.

Now, can you, perVinalia, supply such memes, or are you all hat and no cattle?

[Brian Peacock]

The difficult things about getting and staying fit is first understanding that we're hardwired to stoke calories for a coming famine that hasn't arrive where we live for the last few generations, and second, and probably more important, is accepting the reality of our own bodies.

[JimC]

When I hear the word reality I reach for my Luger gin bottle...

[pErvinalia]

When I hear the word famine I reach for my chocolate.