I'm pretty sure MR has filters that wouldn't allow that. They won't even allow the word referring to an orifice on one's behind, not even if you abbreviate it with "a-" at the beginning 😉
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Elon Musk Completes $44 Billion Twitter Takeover, Fires Top Executives, and Makes Himself CEO
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm pretty sure MR has filters that wouldn't allow that. They won't even allow the word referring to an orifice on one's behind, not even if you abbreviate it with "a-" at the beginning 😉
But they apparently don't have a problem with such speech. They want it allowed on Twitter.
It's so fitting that people are celebrating Twitter becoming a home to Tampa Bay fans on the same day that Tom Brady and Gisele Bunchen file for divorce.
I mean, let's get serious, Twitter and big tech are so politically tilted that you don't even seem to notice your acceptance of their extreme bias by tying it to a random news event.
Chief Twit makes sense for this psychopath. I only use Twitter occasionally so it'll be interesting to watch the dumpster fire that ensues as a result of this. A part of me believes he's not going to be the owner of Twitter long-term if Twitter even survives.
This would be a great time for a real competitor to come in.
This would be a great time for a real competitor to come in.
"That little girl is one of the most dangerous people on this planet"
HAHAHAHA look at what you actually just wrote! Has a good person ever said anything like that? Or is it more Emperor Palpatine-ish? And your incredulity about how many times you got banned from Twitter and Facebook would be adorable if not so deplorable.
Here's some good, free advice:
This is simply the rightwing victimhood complex. Conservatives aren't banned from Twitter for wanting lower taxes; they are banned for calling for and celebrating violence, such as the violence taken against Paul Pelosi this morning. And now they are celebrating because they think Elon will allow such "free speech" again.
Exclusive: Twitter is losing its most active users, internal documents show
The heaviest tweeters, vital to its business, have been in "absolute decline" since the pandemic began, an internal researcher wrote. It underscores a challenge for Elon Musk.
The new owner has his work cut out for him.
Last edited:
I'm genuinely curious, but what is considered "hate speech"? The problem I see is the generations who want to change the meaning of every word they find inconvenient to their world view are the same ones who grew up during the height of call out culture. Hate speech has been coined as anything I find offensive, I disagree with, or anything I can attach a label to. Pointing out that men have penises is considered "hate speech" by some.
I'm relatively socially liberal, but the cultural left has been off the rails for a long time and they're the ones who want to control the Overton window. For instance, dissenting opinion is simply not allowed within the ranks. Groups generally don't get smarter when they shut out contrarian views by wrapping everything up they don't like to hear as "hate speech". They use tactics like branding anyone they disagree with as whatever "phobe" is trending at the time if they so much as dare present a counter point/argument.
I wouldn't compare gender identity to race anymore than I would equate pedophilia to race, even though it's known that people are born with such predispositions. You can seek help and control those kinds of urges/feelings (obviously easier said then done, but still possible), but obviously can do nothing about your race. And before you give me the cliche comeback, I'm NOT equating pedophiles to people with gender dysphoria (and also remember not all pedophiles actually molest children nor are all child molesters pedophiles . . . pedophilia simply refers to a sexual preference). I'm using that example because I do find it interesting that almost nobody who would freak out over the other poster's "Apache helicopter" comment would bat an eye if someone mocked a person struggling with pedophilia, even though they were also born with that and did not ask for it (who would?).
What dodge? I'm not the one saying people celebrating violence should be allowed on Twitter. You're expecting me to defend people celebrating attacks on Rand Paul, which I'm clearly not.
So you tell me, if you're against people celebrating violence, why you want them allowed on Twitter?
Hate speech is "public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation".
Oh, so you know why twitter bans people? Good for you.
Rand Paul, who was also attacked (because of conservative twitter posters, you think?) got banned for questioning the value of masks during covid (and I'm vaxxed and wore n95 because most masks are totally useless).
At the same time, you can see anti-semitic comments here right now. https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir
Edited: anyway, i'm looking forward to this new twitter regime. May it be more enlightened than the last.
Last edited:
Part of me blames people's inability to understand the difference between literal and intended meaning. Which results in "I cant believe you said X we need to get rid of x! and that person that said X" when the taken purpose was not at ALL what was intended due to either ignorance of an alternative meaning or a way that some could interpret it. I really don't understand where the people getting "offended on others behalf" comes from with people today. I'm a left-leaning Millennial and I dont understand it.
They want it allowed if it’s against a Democrat, but if it’s against a Republican, they want it to be swiftly moderated. They’re not “free speech absolutists”. No one is.
The funny part is, there are already right-wing echo chamber sites out there, like Parler and Truth Social. The reason those don't take off is because most right-wingers don't want an echo chamber. They want to be able to "own the libs". And they can't do that if there aren't any libs around to own. Lol
Last edited:
Elon Musk’s First Move Is To Fire The Person Most Responsible For Twitter’s Strong Free Speech Stance
Last night, Elon Musk closed his on-again, off-again, on-again deal to buy Twitter, and his very first order of business was to fire a bunch of top executives. This was not necessarily unexpected. …
www.techdirt.com
Well written stance on the so far rather odd first steps Musk has taken.
Fascinating New Study Suggests (Again) That Twitter Moderation Is Biased Against Misinformation, Not Conservatives
Behold! An actually interesting academic study exploring whether or not Twitter moderation has an anti-conservative bias! This is something many of us have been asking for for a while, but it’…
www.techdirt.com
For those that somehow think Twitter was anti-conservative. Just turns out Conservatives spread more mis-information than Liberals. Gee.
Bruins vs Penguins that's a box of hateWhat a pandoras box of hate.
News flash, the world as a whole on average leans left. Not sure if this is news to anyone, but seems to be.
But the argument seems to be: certain things are incorrectly labeled "hate speech", therefore "hate speech" is useless as a category. Isn't there some kind of middle ground? Can't overt hatred be banned but, say, saying men have penises (something I would agree is not hate speech) not be banned? Why does it always have to be the most ridiculous definition applied? There's a middle between "anything goes" and "ban everything I don't like". There are some things that most people (apart from hateful extremists) regard as hateful. Couldn't that be moderated?
it seems Hate and disagreement have become synonymous aside from real hatred.