Has Twitter "Shadowbanned" Ted Cruz? It Sure Looks That Way

Second item from Jim Geraghty's Morning Jolt, after the obligatory how-terrible-is-the-Williamson-firing piece.

"Shadowbanning" is a banning that's hidden from the user. They don't ban you outright, but they do block everyone except the people you most frequently interact with from seeing your tweets.

A while ago, when I was still on twitter, one of my snarky comments would get 20, 40 retweets, at minimum. Then one day many of my tweets would get zero retweets, or 3.

When Twitter suspended me, I didn't bother getting unsuspended, because I knew they'd already blocked my tweets from 99% of all potential readers. So why bother even using their piece of shit data-exploitation antisocial media?

I would like Twitter to be quizzed heavily about this when they come before Congress to testify. Many conservatives are shadowbanned -- Mollie Hemingway seems to be. Michelle Malkin seems to be.

And even Senator Ted Cruz seems to be.

If this is not actually an open forum, they ought to say so. It's a simple matter of honest disclosure.

Ted Cruz made a point I'm not sure I agree with, but I'd like to hear Twitter quizzed on it. Twitter is immune from the libel published by people using their site because of the Communications Decency Act's provision that an interactive service provider is not responsible for what third parties might write on their service.

That is, they're not considered "publishers" of the libel, even though their platform could be considered a magazine in which the libel was published.

The idea is that they're just providing a neutral space for writing without endorsing anything written on their platform. Like the builder of a wall isn't liable for any defamatory graffiti a third party scrawls on the wall.

But if Twitter is no longer just an open forum but are in fact endorsing some views and punishing others, then they could be construed to be "publishers" of the tweets they permit to be seen, and would therefore not have the protections of the CDA's immunity clause.

Twitter should be made to answer these questions, and made to answer if they still think they're immune from suit from the third party libels the people they're endorsing by not shadowbanning are committing.

Good Point: Remember how the TruCons were totally against pushing back against a corporation's political messaging until The Atlantic fired their cocktail party pal Kevin Williamson (and also dimmed their similar hopes of leaving the conservative movement to work in the more respectable liberal press)?

Well, same thing here.

At what point will "mainstream" conservative media and politicians start caring about Twitter's "shadowbanning" and recognize it as the threat it actually is? When they finally get to Ben Sasse, prob.
— David Reaboi (@davereaboi) April 6, 2018

Twitter, they'll say, is a private company and has the right to shadowban whoever it likes until it does so to the Respectable Conservatives, too. Then they'll be up in arms.

"Eat us last," they begged the crocodile.

Posted by: Ace of Spades at 01:13 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Trump needs to move to gab.

Posted by: Grump928(C) at April 06, 2018 01:14 PM (yQpMk)

2 First.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at April 06, 2018 01:14 PM (/qEW2)

3 or at least crosspost there.

all conservatives should.

Posted by: Grump928(C) at April 06, 2018 01:14 PM (yQpMk)

4 Gab.ai

Posted by: Curmudgeon at April 06, 2018 01:14 PM (ujg0T)

5 Friday nite cruz'ing chix fer free....

Posted by: saf at April 06, 2018 01:14 PM (5IHGB)

6 Top ten?

Posted by: Hawkpilot at April 06, 2018 01:15 PM (p6e8W)

7 Trump needs to grab Twitter's mish.

Posted by: Gumby at April 06, 2018 01:16 PM (2LelM)

8 Mixed feelings. I hated when you cheated on us with that whore twitter, but not in favor of them being cunts to you.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 06, 2018 01:17 PM (fuK7c)

9
NBC News
@NBCNews
Jill Filipovic: Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved. Republicans' still need to.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at April 06, 2018 01:17 PM (+y/Ru)

10
A while ago, when I was still on twitter, one of my snarky comments would get 20, 40 retweets, at minimum. Then one day many of my tweets would get zero retweets, or 3.

Actually it's because people just stopped listening to you.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at April 06, 2018 01:17 PM (BWL+E)

11 So is Social Media a publication or a communications tool? Depending on how you define it, it does have different treatment in law.

Posted by: Gumby at April 06, 2018 01:17 PM (2LelM)

12 Sounds like a civil rights violazzzzZZZZzzzz

Posted by: DOJ at April 06, 2018 01:17 PM (r9UYA)

13 They also have just suspended Owen Benjamin, a Libertarian comedian.

Posted by: Lizzy at April 06, 2018 01:17 PM (W+vEI)

14 there can only be socialist utopia with suppression of speech

Posted by: brak at April 06, 2018 01:18 PM (WT+Ie)

15 Shadowbanning sounds paranoid, but its 100% real. They even found the accounts which Twitter uses to accomplish it; specific innocuous looking official accounts you've never interacted with that act as a control: if they have you blocked, then you're in the account to restrict viewing of your tweets.

Its a private company and they're free to do whatever stupid crap they want... but that doesn't make it any less stupid.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:18 PM (39g3+)

16 So, Twitter is giving a sizable "donation" to Cruz's opponent Beto O'Rourke, the pretend Latino.

Posted by: Ever at April 06, 2018 01:18 PM (OLS0m)

17 I keep telling you, it's not shadowbanning, it's double secret probation.

Posted by: pep at April 06, 2018 01:18 PM (LbbL1)

18 To me it's the same as if, say, the former Bell Telephone monopoly decided they weren't going to serve black households because of higher payment delinquency rates. Twitter's a public accommodation; make them live up to it.

Posted by: andycanuck at April 06, 2018 01:18 PM (ewxPW)

19 I'm sure TruCons will now tell us private businesses can do whatever they want, and it's actually a very liberal idea that we complain about a US Senator not being able to have equal access to a communication platform for no plausible violation other than being a Republican.

I'm sure if back in the day, AT&T forbid Republicans from using their phone service, that would also be fair play, and we would just have to wait around for another phone company to be formed that would maybe let use the phone service.

Being conservative means letting businesses wage their war of social marxism and we better not dare complain.

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 01:18 PM (lKmt3)

20 >>Jill Filipovic: Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved. Republicans' still need to.

Yeah, Teddy decided to do waitress sammiches with Chris Dodd instead of bothering to get them alone.

Posted by: Lizzy at April 06, 2018 01:18 PM (W+vEI)

21 Reply to the last thread: Gulag Archipelago is available as a pdf from Archive.org IIRC

Posted by: CN at April 06, 2018 01:19 PM (5gaNQ)

22 I like Gab okay but its really awkward to post on. It seems like nobody pays any attention to anything you post unless its really radically angry about some political issue, and further its infested with the worst sort of people. Someone can seem like an interesting, decent sort, then you'll get a JOOS CONTROL THE WEATHER post out of the blue from them.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:19 PM (39g3+)

23 Shadowbanning members of Congress sounds like a real "derpderpderp" move to me. I mean, Trump is making noises about going after these guys and you want to give him Congressional support for doing that?

"Hi, we're from the FTC, we're just going to tear your heart out by way of your rectum."
*screaming*
"I'm a member of Congress and I approve of this. Who's the big fella now?"
*screaming, sobbing*

Posted by: Mikey NTH - Banhammer 40,000 - The Future of Ace Will Be Banning - An Outrage Outlet Exclusive! at April 06, 2018 01:19 PM (hLRSq)

24 If this is not actually an open forum, they ought to say so. It's a simple matter of honest disclosure.

Honesty is not part of their business model.

Posted by: GnuBreed at April 06, 2018 01:19 PM (0ogQG)

25 Isn't CRUZING fer olde ex Cubanos who can't salsa? 1sy stop Habana pepper town,with 50's Chevies on the Malecon!!!

Posted by: saf at April 06, 2018 01:19 PM (5IHGB)

26 There's really no reason to use Twitter while Gab exists. Gab is not for the faint of heart, true, but that's the price of a truly free service. Remember that Jack of Twitter is an enthusiastic SJW and that lefty scrunt Anna Sarkeesian is on their Orwellian Security Commission or whatever they call their version of MiniTru.

Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at April 06, 2018 01:20 PM (RD7QR)

27 You're obviously paranoid, Mr. O'Spades. Paranoid...paranoid...paranoid...paranoid...

Posted by: Your Friends At Twitter at April 06, 2018 01:20 PM (O5Q3r)

28 But if Twitter is no longer just an open forum but are in fact endorsing some views and punishing others, then they could be construed to be "publishers" of the tweets they permit to be seen, and would therefore not have the protections of the CDA's immunity clause.

Ouch. Excellent point. You, or Ted, should sue them. And honestly, you could use the money.

Posted by: Grump928(C) at April 06, 2018 01:20 PM (yQpMk)

29 Imagine how funny it would be if BSG got shadowbanned. He'd go crazy out of frustration and we'd still have our peace and quiet.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at April 06, 2018 01:20 PM (/qEW2)

30 Jill Filipovic: Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved. Republicans' still need to.

Yeah I saw that. Incalculably stupid spin.

Democrats when Kennedy murdered a woman: it was a mistake, let him be, he's suffered so much!
Republicans when Kennedy murdered a woman: HE MURDERED HER AND GOT AWAY WITH IT!!!!

Who needs to change here???

Spacey, Wiener, Weinstein, Clinton, Franken, the list goes on and on and on and on.... Democrats have evolved into being bigger hypocrites, is all.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:21 PM (39g3+)

31 >>>A while ago, when I was still on twitter, one of my snarky comments would get 20, 40 retweets, at minimum. Then one day many of my tweets would get zero retweets, or 3.

Actually it's because people just stopped listening to you

And very abruptly. It must have been when he took a strong position on longbows.

Posted by: pep at April 06, 2018 01:21 PM (LbbL1)

32
Shame about Cruz. Hopefully he'll return to 'favorite'ing the good stuff on PronHub.

Posted by: Forgot My Nic at April 06, 2018 01:21 PM (LOgQ4)

33

I would like Twitter to be quizzed heavily about this when they come before Congress to testify. Many conservatives are shadowbanned -- Mollie Hemingway seems to be. Michelle Malkin seems to be.

And even Senator Ted Cruz seems to be.
*********
Wow. This is really frightening

Glad you posted this Ace. Next Monday when Congress comes back from recess I will be calling and asking them to ask these questions.

Posted by: redridinghood at April 06, 2018 01:21 PM (PvFoN)

34 eply to the last thread: Gulag Archipelago is available as a pdf from Archive.org IIRC
Posted by: CN at April 06, 2018 01:19 PM (5gaNQ)

interesting. thx. i know of Gutenberg, not this one. gotta be careful about translation. not all are the same quality, most likely.

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:22 PM (wm1u1)

35 Twitter......Big Ole Bag of Dicks, some assembly required.

Posted by: CSMBigBird at April 06, 2018 01:22 PM (jsWA8)

36 What are the topics that Cruz tweets?

Think of it as targeted advertising. You keep honey bees, you tweet about honeybees, and the ads you get are things related to honey, nutrition, tools for beekeepers.

So if Cruz was tweeting about the Budget Reconciliation of 1875 and how it affects congressional budgeting, who would be interested in that.

Posted by: Skandia Recluse at April 06, 2018 01:22 PM (roQNm)

37 Reddit shadow bans people too.

When I first heard about this, I realized how feminine and faggy it is. How passive-aggressive it is.

It's absolutely Millenial.

Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at April 06, 2018 01:22 PM (4ErVI)

38 Cruz's Twitter retorts were always a knock out. If you can't beat him, delete him.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at April 06, 2018 01:22 PM (qB3GS)

39 [iJill Filipovic: Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved. Republicans' still need to.

People never say shit like this in front of me. I would instantly say 'What do you mean? Please, be specific. What have the Democrats learned that the Republicans need to?'

I end a lot of conversations.

Posted by: Grump928(C) at April 06, 2018 01:22 PM (yQpMk)

40 If this is not actually an open forum, they ought to say so. It's a simple matter of honest disclosure.

Yeah its one thing to openly say "well we don't like that so we won't allow it" but its another to be sneaky about it. People really don't have any respect or patience with that crap.

But with Gab its kind of the opposite problem. Not everyone banned from Twitter is a maligned saint. Some of them really ought not have a public voice anywhere :/

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:22 PM (39g3+)

41 29 Imagine how funny it would be if *** got shadowbanned. He'd go crazy out of frustration and we'd still have our peace and quiet.
Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at April 06, 2018 01:20 PM (/qEW2)

Dude.... don't Beetlejuice him!

Posted by: Hikaru at April 06, 2018 01:23 PM (9TK8E)

42 The left loses arguments on Twitter,that can't be allowed to continue.Soon it will be the same echo chamber as the networks.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 01:23 PM (LiyEm)

43 Nice reasoned argument Ace.

Only problem is that the gopE is fine with twatter doing what they are doing.

Posted by: Jukin the Deplorable and Profoundly Unserious at April 06, 2018 01:23 PM (pw+jk)

44 >> Then one day many of my tweets would get zero retweets, or 3.

The day
The Fun-neh
...died.

Posted by: Don McLean at April 06, 2018 01:23 PM (UJkYd)

45 People never say shit like this in front of me. I would instantly say 'What do you mean? Please, be specific. What have the Democrats learned that the Republicans need to?'

Abortion!!!!! Transexual bathrooms!!! GRABBED BY THE PUTHY!!!!! SHUT UP DADDY!!!!

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:23 PM (39g3+)

46 >>>Jill Filipovic: Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved. Republicans' still need to.

Dems have evolved from killing women to raping them. You've come a long way, baby.

Posted by: Citizen Cake at April 06, 2018 01:23 PM (ppaKI)

47 What makes this tacit manipulation dangerous is that the Twits in San Francisco are clearly using their power to manufacture consensus with political consequences.

It's time for Goth Fonzie and his band of merry closeted stoners to understand that the former public/private distinctions are no longer operative.

Twitter usurped the public square - actual News is made on the platform daily. What right do these assholes have to restrict it because "muh servers?"

Posted by: Alec Leamas at April 06, 2018 01:23 PM (OIiRj)

48 Controlling who can and can't talk is a great idea when I pick.

But when you pick ... that sucks.

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 01:24 PM (fiGNd)

49 Twitter should be flushed for the toilet it really has become.

Posted by: tcn in AK at April 06, 2018 01:24 PM (7UW64)

50 Shirley no one expects consistency from leftards, do they?

Rules? They don't have any. Oh wait, they do: there are no rules.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy likes lobster at April 06, 2018 01:24 PM (GdWl+)

51 what is CDA immunity clause ?

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:24 PM (wm1u1)

52 I'm shadowdancing

Posted by: Zombie Andy Gibb at April 06, 2018 01:24 PM (qB3GS)

53 "Jill Filipovic: Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved. Republicans' still need to."

Jill is kinda cute. Too bad it is wasted on such a vile, hateful shrew.

Posted by: Benji Carver at April 06, 2018 01:24 PM (OD2ni)

54 Should be easy to test of someone is shadowbanned. Just create a new twitter account and see if you can see the tweets.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at April 06, 2018 01:24 PM (/qEW2)

55
Good to see Banana dude is on auto-delete.

Posted by: Forgot My Nic at April 06, 2018 01:25 PM (LOgQ4)

56 Shareholder lawsuit that this practice diminishes stock value.

Posted by: RoyalOil at April 06, 2018 01:25 PM (C9VcF)

57 Jill Filipovic: Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved. Republicans' still need to.

========

But democrats need to evolve their views on plants.

I've seen and felt terrible things, terrible.

Posted by: The Ficus at April 06, 2018 01:25 PM (pw+jk)

58 "When Twitter suspended me, I didn't bother getting unsuspended,"

Why was Ace suspended? Too many funny goofs on Egg McMuffin and "The Expert."

Posted by: Benji Carver at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (OD2ni)

59 Democrats view of women have changed.

They won't let them suffocate in a submerged car, They just think sexual harrassment and rape are part of the perks of their jobs in government, the media and entertainment. They still think abortion should take care of their "mistakes" no mater how far along the baby is.

Thanks for letting us know, Jill

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (tpDAe)

60 Jill is kinda cute. Too bad it is wasted on such a vile, hateful shrew.

Posted by: Benji Carver at April 06, 2018 01:24 PM (OD2ni)

Nothing three days in a basement can't fix.

Imagine the possibilities.

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (fiGNd)

61 I have never been re-tweeted.

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (UJkYd)

62 55
Good to see Banana dude is on auto-delete.
Posted by: Forgot My Nic at April 06, 2018 01:25 PM (LOgQ4)

Oh, he's still trying? That's hilarious. Seriously, you should just take a hint when that happens.

Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (RD7QR)

63 Eventually all businesses that hate half of their consumers will go bust. See ESPN.

Posted by: Citizen Cake at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (ppaKI)

64 what is CDA immunity clause ?

Ace can't be sued for what we comment, mostly, or at least, hopefully.

**crosses fingers**

Posted by: Grump928(C) at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (yQpMk)

65 Shadowbanning is racist.

Posted by: Roy at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (7n4KQ)

66 Bill Clinto didn't evolve too much since Chappaquiddick.

Posted by: Zombie Andy Gibb at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (qB3GS)

67 But with Gab its kind of the opposite problem. Not everyone banned from Twitter is a maligned saint. Some of them really ought not have a public voice anywhere :/

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:22 PM (39g3+)

Either you have freedom of speech, or you don't. There are lots of idiots, malingerers, asshats and inhuman cretins out there, all speaking out loud. Too bad. If you say one group does not deserve to have a voice.....you are saying that neither do you.

Posted by: tcn in AK at April 06, 2018 01:27 PM (7UW64)

68
>>>Jill Filipovic: Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved. Republicans' still need to.

Q: Are we not women?
A: We are DEVO

Posted by: Filipovic tube at April 06, 2018 01:27 PM (IqV8l)

69 I never did twitter...and I never will.
Eff 'em.

Posted by: Diogenes at April 06, 2018 01:27 PM (8DZhw)

70 I want a new microblogging forum.
Is there one?

Posted by: sarahw at April 06, 2018 01:27 PM (Sp1NT)

71 9
NBC News
@NBCNews
Jill Filipovic: Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved. Republicans' still need to.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at April 06, 2018 01:17 PM (+y/Ru)

Now they just sexually assault them and accuse them of bimbo eruptions.

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 01:27 PM (cAnNx)

72 The biggest problem the left has is that they didn't control social media and it was used by their political foes very powerfully and effectively to get out the news they tried to suppress and to correct the lies they tried to spread. It gave President Trump an audience and a platform that they were trying to deny him.

In the past, if they didn't like someone -- like a Republican presidential candidate -- they could easily just cut off his air. Press would either not bother reporting what they said, give it very little coverage, edit it heavily to look bad, or only talk about it in a negative context on a heavily biased opinion show.

In 2016 ol' Two Scoops bypassed all that with social media, and his supporters avalanched the attempt to suppress his voice.

That is what the whole "fake news" thing was about, they are infuriated that their control was shattered. They weren't the gate keepers any longer. So now they're trying to find ways to get that power back, but in a way that doesn't harm their favorite toys in social media.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (39g3+)

73 I have never been re-tweeted.

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (UJkYd)

Hell ... I've never tweeted.

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (fiGNd)

74 Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:22 PM (39g3+)

I'm on Gab for the same reason I'm on Tumblr. Business. Of course, by the time I have nothing to do with either Stormers or Tumblerinas I'm not sure what my actual reach is. I'm still trying to get Horde user names though, so hopefully that will help.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (rp9xB)

75 Ace can't be sued for what we comment, mostly, or at least, hopefully.

**crosses fingers**
Posted by: Grump928(C) at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (yQpMk)

how convenient ....

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (wm1u1)

76
Thanks for letting us know, Jill

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at April 06, 2018 01:26 PM (tpDAe)

To be more accurate, the democrats who SURVIVE ABORTION have evolved, or some such shit.

Posted by: tcn in AK at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (7UW64)

77 >>Hell ... I've never tweeted.

You figured out my recipe.

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (1gDYJ)

78 Scott Adams talked about how Twitter doesn't shadow ban but he calls it throttling, because some people see the tweets and people that call out twitter for shadowbanning look like conspiracy theory nutcases.

Scott Adams has been shadowbanned

Posted by: Patrick From Ohio at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (SjHNI)

79 The publishing non-imunity is a no-brainer and it should either ruin them or force them to straighter up their act.

Posted by: Dirks Strewn at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (kfcYC)

80 >>>But with Gab its kind of the opposite problem. Not everyone banned from Twitter is a maligned saint. Some of them really ought not have a public voice anywhere :/

I don't know about Gab.ai but I do know that every forum needs SOME moderation.

I think the correct alternative to Twitter is not gab.ai, but to just get the fuck off these timewasting pieces of shit altogether.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (8rNrN)

81 50
Shirley no one expects consistency from leftards, do they?

Rules? They don't have any. Oh wait, they do: there are no rules.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy likes lobster at April 06, 2018 01:24 PM (GdWl+)

****
Stop calling me Shirley.

Posted by: Lt. Frank Drebbin at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (Fb9aZ)

82 To me it's the same as if, say, the former Bell Telephone monopoly decided they weren't going to serve black households because of higher payment delinquency rates. Twitter's a public accommodation; make them live up to it.

Posted by: andycanuck at April 06, 2018 01:18 PM (ewxPW)

Common carriers get much different treatment under the law. Twitter may want to look into the ramifications of that.

While it maybe a definitional stretch, I wouldn't want to run that risk.

So she means that Republicans

Posted by: Mikey NTH - Banhammer 40,000 - The Future of Ace Will Be Banning - An Outrage Outlet Exclusive! at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (hLRSq)

83 If Twitter is allowing one candidate free access to its platform but denying it to another, is that not an in-kind political donation? Isn't that illegal?

And can one argue that the systematic denial of supporters of a candidate also an in-kind political donation?

I have no doubt that Jeff Sessions will get right on it...

Posted by: Skeptical at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (oc+Zp)

84 Isn't that racist alt-right anti-Semite Spencer still on Twitter?

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (cAnNx)

85 NBC News
@NBCNews
Jill Filipovic: Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved. Republicans' still need to.
========

Damn right! Why drown them when we can make sandwiches out them???

Posted by: Chris Dodd & Ted Kennedy at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (vg8iE)

86 http://bit.ly/2GKcOoA
++++
Bombshell: Facebook Admits 'Most' of Site's 2 Billion Users Compromised by 'Malicious Actors' | Breitbart
--------
Not completely OT

Posted by: DeploraBOT at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (y3aQB)

87 If you say one group does not deserve to have a voice.....you are saying that neither do you.

I agree, and in principle support this. Its just... this is the kind of thing that used to get you punched in the face or just ostracized entirely from polite company. Now they just puke it right in your lap and grin as you fume helplessly.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (39g3+)

88 15 Shadowbanning sounds paranoid, but its 100% real. They even found the accounts which Twitter uses to accomplish it; specific innocuous looking official accounts you've never interacted with that act as a control: if they have you blocked, then you're in the account to restrict viewing of your tweets.

Its a private company and they're free to do whatever stupid crap they want... but that doesn't make it any less stupid.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor

Not quite. They are free to ban what they don't like as long as they are willing to be responsible for what they do allow.

Posted by: Dirks Strewn at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (kfcYC)

89 You figured out my recipe.

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (1gDYJ)

That's why they always give me a spork, garrett. My dizzying intellect.

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (fiGNd)

90 28 But if Twitter is no longer just an open forum but are in fact endorsing some views and punishing others, then they could be construed to be "publishers" of the tweets they permit to be seen, and would therefore not have the protections of the CDA's immunity clause.

Ouch. Excellent point. You, or Ted, should sue them. And honestly, you could use the money.

So, are all the readers here that are still on Twitter permitted to post that? And, tell them Ace says so?

Posted by: Ever at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (OLS0m)

91 >>>75 Ace can't be sued for what we comment, mostly, or at least, hopefully.

good eyes. The part about Ted Cruz's suggestion for making Twitter liable for libel (whatever) that worries me is that such a rule would, of course, also apply to sites like this one, making it a highly dubious notion that comments would even be permitted.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:30 PM (8rNrN)

92 What are the topics that Cruz tweets?

Think of it as targeted advertising. You keep honey bees, you tweet about honeybees, and the ads you get are things related to honey, nutrition, tools for beekeepers.

So if Cruz was tweeting about the Budget Reconciliation of 1875 and how it affects congressional budgeting, who would be interested in that.
Posted by: Skandia Recluse

____________

Are liberal members of Congress receiving the same treatment? Something tells me no.

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 01:30 PM (lKmt3)

93 Twitter, for me, has become a treasure trove of information-sharing and connecting the dots, especially as we near the release of Horowitz's report. THIS is what the left fears (not silly slams, etc.). They fear the peaceful assembly of the people, learning, getting wiser. And that's why we suddenly have the left wanting to take down these tools - Facebook, Twitter - to resurrect them under conditions more favorable to their agenda.
It is the modern-age's version of peaceful assembly, and they seek to impede that.
I do not have a Twitter account, but every day I visit a handful of sites that share and parse government documents, then provide just enough context (names and connections) to reveal the bigger picture. Although I'm merely a reader, I feel a part of a research collaborative, across the country. There has been no other time like this in our nation's existence. It's is absolutely essential that we have such tools, like highways, to allow us access to one another, if only to thwart the left who would have us blind and dumb.

Posted by: curley'slarryandmeeniemoe at April 06, 2018 01:30 PM (iFs8n)

94 Put a MySerialNumber++ into all your tweets and people will know if they're missing some of them.

Posted by: DaveA at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (FhXTo)

95 >>What are the topics that Cruz tweets?

Big Titty Porn Starlets, apparently.

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (mF1qm)

96 Oooooh, Ace, you just tingled my leg with your legal analysis.

Posted by: SFGoth at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (dZ756)

97 Posted by: tcn in AK at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (7UW64)

Really-what on earth did she mean? It's stupid It's not like R-as wimpy as they can be- are endorsing taking the vote away from women or women not being in the workforce at all.

The only route of acceptable "evolution" is thinking abortion should be permitted under any circumstances?

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (tpDAe)

98 Lame asses like Noah Rothman and other pet "conservatives" will be the only ones allowed to stay.Just like the rest of the mass media

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (LiyEm)

99 "Eventually all businesses that hate half of their consumers will go bust. See ESPN.
Posted by: Citizen Cake"

Clay Travis has a hilarious article on OutKick The Coverage about ESPN's new woke morning show that nobody is watching. For some reason, ESPN thought sports fans would want to watch ultra lib Michelle Beadle rant about Trump for a couple of hours every morning. They were wrong.

Posted by: Benji Carver at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (OD2ni)

100 I can shadow fap. Fuck Twitter.

Posted by: Gumby at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (2LelM)

101 making it a highly dubious notion that comments would even be permitted.

Breitbart wept in heaven.

Posted by: Grump928(C) at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (yQpMk)

102 >>>Big Titty Porn Starlets, apparently.

he's a great american.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (8rNrN)

103 Its just... this is the kind of thing that used to get you punched in the face or just ostracized entirely from polite company.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (39g3+)

There's your problem. Polite Company is entirely over-rated.

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (fiGNd)

104 You figured out my recipe.
Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (1gDYJ)
---------

NOW you're giving out your recipes.

Posted by: bluebell at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (oMtOd)

105 What are the topics that Cruz tweets?

Big Titty Porn Starlets, apparently.
Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (mF1qm)

His response to that was pretty funny actually.

Posted by: Zombie Andy Gibb at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (qB3GS)

106 Facebook Admits 'Most' of Site's 2 Billion Users Compromised by 'Malicious Actors'

Translation: we sold your crap to everyone without regard to who they are or what they'd use it for, but now act shocked, shocked that some bad people were our customers.

For the record: shadow banned people are not utterly silenced. They are just severely limited as to their reach. twitter uses all sorts of algorithms to decide what you see when and how many times. Shadowbanning severely limits that to everyone and some never see some of your posts. You can call that "throttling" if you choose, but it means the same thing.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (39g3+)

107 But if Twitter is no longer just an open forum but are in fact
endorsing some views and punishing others, then they could be construed
to be "publishers" of the tweets they permit to be seen, and would
therefore not have the protections of the CDA's immunity clause.

So would an enterprising, freedom loving lawyer get paid for turning Twitter into the Town Square they claim to be, instead of the One-Party Political Tool that Twitter actually is?

How would this happen? There is a big payoff for who cracks that nut.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (UsCnO)

108 Twitter (and FB, etc) is not really a free service. They make money by getting people to SPEND their time and energy on reading and producing content, which Twitter harvests (supposedly) for profit.

So Twitter is selling something, and as with any product, they should not be allowed to advertise falsely. When they manipulate views and do shadow bans, they are misleading people about their products.

Also, they are doing that for seditious political purposes. Suddenly the crazy liberal nonsense is spreading everywhere, and the best content (Ace's) is stuck in the mud, sent down a dark alley and shadow banned to death.

That internet bill of rights idea could work, starting with at the very least revealing what manipulation is occurring, stopping the shadow bans, providing an open platform except for blatant vulgarity. But they may have fascist deep state on their side, so maintaining rights won't be an easy task.

Posted by: illiniwek at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (bT8Z4)

109 "Twitter is immune from the libel published by people using their site
because of the Communications Decency Act's provision that an
interactive service provider is not responsible for what third parties
might write on their service."

That may be. But I would like to see people like Laura Ingraham who are victims of the twitter lynch mobs go after people like Hogg and their sponsors who are empowering him and using him as a mouthpiece (Everytown? Soros? and perhaps even Twitter for selectively allowing it?) tortious interference with a business relationship.

This is war. Act like it.

Posted by: flounderbot, rebel, vulgarian, deplorabot, winner at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (Dp6qK)

110 -
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of rightwingers?

The Shadowban knows!

Posted by: Twatter, Detector of Eeevill at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (pMGkg)

111 Free speech does not include thought-crime.

Posted by: Neil deGrasse Tyson's rapey banana at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (1L9V9)

112 good news - baseball has started
bad news - my team is already 2 games out.
good news - home opener today
bad news - I didn't get tickets this year
good news - its snowing
bad news - maybe delayed or canceled.
good news - I didn't get tickets this year

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (r+sAi)

113 93 Twitter, for me, has become a treasure trove of information-sharing and connecting the dots, especially as we near the release of Horowitz's report.
----------------------
As we near the release? WTF? I want my report now!

Posted by: Gumby at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (2LelM)

114 >>he's a great american.
Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (8rNrN)

THREADWINNER!

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (mF1qm)

115 94 Put a MySerialNumber++ into all your tweets and people will know if they're missing some of them.
Posted by: DaveA at April 06, 2018 01:31 PM (FhXTo)

--

like a check number?
that's an a interesting idea

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (hMwEB)

116 >>>This is war. Act like it.

agreed. I'm way past #MuhPrinciples.

Muh Main Principle is fucking survival. All other principles are subordinate to that one.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (8rNrN)

117 >>But if Twitter is no longer just an open forum but are in fact endorsing some views and punishing others, then they could be construed to be "publishers" of the tweets they permit to be seen, and would therefore not have the protections of the CDA's immunity clause.

They currently use the blue checkmark more as approval than as identity verification.

They don't bestow, or take away, the blue checkmark if they don't like a user's content.

Posted by: Lizzy at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (W+vEI)

118 Twitter will ban anyone who is pro-life or for traditional marriage or a wall, but they will allow the people they agree with to make threats and slander.

They could be held accountable if they are both "policing" and letting that crap through.

Posted by: Dirks Strewn at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (kfcYC)

119 They would shaddowban PDT if they thought they could get away with it.

Posted by: JAS at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (sCN2W)

120 Now they just puke it right in your lap and grin as you fume helplessly.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (39g3+)

So walk away. You are free to do that, too.

I don't watch network tv news. It is the same deal. Don't piss on my head and tell me it's raining. I will walk away.

Posted by: tcn in AK at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (7UW64)

121 I think the correct alternative to Twitter is not gab.ai, but to just get the fuck off these timewasting pieces of shit altogether.

Agreed. My foray on Gab was the equal of my blogging success, which was exactly zero.

Insty has been posting lately that some people are going back to blogs for their info. At least the Zucks of the world can't shadowban them.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy likes lobster at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (GdWl+)

122 How would this happen? There is a big payoff for who cracks that nut.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (UsCnO)

Busting a large one pays pretty well, too.

Posted by: Peter North at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (fiGNd)

123 Shadowbanning severely limits that to everyone and
some never see some of your posts. You can call that "throttling" if
you choose, but it means the same thing.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:32 PM (39g3+)

I would call it censorship.

But I am getting really old and can barely figure out half the features on my cell phone.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (UsCnO)

124 I'm shadowdancing

I'm doing the safety dance!

Posted by: Archer at April 06, 2018 01:34 PM (gbWkA)

125 86 http://bit.ly/2GKcOoA
++++
Bombshell: Facebook Admits 'Most' of Site's 2 Billion Users Compromised by 'Malicious Actors' | Breitbart
--------
Not completely OT
Posted by: DeploraBOT at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (y3aQB)

I guess the gravity of that depends on your definition of "malicious actors."

Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at April 06, 2018 01:34 PM (RD7QR)

126 But if Twitter is no longer just an open forum but are in fact endorsing some views and punishing others, then they could be construed to be "publishers" of the tweets they permit to be seen, and would therefore not have the protections of the CDA's immunity clause.

Twitter should be made to answer these questions, and made to answer if they still think they're immune from suit from the third party libels the people they're endorsing by not shadowbanning are committing.

Ding ding ding ding ding.

This is the means of attack. The social compact made to allow, well, the Horde to exist without ace being afraid of being sued into oblivion when we start up the Searchlight Strangler stuff is that if you are merely a forum then you are not a publisher and thus you are immune from suit for libel.

For example, Yelp could not exist without that protection because people have been caught repeatedly making up lies about their competition on Yelp. As part of the libel suit, Yelp can be instructed to take down a review but Yelp itself cannot be sued.

If Twitter is going to play games with being an open forum, then it's time to play games back with immunity.

Play stupid games. Win stupid prizes.

Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at April 06, 2018 01:35 PM (mf5HN)

127 So she means that Republicans

Posted by: Mikey NTH
Oh no! Twitter or Facebook cut off Mikey in mid-sentence! See?! See?!!!

Posted by: andycanuck at April 06, 2018 01:35 PM (ewxPW)

128 Odd that twitter would ramp up on this sort of censorship considering the recent youtube incident. Scratch that, I'm sure all twitter users are totes super sane.

Posted by: Fritz at April 06, 2018 01:35 PM (bJ0w+)

129 Rush talking about Morning Woke on ESPn

Posted by: josephistan at April 06, 2018 01:35 PM (7HtZB)

130 I got your name from a friend of a friend
Who said he used to work with you
Remember the all night creature from Stereo Ninety Two
Yeah, I said, "Could you relate to our quarter track tape
You know the band performs in the nude"
He said, "Uh huh don't call us child, we'll call you"

Posted by: Sugarloaf at April 06, 2018 01:35 PM (ATVNj)

131 But if Twitter is no longer just an open forum"

Hmm. I missed that in their IPO...

It's a media product, used to sell advertising. Not the old Bell System...

And I've never been banned on it nor facebook!

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 01:35 PM (7LY+6)

132 Shadowbanned? The k.d. lang album?

Posted by: Burger Chef at April 06, 2018 01:35 PM (RuIsu)

133 So Ace, have you banned anyone here or on twitter?

Posted by: Really? at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (LhVCK)

134 HAHAHA Ace banned from twatter. Go to GAB the only free speech platform, and then complain about the antisemitism.

Posted by: DFCtomm at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (50gG9)

135 >>Ding ding ding ding ding.

I love it when The Empress gets all Legal Teachy.

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (mF1qm)

136 I'd love to see Cruz grill these guys.
But I'd really love an alternative platform that actually believes in free speech.

Too bad we can't have a website for speech actually protected by the government. It'd be a sewer, but it'd be free. As long as people who understood free speech ran it.

Posted by: Iblis at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (ANKMf)

137 So walk away. You are free to do that, too.

Yeah and Gab does make it really easy to do that, you can mute people or accounts and topics, all kinds of controls. Its just a nasty place because of the awful people in there and they will spring it on you without warning. Like having a nice, friendly uncle who suddenly spouts off about lynching n---ers without any warning.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (39g3+)

138 I saw Malicious Actors open for Savoy Brown at Cobo Arena in 69.

Posted by: Gumby at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (2LelM)

139 Cruz's Twitter retorts were always a knock out. If you can't beat him, delete him.
=====

Can't have a sense of humor. Makes the humorless scolds look bad.

He is also on Sen Fed Comm Committee (?). Get rid of the heathen like the current chairman guy because 'net neutrality' is the waaaave of the future.

Posted by: mustbequantum at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (MIKMs)

140 HAH!
This 'o-Spades guy wants intellectual consistency from the left?!?!
I bet he'll get that pony he wanted as a child first

Posted by: random ~~lurker~~ commenter at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (oLa9K)

141 And I've never been banned on it nor facebook!

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 01:35 PM (7LY+6)

Pitiful effort, really. Denounce yourself.

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (fiGNd)

142 >>>Ding ding ding ding ding.

This is the means of attack.

...

agree in principle, but just worried on my own end about this rule being applied here. After all, I ban people whose speech I find harms the brand.

I'm not sure what law or regulation could say "This rule applies to twitter but not to ace."

but you know, I'd almost be willing to risk that to take down Twitter.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (8rNrN)

143 Why was Ace suspended? Too many funny goofs on Egg McMuffin and "The Expert."

Funny, Right and Anonymous are a disallowed triple. Because what they can't doxx they can't bakelite.

Posted by: DaveA at April 06, 2018 01:37 PM (FhXTo)

144
I got your name from a friend of a friend

Who said he used to work with you

Remember the all night creature from Stereo Ninety Two

Yeah, I said, "Could you relate to our quarter track tape

You know the band performs in the nude"

He said, "Uh huh don't call us child, we'll call you"

Posted by: Sugarloaf at April 06, 2018 01:35 PM (ATVNj)
I love that one hit wonder!

Posted by: Archer at April 06, 2018 01:37 PM (gbWkA)

145 THIS is what the left fears (not silly slams, etc.). They fear the peaceful assembly of the people, learning, getting wiser. And that's why we suddenly have the left wanting to take down these tools - Facebook, Twitter - to resurrect them under conditions more favorable to their agenda.
It is the modern-age's version of peaceful assembly, and they seek to impede that.
...
There has been no other time like this in our nation's existence. It's is absolutely essential that we have such tools, like highways, to allow us access to one another, if only to thwart the left who would have us blind and dumb.

Posted by: curley'slarryandmeeniemoe at April 06, 2018 01:30 PM

Ironically it was Bill Clinton who when briefed about this back in the 90's who pointed out how this was going to really level the playing field.

Posted by: Diogenes at April 06, 2018 01:37 PM (8DZhw)

146 I love it when The Empress gets all Legal Teachy.

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (mF1qm)

I love it when she puts up pics of the Victory Rack.

We all got our kinks, man.

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 01:37 PM (fiGNd)

147 "Lame asses like Noah Rothman and other pet "conservatives" will be the only ones allowed to stay.Just like the rest of the mass media
Posted by: steevy"

Tim Miller is another one. He was happy and gloating early on election night 2016 an ABC with the "told you so" when he thought Hillary would win.

Posted by: Benji Carver at April 06, 2018 01:38 PM (OD2ni)

148 I'll tell you one thing Twitter has been absolutely invaluable for: showing just how insane many on the Left are.

Posted by: Citizen Cake at April 06, 2018 01:38 PM (ppaKI)

149 >>After all, I ban people whose speech I find harms the brand.

Ace is getting the Brand back together?

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:38 PM (mF1qm)

150 133
So Ace, have you banned anyone here or on twitter?

Posted by: Really? at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (LhVCK)

I am guessing he might real soon, theyby.

Posted by: flounderbot, rebel, vulgarian, deplorabot, winner at April 06, 2018 01:39 PM (Dp6qK)

151 Burn the witch!

Posted by: Archer at April 06, 2018 01:39 PM (gbWkA)

152 If you're not getting something out of Twitter, then you aren't visiting the brilliant patriots out there who are researching, connecting dots, and sharing insight with readers who care about this country.
They have proven to be at the very least 2 weeks ahead of Rush, months ahead of conservative news outlets, and an eternity ahead of the mainstream news.
Again, Twitter has become a place for peaceful assembly and information-sharing. That's why the left is now offering up its own, Zuck, to shut this down. They don't like patriots talking, much less talking to one another.
Keep it open and keep it free-flowing.
This might be a fight for Ajit Pai.

Posted by: curley'slarryandmeeniemoe at April 06, 2018 01:39 PM (iFs8n)

153 He said, "Uh huh don't call us child, we'll call you""

CBS Records and the White House phone numbers...

(yeah. Get off my lawn)

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 01:39 PM (7LY+6)

154 he fuck off these timewasting non-profitable pieces of shit altogether.

Posted by: DaveA at April 06, 2018 01:39 PM (FhXTo)

155 So she means that Republicans

Posted by: Mikey NTH
Oh no! Twitter or Facebook cut off Mikey in mid-sentence! See?! See?!!!

Posted by: andycanuck at April 06, 2018 01:35 PM (ewxPW)

Oh, I did that one all by myself. I started a thought and didn't delete all of it before hitting

Posted by: Mikey NTH - Banhammer 40,000 - The Future of Ace Will Be Banning - An Outrage Outlet Exclusive! at April 06, 2018 01:39 PM (hLRSq)

156 I deleted Twitter in summer of 2016 and never looked back.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 01:39 PM (LiyEm)

157 Posted by: BackwardsBoy likes lobster at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (GdWl+)
++++++
go see the little wikipedia based "Truths" they have on Breibart & DailyWire & such on FB

Posted by: DeploraBOT at April 06, 2018 01:39 PM (y3aQB)

158 He was happy and gloating early on election night 2016 an ABC with the "told you so" when he thought Hillary would win.

Yeah the chance to be right and gloat was more important to them than the horror of having Hillary as president. They'd rather be proven right than be right.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:39 PM (39g3+)

159
86 http://bit.ly/2GKcOoA
++++
Bombshell: Facebook Admits 'Most' of Site's 2 Billion Users Compromised by 'Malicious Actors' | Breitbart
--------
Not completely OT

Posted by: DeploraBOT at April 06, 2018 01:29 PM (y3aQB)

Also known as people doing exactly what Obama's campaign did but it wasn't to help get him elected... so, bad.

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 01:39 PM (cAnNx)

160 This is war. Act like it.
Posted by: flounderbot, rebel

__________

That's where I'm at, and I guess some conservatives want to be able to tell everyone in the Amazon camps that at least they had principles and didn't want the government regulating businesses too much, as if that ship hadn't sailed 100 years ago.

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 01:40 PM (lKmt3)

161 Damn, everyone here is pretty pissed off that these tech companies are so much better than we were.

People knew we were lying. These very smart Americans would think it was truth.

Posted by: PRAVDA at April 06, 2018 01:40 PM (pw+jk)

162 agree in principle, but just worried on my own end about this rule being applied here. After all, I ban people whose speech I find harms the brand.

I'm not sure what law or regulation could say "This rule applies to twitter but not to ace."

but you know, I'd almost be willing to risk that to take down Twitter.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (8rNrN)

---

One difference is you do have rules and you hammerban, you don't shadowban.

You tell ppl why they are banned.

Dunno if that matters.

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 01:40 PM (hMwEB)

163 Posted by: curley'slarryandmeeniemoe at April 06, 2018 01:30 PM (iFs8n)

Really? Maybe it is an age thing (one thing I'm not is age impaired), but I absolutely cannot follow conversations on that platform. It has gotten to the point where if a link here or elsewhere goes to Twitter I won't even click on it. Just a waste of my time. I see nothing but a screen full of disjointed comments that seem to refer to a variety of subjects - most of which deal with people I neither care about nor know of.

Posted by: moon_over_vermont at April 06, 2018 01:40 PM (kUmUV)

164 When I mention my private chat, it's some people I used to talk to on twitter who were kind enough to set up a private chat so I could keep talking with them. They feed me most of the Twitter crap I put up here.

I have an idea of how to make a Twitter competitor that could actually steal market share from it (a good kind of brand differentiation) and would love to talk to someone with skills or money to make that happen. I would just love to kill all of these companies.

And the media, obviously.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:40 PM (8rNrN)

165 Ace is getting the Brand back together?

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:38 PM (mF1qm)

Everybody loves The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down ... but give some of their other tunes a try. Like Ophelia, or Evangeline, for example.

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 01:40 PM (fiGNd)

166 "Cruz's Twitter retorts were always a knock out. If you can't beat him, delete him."

That beta soy boy from Deadspin still has not recovered getting owned by Cruz.

Posted by: Benji Carver at April 06, 2018 01:41 PM (OD2ni)

167 Posted by: Sugarloaf at April 06, 2018 01:35 PM (ATVNj)
I love that one hit wonder!

I really did see them live. They were a good band. Jerry Corbetta was a killer keyboardist.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy likes lobster at April 06, 2018 01:41 PM (GdWl+)

168 >>>One difference is you do have rules and you hammerban, you don't shadowban.

You tell ppl why they are banned.

Dunno if that matters.

...

i think the same principle would apply -- I'm permitting some speech and forbidding other kinds, ergo I'm a "publisher" for the speech I permit.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:41 PM (8rNrN)

169
Seems to be an opportunity for a non-gab twitter in the marketplace. Of course, that takes lots and lots of money and many years of losses. I wonder if Trump would consider a govt grant along the lines of Solyndra. I'd give it a shot. Or alternatively consider twitter a monopoly and regulate the hell out of their censorship.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 06, 2018 01:41 PM (r+sAi)

170 >>Keep it open and keep it free-flowing.

I couldn't close it if I tried .

Posted by: Hope Solo at April 06, 2018 01:41 PM (mF1qm)

171 150 133
So Ace, have you banned anyone here or on twitter?

Posted by: Really? at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (LhVCK)

I am guessing he might real soon, theyby.

Posted by: flounderbot, rebel, vulgarian, deplorabot, winner at April 06, 2018 01:39 PM (Dp6qK)

Yeah, I think ace should definitely add to his list of banned people. Of course that troll is on a dynamic IP or using a proxy so it won't do much good.

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 01:41 PM (cAnNx)

172
Posted by: Diogenes at April 06, 2018 01:37 PM (8DZhw)
Ironically it was Bill Clinton who when briefed
about this back in the 90's who pointed out how this was going to really
level the playing field.

-----
Back on the 00s, Bill also said in a speech that although the government needed to shrink that officials weren't going to do it themselves.

Sure, he can see the truth, but it doesn't mean sh--.

Posted by: curley'slarryandmeeniemoe at April 06, 2018 01:41 PM (iFs8n)

173
When they put me in the reeducation camps I want Whoopi Goldberg to be my instructor. She seems nice.

Posted by: Sphynx at April 06, 2018 01:42 PM (rXie1)

174 Yeah I would think that there's a distinction between openly and specifically having rules for who gets nailed and who doesn't... and sneakily working behind the scenes to suppress people you just don't want to hear from.

I mean ace has been way more patient with people on his blog commentary than I would be in his place. I would not have put up with guys he did for as long as they did. Hell I'd probably have given myself temporary bans for some of the angry rants I've launched into here, to my later regret.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:42 PM (39g3+)

175 Why don't we all just shadow ban twitter?

And by that, I mean, stop using it.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 01:42 PM (F5+ro)

176 such a rule would, of course, also apply to sites like this one,

It's already pretty well moderated (thank COB). Mostly what's left merits psychiatric rather than legal intervention.

Posted by: DaveA at April 06, 2018 01:42 PM (FhXTo)

177 Unless there's some kind of rule about a "private club" exception. For example, if a "private social media club" was defined by some kind of screening for members, and was open about the fact that it was not generally open to the public.

But Twitter would just immediatley claim they were that, too.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:42 PM (8rNrN)

178 I absolutely agree with the idea that, once a platform (like Twitter) starts making editorial decisions about the content its users can publish - including deciding who can see it - that they should lose immunity under CDA. It is absurd to claim to be a neutral platform administrator while simultaneously selectively removing or limiting the accessibility of certain users content.

Posted by: anotheranon at April 06, 2018 01:42 PM (dOFfJ)

179 Still looking for that blue jean, baby queen
Prettiest girl I ever seen
See her shake on the movie screen, Jimmy Dean

Posted by: Archer at April 06, 2018 01:42 PM (gbWkA)

180 I have an idea of how to make a Twitter competitor that could actually steal market share from it (a good kind of brand differentiation) and would love to talk to someone with skills or money to make that happen. I would just love to kill all of these companies.

And the media, obviously.
Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:40 PM (8rNrN)

drop a note to Peter Thiel ?

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:43 PM (wm1u1)

181 FWIW, Van Halen did an excellent cover...

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 01:43 PM (7LY+6)

182 164 When I mention my private chat, it's some people I used to talk to on twitter who were kind enough to set up a private chat so I could keep talking with them. They feed me most of the Twitter crap I put up here.

I have an idea of how to make a Twitter competitor that could actually steal market share from it (a good kind of brand differentiation) and would love to talk to someone with skills or money to make that happen. I would just love to kill all of these companies.

And the media, obviously.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:40 PM (8rNrN)

The Connecticut Mafia is real!

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 01:43 PM (cAnNx)

183 Hey! Mitch McConnell twats

Mitch McConnell & @KYAgCommish Ryan Quarles announce legislation to support #Kentucky's #hemp industry. The Hemp Farming Act will legalize hemp as an agricultural commodity + remove it from the controlled substances list

@SenMajLeader March 26

McConnell addressing the big problems in our country.

Posted by: DOJ at April 06, 2018 01:43 PM (r9UYA)

184 Bongino's podcast today is must-listen.

Posted by: Sharkman at April 06, 2018 01:43 PM (BfOXk)

185
next CPAC ?

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:43 PM (wm1u1)

186 Well I just followed Ted Cruz and his official Senator account, and a tweet timeline is showing activity.

What I found interesting was their suggestion to also follow Marco Rubio, Ben Candy Carson, and Jeb Bush.

Given the frequency that Jeb Bush comments here, I think I can skip that one, and given the frequency that Ace comments on Marco Rubio, I think I can skip that one, as well.

Posted by: Duncanthrax at April 06, 2018 01:43 PM (ctuyM)

187 Trump needs to tweet asking if they've shadowbanned Cruz.

The awesome thing about Trump tweeting is no one can ignore it and they wouldn't dare ban him.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at April 06, 2018 01:44 PM (oVJmc)

188 Cruz's Twitter retorts were always a knock out. If you can't beat him, delete him.

He was getting really good at the social media game. Very funny and witty and charming. I think they knew they had to silence that.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:44 PM (39g3+)

189 >>Unless there's some kind of rule about a "private club" exception. For example, if a "private social media club" was defined by some kind of screening for members

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:42 PM (8rNrN)

Those who donate/pay fees via PPal and have received Cardboard Membership Privileges (or higher)?

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:44 PM (mF1qm)

190 Does this mean ace is responsible for us ?

Oh shit.

Posted by: The Jackhole Somewhere on Ventura Highway at April 06, 2018 01:44 PM (M+Lyo)

191 >>173 When they put me in the reeducation camps I want Whoopi Goldberg to be my instructor. She seems nice. Posted by: Sphynx at April 06, 2018 01:42 PM (rXie1)

I had her for Cultural Marxism 101. She's a tough grader.

Posted by: Zod at April 06, 2018 01:44 PM (Bdeb0)

192 drop a note to Peter Thiel ?

He's on Twitter, right?

Posted by: BackwardsBoy likes lobster at April 06, 2018 01:44 PM (GdWl+)

193
Posted by: moon_over_vermont at April 06, 2018 01:40 PM (kUmUV)
Really? Maybe it is an age thing (one thing I'm not is age impaired),
but I absolutely cannot follow conversations on that platform.-----
Then go to TheConservativeTreehouse. It's long-form.

Posted by: curley'slarryandmeeniemoe at April 06, 2018 01:45 PM (iFs8n)

194 He's on Twitter, right?"

Friendster.

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 01:45 PM (7LY+6)

195 179 Still looking for that blue jean, baby queen
Prettiest girl I ever seen
See her shake on the movie screen, Jimmy Dean
__________________________________________

Now you guys have me digging through my iTunes selections for the great songs.

Great songs being those songs no one knows but they got me through junior high on Long Island.

Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at April 06, 2018 01:45 PM (ATVNj)

196 I mean ace has been way more patient with people on his blog commentary than I would be in his place. I would not have put up with guys he did for as long as they did. Hell I'd probably have given myself temporary bans for some of the angry rants I've launched into here, to my later regret.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:42 PM (39g3+)

Its all about who holds the keys. Nothing more, nothing less.

Controlling who gets to talk is a powerful tool. More power than I'd ever want. Goes straight to most people's heads.

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 01:45 PM (fiGNd)

197 >>>drop a note to Peter Thiel ?
Posted by: runner

Well, I don't have any idea of how to contact him.

If I did, I wouldn't be here. I'd be driving a speedboat with a blonde's head in my lap, doing all sorts of "imagineering" for Peter Thiel.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:45 PM (8rNrN)

198 drop a note to Peter Thiel ?

He's on Twitter, right?
Posted by: BackwardsBoy likes lobster at April 06, 2018 01:44 PM (GdWl+)

don't know..not on twitter myself

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:45 PM (wm1u1)

199 agree in principle, but just worried on my own end about this rule being applied here. After all, I ban people whose speech I find harms the brand.

I'm not sure what law or regulation could say "This rule applies to twitter but not to ace."

but you know, I'd almost be willing to risk that to take down Twitter.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (8rNrN)

That's the issue, where's the line between permitting the owner to say my sandbox, stop stinking up the place and okay now you are a publisher.

That being said, and as a Twitter whore I have the moral authority to say it, screw Twitter.

I'm still there because it's a nice way to keep up with some people and I like following the Indians feed and I like to have a throwaway forum for snark.

But, other than the Indians twitter feed, if the Twats went away tomorrow, I wouldn't miss a thing.

Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at April 06, 2018 01:45 PM (mf5HN)

200 Yeah, but he did make the trains run on time.

Posted by: Archer at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM (gbWkA)

201 178 I absolutely agree with the idea that, once a platform (like Twitter) starts making editorial decisions about the content its users can publish - including deciding who can see it - that they should lose immunity under CDA. It is absurd to claim to be a neutral platform administrator while simultaneously selectively removing or limiting the accessibility of certain users content.
Posted by: anotheranon at April 06, 2018 01:42 PM (dOFfJ)

I don't know how you write a law that
a) says twitter is a utility and is basically under the "fairness doctrine" regarding speech

and

b) twitter is not responsible for the content on their platform.

It would seem if you have a, you need b, in which case, twitters business model (and even our aoshq commenting here) is basically gone.

Since if one of us defames someone, ace will be legally liable for that. Same with twitter.

I think we just need to accept that silicon vallye is not our friends and that we should not use their products.

Eventually someone will say, "shit, half the country isn't using any silicon valley products. Maybe we could come up with a platform that was inclusive for EVERYONE, think about the money we'd make..."

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM (F5+ro)

202 Please retweet!

Posted by: !Jeb! at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM (ewxPW)

203 "When I mention my private chat, it's some people I used to talk to on twitter who were kind enough to set up a private chat so I could keep talking with them. They feed me most of the Twitter crap I put up here."

I understand your reasons for leaving Twitter, but it was hilarious when you would get under Jake Tapper's skin and get him to drop his "neutral nice guy" mask and reveal himself.

Posted by: Benji Carver at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM (OD2ni)

204 I'd be open to repealing the publisher immunity for libel.

It would change the Internet and social media, but not necessarily for the worse. I'm not sure we lose much by not being inundated with the opinions of people with more free time than sense that we'd never agree to listen to in person.

Posted by: Bear with Assymetrical Balls at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM (uYSAz)

205 Worse Star Trek character Guinan or Wesley Crusher?

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM (LiyEm)

206 >>>190 Does this mean ace is responsible for us ?

Oh shit.

...

under the current rule about libel, no. I mean, generally. I don't know the details or if there's some way to breach it by claiming "He's encouraging this libel" or whatever.

Under Ted Cruz's proposed rule change, probably.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM (8rNrN)

207 >>So walk away. You are free to do that, too.

I get that, and the same goes for facebook, YouTube, etc. However, these social media tools may have been created for recreational use, but they are now established means of business communications, whether it's the start-up artist trying to snag an audience out of his/her hometown, or Coca-Cola announcing where to find it's new flavor of diet coke, or a political candidate keeping his supporters aware of his/her schedule of public appearances. As such, the "just walk away" doesn't work. The tech companies now have the ability to effectively kill a business or a candidate by simply suspending them. That they feel they can do this for political opinions is a problem.

Posted by: Lizzy at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM (W+vEI)

208 All of the social media is run by corrupt leftard idiots. I don't use any of them.

Posted by: maddogg at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM (o2MD2)

209 like a check number

If you used a consistent reader app it could verify you saw them all for you.
Like ace typed though if they control the horizontal we control the power switch.

Posted by: DaveA at April 06, 2018 01:47 PM (FhXTo)

210 The awesome thing about Trump tweeting is no one can ignore it and they wouldn't dare ban him.

Unless they're quitting their job and get the keys to the machine somehow at the last minute...

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:47 PM (39g3+)

211 What is this Twatter of whom you speak?

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at April 06, 2018 01:47 PM (o7tuA)

212 Really? seems to be under the impression ace has admin rights on Twitter.

Posted by: bonhomme at April 06, 2018 01:47 PM (iv0p7)

213 agree in principle, but just worried on my own end about this rule being applied here. After all, I ban people whose speech I find harms the brand.

I'm not sure what law or regulation could say "This rule applies to twitter but not to ace."

but you know, I'd almost be willing to risk that to take down Twitter.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM (8rNrN)

ace, more than that, what about speech you don't ban? Should you be responsible for it if a moron defames someone?

Should you have to legally defend every comment?

And if not, how do you write a law that says "you can't discriminate against speech, but you can delete or ban people if you want, but youre not responsible whats on your site anyways"

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 01:47 PM (F5+ro)

214 Also called hellbanned.

Posted by: muckrack at April 06, 2018 01:47 PM (RZ4iC)

215 The principle is the same as media underreporting.

Isolate people, keep them ignorant, cut the lines of communication, prevent people from coordinating. Then by the time that danger is upon them, it's too late to organize a response. I think that's what's going on in Germany and Sweden.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at April 06, 2018 01:47 PM (/qEW2)

216 >>>I understand your reasons for leaving Twitter, but it was hilarious when you would get under Jake Tapper's skin and get him to drop his "neutral nice guy" mask and reveal himself.

many of the people in the private chat are there because we used to exchange Jake's Nasty DMs.

We should put out a book one day -- Jake Tapper's Midnight Direct Message Nastygrams.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (8rNrN)

217 If I did, I wouldn't be here. I'd be driving a speedboat with a blonde's head in my lap, doing all sorts of "imagineering" for Peter Thiel.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:45 PM (8rNrN)

That ace, collecting the skulls of his enemies and one step ahead of the Coast Guard.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - Banhammer 40,000 - The Future of Ace Will Be Banning - An Outrage Outlet Exclusive! at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (hLRSq)

218
right, seems like a stretch, ace, but I think he goes to CPAC and similar, does Q&A and forums and who knows, you know people( I assume), may be an overlap somewhere, be a few degrees of separation...

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (wm1u1)

219
As far as Twitter competitor venture capital, Elon Musk seems sort of Libertarian. Or else he's a time traveler that got stuck in the past and used his knowledge of the future to go from a dishwasher to billionaire.

Posted by: Sphynx at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (rXie1)

220 Someone needs to produce a documentary that outlines all of the tricks and surveillance that social media can pull.

I mean, we only find out about this stuff through -- social media.

I saw a documentary about Suxnet a year or so ago. There are so many ways we can be surveilled by government, corporations and individuals.

If organized crime ever got into computers, they'd never do street crimes.

Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (ATVNj)

221 can you see meeeee ? Am I shadow banned ?

or just in the barrell

Posted by: The Jackhole Somewhere on Ventura Highway at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (M+Lyo)

222 >>Should you have to legally defend every comment?

If this is true I am almost sorry for soe of the shit you are gonna have to say out loud in court.

Almost.

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (mF1qm)

223 agree in principle, but just worried on my own end about this rule being applied here. After all, I ban people whose speech I find harms the brand.

I'm not sure what law or regulation could say "This rule applies to twitter but not to ace."

but you know, I'd almost be willing to risk that to take down Twitter.

Posted by: ace

__________

To me its apples and oranges, Twitter is a broad communication platform designed to reach "the public". That implies some sort of equal access regardless of political affiliation.

Your website is a discussion forum for conservative topics.

I certainly think say DailyKos is well within their rights to ban people that are say conservative trolls, I also think an automotive forum can ban people not engaging in what their platform was designed for if for instance someone wanted to discuss other topics, etc.

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (lKmt3)

224 The mentally ill should be banned from social media entirely, because the word is mightier than the AR-15.

So twitter might have 100 accounts left after the purge.

Posted by: BluesFish at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (Z+EmJ)

225 Twitter has been very useful ... as Trump shows. I can get a general sense of what a lot more people are saying from Twitter, and can pursue lines of thought that interest me.
But the secret banning and deception in search results (Google) or defunding some that would provide an interesting conservative platform, but allowing every radical leftist ... that is the "unfair" part that can't be allowed.
The AoS platform ... not sure. Boy Scouts should be allowed to have their own brand, and members should "fit in". But Twitter, FB, You-Tube have nearly monopoly power, and pretend to be open forums for all, but deceptively manipulate. I think that is different than sites that are openly "partisan" in their comment preferences, and that are in no way a monopoly of conversation.

This is not a forum where I pick out the people I want to follow, it is a place where the AoS "ideology" is discussed, as laid out by Ace. But Ace having to govern every comment would be overly burdensome, and oppressive?

But devil is in detail of how such a law/code could be writtten.

Posted by: illiniwek at April 06, 2018 01:49 PM (bT8Z4)

226 Worse Star Trek character Guinan or Wesley Crusher?

At least no one on TNG ever said, "Shut up, Guinan!"

Posted by: BackwardsBoy likes lobster at April 06, 2018 01:49 PM (GdWl+)

227 Worse Star Trek character Guinan or Wesley Crusher?

Crusher actually contributed to the plot and the story instead of being a pointless wise negress for the captain to whine to. So her character was far more annoying to me. Plus she's uncomfortable to look at, like a 1930's political cartoon of a black woman.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:49 PM (39g3+)

228 @NBCNews
Jill Filipovic: Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved. Republicans' still need to.
Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at April 06, 2018 01:17 PM (+y/Ru)

Wow. The Dems view of women was that they should be left to suffocate when they easily could be rescued?

I was not aware of that.

Posted by: LASue at April 06, 2018 01:49 PM (Z48ZB)

229 Worse Star Trek character Guinan or Wesley Crusher?
Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM

Embrace the power of 'and'.

Posted by: Duncanthrax at April 06, 2018 01:49 PM (ctuyM)

230 If I did, I wouldn't be here. I'd be driving a
speedboat with a blonde's head in my lap, doing all sorts of
"imagineering" for Peter Thiel.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:45 PM (8rNrN)

=========
Hey there.

Posted by: Amy Schumer at April 06, 2018 01:49 PM (pw+jk)

231 Worse Star Trek character Guinan or Wesley Crusher?

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM (LiyEm)

Trick question - They bother were the worst. Worse even than the Ferengi.

Posted by: Archer at April 06, 2018 01:49 PM (gbWkA)

232 So maybe we need a govt run equal access twitter.
oh the horror
everyone has to use real names

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 01:49 PM (hMwEB)

233 We should put out a book one day -- Jake Tapper's Midnight Direct Message Nastygrams.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (8rNrN)

Jakes Nocturnal Emissions

Posted by: The Jackhole Somewhere on Ventura Highway at April 06, 2018 01:49 PM (M+Lyo)

234 Alright morons, I'm Timon87 on Gab. Out yourselves!

Posted by: Timon at April 06, 2018 01:50 PM (NTM5E)

235 Worse Star Trek character Guinan or Wesley Crusher?"

Yes. Yes indeed.

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 01:50 PM (7LY+6)

236

Twitter should be made to answer these questions, and made to answer if
they still think they're immune from suit from the third party libels
the people they're endorsing by not shadowbanning are committing.

Posted by: Ace of Spades at 01:13 PM

and Youtube then?

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at April 06, 2018 01:50 PM (o7tuA)

237 >>Worse Star Trek character Guinan or Wesley Crusher?
Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM

Wesley, by far.

I always kinda liked Space Isaac, myself.

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:50 PM (mF1qm)

238 "why bother even using their piece of shit data-exploitation antisocial media?"

Get off Twitter and Facebook. Ignore them. Ignore the 25% of our current "news" that is simply reverbed amplified Twit noise.

And create new platforms that support free speech.

PS: Turn off your TV too. It's garbage.

Posted by: gp at April 06, 2018 01:50 PM (mk9aG)

239 That ace, collecting the skulls of his enemies and one step ahead of the Coast Guard.
_______________________________________________

Sir, heave to and prepare to be boarded.

Posted by: The United States Coast Guard at April 06, 2018 01:50 PM (ATVNj)

240 231 The Ferengi got redeemed somewhat by Deep Space Nine.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 01:50 PM (LiyEm)

241 219
As far as Twitter competitor venture capital, Elon Musk seems sort of Libertarian. Or else he's a time traveler that got stuck in the past and used his knowledge of the future to go from a dishwasher to billionaire.
Posted by: Sphynx at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (rXie1)

...Elon Musk?

Seriously?

His entire business model is "get money from governments by hook or crook."

Which reminds me -- those 10k a week series 3's are really rolling off the assembly line in Freemont, aren't they?

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 01:50 PM (F5+ro)

242 I know some people here think Cruz is a conservative scold but I think he is the closest to being an aos moron than any other politician.

Admittedly I have been aggravated at Cruz for being publicly silent on the issues of the day. He no longer seems to be the boat rocker that drew me to him. I've told his office the same.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at April 06, 2018 01:51 PM (qB3GS)

243 >>However, these social media tools may have been created for recreational use, but they are now established means of business communications, whether it's the start-up artist trying to snag an audience out of his/her hometown, or Coca-Cola announcing where to find it's new flavor of diet coke, or a political candidate keeping his supporters aware of his/her schedule of public appearances. As such, the "just walk away" doesn't work. The tech companies now have the ability to effectively kill a business or a candidate by simply suspending them. That they feel they can do this for political opinions is a problem. Posted by: Lizzy at April 06, 2018 01:46 PM (W+vEI)

I don't believe much of this.

Posted by: Zod at April 06, 2018 01:51 PM (Bdeb0)

244
We should put out a book one day -- Jake Tapper's Midnight Direct Message Nastygrams.

Tapper After Dark

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at April 06, 2018 01:51 PM (lKyWE)

245 For example, if a "private social media club" was defined by some kind
of screening for members, and was open about the fact that it was not
generally open to the public.

JournoList!

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 06, 2018 01:51 PM (r+sAi)

246 "But if Twitter is no longer just an open forum but are in fact endorsing some views and punishing others, then they could be construed to be "publishers" of the tweets they permit to be seen, and would therefore not have the protections of the CDA's immunity clause."

Welcome to the party, pal. I've been pushing this for the last couple of years. And it isn't just Twitter: Facebook, YouTube and Google are doing the same things.

Posted by: SDN at April 06, 2018 01:51 PM (z3gg+)

247 bother= both

Posted by: Archer at April 06, 2018 01:51 PM (gbWkA)

248 This would seem to be an illegal corporate contribution to his political opponents. How valuable would it be to silence your political opposition on twitter? Either TWTR is completely worthless, or that contribution is well in excess of any contribution limits.

I would consider a consent decree to never shadowban any Republican again, plus a contribution of 51% of TWTR shares to the RNC, and control over the board and CEO selection. Or a $100 billion fine, with $1B to the gov't, and the other $99B split between the house R committee, the senate R committee, POTUS's reelection committee, and the RNC. I would also consider accepting life sentences for all TWTR management for civil rights violations.

Posted by: Rather Not at April 06, 2018 01:52 PM (oPogG)

249 Once my follower, now unfriend.
What a cruel thing to pretend.

You made me a shadowbanner baby.
I wanna be able to censor what you do.

Posted by: Fiona Apple at April 06, 2018 01:52 PM (/qEW2)

250 Which reminds me -- those 10k a week series 3's are really rolling off the assembly line in Freemont, aren't they?"

El Snort.

I do chuckle over Automotive News' "estimated" figure...

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 01:52 PM (7LY+6)

251
i dont understand the purpose of shadow banning - why not ban outright ?

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:52 PM (wm1u1)

252
How about guerrilla tactics on Twitter? Pretend to be a leftist twit under a pseudonym, earn a blue star, then let loose with how you really feel? Or, start some batshit wacky leftist nonsense tweeting.

Posted by: Sphynx at April 06, 2018 01:53 PM (rXie1)

253 Direct Messaging is something I've almost never used in twitter, it seems pointless. I'm on there trying to get people to be interested enough in my to try my books, I can't really tell how well its working or not. I mean I have a pinterest page to promote my work too, its just a way for a broke, ill guy to reach out to potential fans.

But I don't like Twitter or Facebook, and it feels... arrogant to assume people will want to know my opinion enough to "follow" me and my dubious wisdom anywhere.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:53 PM (39g3+)

254 -
--
I'm not sure what law or regulation could say "This rule applies to twitter but not to ace."

but you know, I'd almost be willing to risk that to take down Twitter.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:36 PM

------------------------

You craft the law as quasi-anti-monopoly. No scrutiny until a site reaches some large metric that only the top x-number of sites meet.

Posted by: irright at April 06, 2018 01:53 PM (pMGkg)

255 At least twitter needs to declare how and what they censor.

Posted by: muckrack at April 06, 2018 01:53 PM (RZ4iC)

256 221
can you see meeeee ? Am I shadow banned ?

or just in the barrell

Posted by: The Jackhole Somewhere on Ventura Highway at April 06, 2018 01:48 PM (M+Lyo)

can't see you. Sorry Jack.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob at April 06, 2018 01:53 PM (o7tuA)

257 I caught the Houston Comical doing this a few years ago. I had enjoyed a relatively robust 'thumbs up' on their comments until one day I didn't.

At the same time I noticed all the libs quit going ballistic as they always done with just about every post.

I purge of my browser history that included deleting cookies revealed my posts were only seen by me.

Their posted comments are pretty much a DailyKos enterprise now.

Posted by: DanMan at April 06, 2018 01:53 PM (XTiHL)

258 Get off Twitter and Facebook. Ignore them. Ignore the 25% of our current "news" that is simply reverbed amplified Twit noise.

And create new platforms that support free speech.

PS: Turn off your TV too. It's garbage.
Posted by: gp

________

They sort of "win" though if that is the end result.

That's what they want, for conservatives to be run out of the culture on a rail.

We can't ignore popular ways of communication for the masses if we're interested in doing things like winning elections and influencing politics.

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 01:53 PM (lKmt3)

259 You craft the law as quasi-anti-monopoly. No scrutiny until a site reaches some large metric that only the top x-number of sites meet.

Posted by: irright at April 06, 2018 01:53 PM (pMGkg)

You could use "any site with a larger audience than ace.mu.nu" as a metric, no?

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 01:54 PM (F5+ro)

260 Commence with the shadowbanning.

Posted by: General Blownmargins at April 06, 2018 01:54 PM (vtcmf)

261 That verified thing.

ace never got it, but freaking David Hogg's little sister is verified. And Twitter specifically stated that they are more protective of verified accounts than non.

There are people who have that blue check mark who are less famous than me and I'm freaking nobody.

Joe Blow is a hip hop artist with one song recorded on youtube and a designer who made his own album cover for when he writes more songs! BLUE CHECK

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:54 PM (39g3+)

262 Twitter has more negatives than positives, even when it was functioning.

I'm ok with it going out of business.

Posted by: Mark Andrew Edwards at April 06, 2018 01:54 PM (xJa6I)

263 "To me its apples and oranges, Twitter is a broad communication platform designed to reach "the public". That implies some sort of equal access regardless of political affiliation."

That's what I meant by the "common carrier" argument and that Twitter should really not want to risk getting themselves defined as such. Ticking off members of Congress who may pressure administrative agencies to make that determination sounds to me like a terrible idea that only an arrogant fool of a Soviet sub captain would have.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - Banhammer 40,000 - The Future of Ace Will Be Banning - An Outrage Outlet Exclusive! at April 06, 2018 01:54 PM (hLRSq)

264 The stupidest thing about TNG was all the kids on the ship.I mean,Starfeet personnel bring their kids with them on dangerous missions.There were other civilians on board too,like teachers for all the kids.Retarded.But "Starfleet is not a military organization"(even though it functions as a military but whatever)

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 01:54 PM (LiyEm)

265 Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved.
______________________________________________

Right.

Posted by: Chandra Levy at April 06, 2018 01:54 PM (ATVNj)

266 I've been thinking on this a bit... and...

The Constitution and Bill of Rights, specifically was written for 'Natural Rights'... and made it so the Government could not deny you those Rights.

So the question becomes, why do we allow Corporations to inhibit, or outright deny us, those same Rights?

I understand the contractual obligations... and of course Private Property concerns... which have led us to the Tyranny of Corporations... but isn't there supposed to be a balance?

And isn't it up to the Federal Government, to step in when there is a question of Balance between Rights?

Also, isn't this a Public Accommodation question? Where in it seems that you should be able to go after their BUSINESS LICENSE if they do not, accommodate the Public?

Posted by: Don Q. at April 06, 2018 01:55 PM (NgKpN)

267 261 That verified thing.

ace never got it, but freaking David Hogg's little sister is verified. And Twitter specifically stated that they are more protective of verified accounts than non.

There are people who have that blue check mark who are less famous than me and I'm freaking nobody.

Joe Blow is a hip hop artist with one song recorded on youtube and a designer who made his own album cover for when he writes more songs! BLUE CHECK

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:54 PM (39g3+)

Ace could get it. But they want him to give up his anonymity for it.

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (cAnNx)

268 251

i dont understand the purpose of shadow banning - why not ban outright ?

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:52 PM (wm1u1)

Deception.

Posted by: muckrack at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (RZ4iC)

269 Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved.

Yes.

Posted by: Stormy O'Spaniels at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (vtcmf)

270 Twitter should really not want to risk getting themselves defined as such"

But see, being defined as such is Network Nuttrality, and is a GoodThing.

That is until an (R) is in the White House.

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (7LY+6)

271 >>Ace could get it. But they want him to give up his anonymity for it.

And do that thing with his mouth.

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (mF1qm)

272 Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved.
______________________________________________

Right.

Posted by: Chandra Levy at April 06, 2018 01:54 PM (ATVNj)

Totally

Posted by: Juanita Broderick at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (M+Lyo)

273 It has gotten to the point where if a link here or elsewhere goes to Twitter I won't even click on it. Just a waste of my time. I see nothing but a screen full of disjointed comments that seem to refer to a variety of subjects - most of which deal with people I neither care about nor know of.

Twitter conversation threading is terrible, by design.

They intentionally created an environment of "micro blogging" with the idea that people would keep messages brief and to the point if they were forced to parsimony of word count.

It sort of worked, but important ideas often take more space to flesh out. Twitter conceded this when they made the default max character count greater.

Posted by: bonhomme at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (iv0p7)

274 The stupidest thing about TNG was all the kids on the ship.I mean,Starfeet personnel bring their kids with them on dangerous missions.There were other civilians on board too,like teachers for all the kids.Retarded.But "Starfleet is not a military organization"(even though it functions as a military but whatever) Will Riker as Sex god

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (wm1u1)

275 Posted by: Timon at April 06, 2018 01:50 PM (NTM5E)

Knit'n Kitten

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (rp9xB)

276 Most of twits and fascistbook are nothing more than electronic graffiti, I don't see the point of them.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM (7ZVPa)

277 Posted by: DanMan at April 06, 2018 01:53 PM (XTiHL)

I haven't read the Chronical in over a decade. I don't know how they are still in business. It can't be the Sunday edition coupons that's keeping them afloat can it?

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM (qB3GS)

278 the left needs to feel pain or else they'll go even crazier

Posted by: Kuhyt at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM (Kuhyt)

279 Also, isn't this a Public Accommodation question? Where in it seems that you should be able to go after their BUSINESS LICENSE if they do not, accommodate the Public?

I'm still looking for that clause in the Constitution that says, "...except at work."

Haven't found it yet.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy likes lobster at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM (GdWl+)

280 Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved.
______________________________________________

Right.

Posted by: Chandra Levy at April 06, 2018 01:54 PM (ATVNj)

Totally

Posted by: Juanita Broderick at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (M+Lyo)
=========

Absolutely!

Posted by: Kathleen Willey at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM (vg8iE)

281 This would seem to be an illegal corporate contribution to his political opponents. How valuable would it be to silence your political opposition on twitter? Either TWTR is completely worthless, or that contribution is well in excess of any contribution limits.

Good point. I've often thought similarly about the media. They basically run free attack ads for the Democrats.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM (/qEW2)

282 i dont understand the purpose of shadow banning - why not ban outright ?

--

that way you still count as a user for their advertiser numbers, but you are basically muted without you knowing it.

very passive aggressive

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM (hMwEB)

283 i think the same principle would apply -- I'm permitting some speech and
forbidding other kinds, ergo I'm a "publisher" for the speech I permit.

Buffers, yea Senator the Horde has a lot of Buffers.
Legal cutouts or Programmatic dumps.

Let everything thru and give users the tool e.g. ignore_user_two_weeks()
to dump what they don't want. The bandwidth would suck though and resetting everything every time YourUserPCHardware or Windows or Browser or Script or Cookies takes a dump.

Posted by: DaveA at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM (FhXTo)

284 116 >>>This is war. Act like it.

agreed. I'm way past #MuhPrinciples.

Muh Main Principle is fucking survival. All other principles are subordinate to that one.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:33 PM (8rNrN)

++++

People say that, and then they continue to promote Twitter. Over at Instapundit, Steve Green makes many comments about one of the writers at PJ Media that was banned by Twitter with no explanation. But, all the rest of them still have accounts with Twitter and still puts up links to Twitter. Of course, the readers of their sites follow those links and Twitter gets all that traffic they send them.

Same with the HQ. Twitter bans or shadowbans you, yet this site continues to send them traffic.

If all the people complaining about Twitter would stop sending Twitter traffic, maybe Twitter would start to feel the pain. No, just one guy doing it by himself wouldn't have much effect. But, if the majority of right-leaning sites did the same, perhaps Twitter would decide they had a problem.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM (pvjTE)

285 I think that's what's going on in Germany and Sweden.
=====

You do know that LePen has been charged with 'hate speech' right now? EU has the whole 'net neutrality' thing going on and all speech or writing to the public is now subject to government control. Macron is getting rid of a potential rival. Wilders in Netherlands has endured it for years -- but he is starting to break out.

Posted by: mustbequantum at April 06, 2018 01:58 PM (MIKMs)

286 My favorite comment at the Boston Globe's "Chappaquiddick" review:

"To Ted's credit, he's been sober the past nine years."

Posted by: Jane D'oh at April 06, 2018 01:58 PM (ptqGC)

287 272 Since Chappaquiddick, Democrats' views of women have evolved.
______________________________________________

Right.

Posted by: Chandra Levy at April 06, 2018 01:54 PM

Totally
Posted by: Juanita Broderick at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM
______________________________________________

Really.

Posted by: Rielle Hunter at April 06, 2018 01:58 PM (ATVNj)

288 So the question becomes, why do we allow Corporations to inhibit, or outright deny us, those same Rights?

Its an interesting question. The theory is that private entities are not powerful enough to harm your free expression in the way government can, and further that a corporation is in effect (and sometimes literally is) a human being with individual rights and government is not.

But even back then, there were no mega corps with the kind of power and riches that something like the British East India company developed after the Revolution. Today these companies have such vast power they seem to be at a place where they have too much ability to damage our free expression.

They aren't true monopolies, but they are often effectively so. There are alternatives to Twitter and Facebook, but those are so little used that they really don't count.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 01:58 PM (39g3+)

289 Plus side - you get to tell your Mom you're a "Publisher" now.

Posted by: DaveA at April 06, 2018 01:58 PM (FhXTo)

290 i dont understand the purpose of shadow banning - why not ban outright ?

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:52 PM (wm1u1)

Deception.
Posted by: muckrack at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (RZ4iC)
well, yeah, but from a business perspective ? what does it do ? not much. or am i stupid and not seeing some very clever business angle ?

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:58 PM (wm1u1)

291 I have decided twatter just pisses away time arguing with bubbleheads, Personally I don't need the time suck

Posted by: Somewhere on Ventura Highway at April 06, 2018 01:58 PM (M+Lyo)

292 Twitter has more negatives than positives, even when it was functioning.

I'm ok with it going out of business.
Posted by: Mark Andrew Edwards

_________

I honestly think Twitter would have been something like MySpace had Trump not decided to use it so heavily.

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 01:59 PM (lKmt3)

293 Yeah, I think ace should definitely add to his list of banned people. Of course that troll is on a dynamic IP or using a proxy so it won't do much good.

Registration. A non intrusive kind just to establish your nic. Make people have to wait 24 hours for their first post, 12, or 6, whatever works. It would definitely cut down on the drivebys.

Posted by: Grump928(C) at April 06, 2018 01:59 PM (yQpMk)

294 irright's got a good idea about limiting it to a certain size of company. that could work.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:59 PM (8rNrN)

295 Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:58 PM (wm1u1)

see 282

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 01:59 PM (hMwEB)

296
Lawsuit on basis of ideological discrimination.

Posted by: Sphynx at April 06, 2018 01:59 PM (rXie1)

297 Twitter is mostly idiocy and snark. Even the "good" tweets are just snark. Often well deserved, but still not rising to a level of "necessary."

There is no good reason why we couldn't have a platform for conservatives which is just as powerful in the culture. But we don't, because, it is nonsense at its root.

Posted by: tcn in AK at April 06, 2018 01:59 PM (7UW64)

298 i dont understand the purpose of shadow banning - why not ban outright ?

--

Some people get upset when they are banned and try to contest it. If you don't know you have been banned, you don't escalate the conflict. You might just give up altogether.

Posted by: Skandia Recluse at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM (roQNm)

299 Remembering a time when bloggers were very concerned about legal problems. Ace and the other McCain etc.
Also remembering a time in recent memory when personal computers were being destroyed by rogue programs.
Seemed like it was a birther research thing and the importance of media mattering thing.

Posted by: yeah me at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM (IbD5q)

300 290 i dont understand the purpose of shadow banning - why not ban outright ?

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:52 PM (wm1u1)

Deception.
Posted by: muckrack at April 06, 2018 01:56 PM (RZ4iC)
well, yeah, but from a business perspective ? what does it do ? not much. or am i stupid and not seeing some very clever business angle ?

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:58 PM (wm1u1)

It's not about business. It's about the little totalitarians of their special councils flexing their power over others. "I shadow banned him" *Sloosh*

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM (cAnNx)

301

EM CANTALOUPE FOADDY-FI!!!

Posted by: Maxine Waters' Hair at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM (mPeei)

302 I gave up Twitter, cold turkey, at the beginning of 2017. It was much easier then I thought it would be. Next I cut the cord, then I gave up Facebook. Now I have so much more time, and so much less stress and anxiety.

Posted by: Thursby at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM (WVn9a)

303 i am banned on my regular IP. i think it's a spam filter, because I am/my IP is showing banned on barracuda for some inexplicable reason

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM (wm1u1)

304 i dont understand the purpose of shadow banning - why not ban outright ?

--

that way you still count as a user for their advertiser numbers, but you are basically muted without you knowing it.

Also, if they are too aggressive about it, people start to leave. They lost a lot of accounts -- including some big names -- the first wave of this "we created a tribunal and are banning names we don't like" crap.

Gab started up and was so effective and grew so fast Twitter freaked out and started adding features Gab had. They are trying to walk a line between total tyrannical control and maintaining users.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM (39g3+)

305 i think the same principle would apply -- I'm permitting some speech and forbidding other kinds, ergo I'm a "publisher" for the speech I permit.

Posted by: ace

I've read the Federalist papers and the Constitution pretty closely and I think the Founders contemplated "but that guy's an asshole and I don't want him here".

Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM (fuK7c)

306 if there was no twitter would Trump start a blog?

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (hMwEB)

307 Twiiter's business model can't be making them money. It has to basically be a ponzi scheme at this point.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (qB3GS)

308 -
--
i dont understand the purpose of shadow banning - why not ban outright ?

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:52 PM

-------------------------------------------

You quiet your enemies without the uproar of actual bannings or the need to show any cause.

Posted by: irright at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (pMGkg)

309
Find someone who suspects shadow banning of their anti-abortion tweets. Sue on basis of religious discrimination.

Posted by: Sphynx at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (rXie1)

310 274 Worf got as much quality tail as him if not more.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (LiyEm)

311 I would also like to know why it isn't fraud for Twitter to pretend that their service is available to all, but then to surreptitiously deactivate features on certain accounts without telling the user?

The entire purpose of using the service is to talk to others, and that is how they advertise it. But if at the same time they are quarantining people into little camps, or putting them in isolation cells where no one can hear them then they have not performed the function they claim to be providing. Everyone thinks their tweets are going out to the world. What would be the point otherwise?

I guess you would have difficulty proving damages, but there seems to be little doubt they are committing a tortious act. What is lacking is the will for lawyers on the right to go after them and punish them in a class action suit.

Posted by: thatch at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (+p2i/)

312 It's not about business. It's about the little totalitarians of their special councils flexing their power over others. "I shadow banned him" *Sloosh*
Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM (cAnNx)

i get all that, but there must be something else other than just being bitchy

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (wm1u1)

313 I almost feel sorry for the PJmedia conservatives, since I use to be one. All these changes feel like the rug has been ripped out from under you doesn't it, but the truth is I find it funny as hell. You've still got so far to go, and the reactions and confusion is going to be just precious.

Posted by: DFCtomm at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (50gG9)

314 Now I have so much more time, and so much less stress and anxiety.
Posted by: Thursby

Just watch out for that Brigid O'Shaughnessy dame. She's pure poison

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:02 PM (39g3+)

315 307 Twiiter's business model can't be making them money. It has to basically be a ponzi scheme at this point.
Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (qB3GS)

Pretty sure they still haven't turned a profit.

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 02:02 PM (hMwEB)

316 There is no good reason why we couldn't have a platform for conservatives which is just as powerful in the culture. But we don't, because, it is nonsense at its root.
Posted by: tcn in AK

__________

Should we have to?

I mean I don't need a "conservative" cell carrier alternative if I want to send a text message that says "Hillary belongs in prison"

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 02:02 PM (lKmt3)

317
i dont understand the purpose of shadow banning - why not ban outright ?
Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:52 PM (wm1u1)

I think many advertisers would still be skittish about advertising on a platform that outright bans people.

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at April 06, 2018 02:03 PM (lKyWE)

318
Way back when twitter was just hitting stride, the conservatives totally were owning the new tech. This is why twitter started their purging.

Conservatives should just quit it en masse. It will then just be a bunch of Lefties talking to each other.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 06, 2018 02:03 PM (r+sAi)

319 I honestly think Twitter would have been something like MySpace had Trump not decided to use it so heavily.

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 01:59 PM (lKmt3)
----------

I don't think it really has anything to do with Trump. MySpace went out of style because Facebook replaced it. Kids today leave Facebook for Instagram and Snapchat.

Twitter will go when something perceived as "better" comes along, and not before then.

Posted by: bluebell at April 06, 2018 02:03 PM (oMtOd)

320 298 i dont understand the purpose of shadow banning - why not ban outright ?

--

Some people get upset when they are banned and try to contest it. If you don't know you have been banned, you don't escalate the conflict. You might just give up altogether.
Posted by: Skandia Recluse at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM (roQNm)

...same story as why you'd have the IRS hold up TEA Party applications indefinitively -- never approving or denying them.

Keeping people in limbo.

Also, I think Twitter denies that shadow banning is even a thing.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 02:03 PM (F5+ro)

321 >>Worf got as much quality tail as him if not more.

True Fact : The Klingon Penis has 3 barbs.

Posted by: Michele Obama's Landing Strip at April 06, 2018 02:03 PM (mF1qm)

322 294 irright's got a good idea about limiting it to a certain size of company. that could work.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:59 PM (8rNrN)

Also ace, your blog probably would have the most protections in this case over others. There is no registration and that is very obvious. I can't just hop over to twitter and start saying shit. I have to sign up. I would say where the similarity would apply is in you would be responsible for the content of the cobloggers on the site, which I'm assuming you actually already are.

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 02:03 PM (cAnNx)

323 Still looking for that blue jean, baby queen
Prettiest girl I ever seen
See her shake on the movie screen, Jimmy Dean

omg! That's my favorite one hit wonder song of ever.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 06, 2018 02:04 PM (fuK7c)

324 Twitter gave a effing blue check mark to a random 7 year old girl living in Syria after a bombing. They can fuck off about needing to verify somebody by collecting their personal info when 7 year old girls from the Middle East get blue check marks.

I hope Twitter gets all their assets seized under the Human Trafficking EO and their board members and higher up staff get GITMO.

Posted by: Monk at April 06, 2018 02:04 PM (INpWu)

325 Ted Kennedy used to go to Tommy Doyle's, an Irish bar on Maine Street in Hyannis not far from the John F. Kennedy Museum

The greasy and besotted whiskey sponge went there with his family members and staff, where he would grope and feel every girl in the joint.

Tommy Doyle's has now closed. I have no doubt that it's financial demise was directly related to Ted's death.

Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at April 06, 2018 02:04 PM (ATVNj)

326 Just imagine the freak-out if President Trump tipped using Twitter and switched to Gab.ai

Posted by: tankdemon at April 06, 2018 02:04 PM (sqERa)

327 297 Twitter is mostly idiocy and snark. Even the "good" tweets are just snark. Often well deserved, but still not rising to a level of "necessary."

There is no good reason why we couldn't have a platform for conservatives which is just as powerful in the culture. But we don't, because, it is nonsense at its root.
Posted by: tcn in AK at April 06, 2018 01:59 PM (7UW64)

I suspect it's also diminishing people's ability to follow a lengthy argument. It's as if it's shrinking processing ability on a national level and

What were we discussing?

Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at April 06, 2018 02:04 PM (RD7QR)

328 Twiiter's business model can't be making them money."

It doesn't.

The only "profit" was 4Q 2017 after some serious cost cutting, not repeatable income growth...

In fact, income continues to drop. Tulips, anyone?

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 02:04 PM (7LY+6)

329 making it a highly dubious notion that comments would even be permitted.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:30 PM

I warned you this would happen if Hillary got elected.

Trump is the bump in the road to shutting down free speech.

But still they persist.

Posted by: Forgot My Nic at April 06, 2018 02:04 PM (LOgQ4)

330

i get all that, but there must be something else other than just being bitchy

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (wm1u1)

Information is power, they want to control it.

Posted by: muckrack at April 06, 2018 02:05 PM (RZ4iC)

331 I mean,Worf nailed Jadzia Dax .

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:05 PM (LiyEm)

332 I think many advertisers would still be skittish about advertising on a platform that outright bans people.
Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at April 06, 2018 02:03 PM (lKyWE)

now that makes sense, and there we go

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:05 PM (wm1u1)

333 The Atlantic fired Williamson? I thought they just hired him.

Well, well, Kevin, the libs find you - deplorable.

They want you to just die already.

How does that feel, asshole.

Posted by: Donna&&&&&&V. at April 06, 2018 02:05 PM (H80UQ)

334 What were we discussing?"

One hit 70's wonders in general, and trivia about such...

Heh.

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 02:05 PM (7LY+6)

335 i dont understand the purpose of shadow banning - why not ban outright ?

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 01:52 PM

-------------------------------------------

You quiet your enemies without the uproar of actual bannings or the need to show any cause.

Posted by: irright

________

Also, shadow banning "proves" that their policies are purposely attempting to steer a certain way politically.

If they can participate, but only in a limited way, they sort of threw out their argument that these individuals have violated their policies.

They are simply trying to shape the culture in their image.

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 02:05 PM (lKmt3)

336 Twiiter's business model can't be making them money. It has to basically be a ponzi scheme at this point.

They gather data based on words and topics you tweet on, hashtags, etc and sell that, just like Facebook. You liked that tweet about old cars? Flag. You posted about cats? Flag. You retweeted that thing about travel to France? Flag. Its all about gathering data and selling that. And its big money, for some reason because I seriously doubt its as effective in sales as people seem to believe in advertising.

I predict that Twitter will one day just start to die out. People will realize that 2-day outrage fests and 1-hour Tweetstorms aren't remotely as important or meaningful as they believed. Right now businesses live in fear of a social media outcry because they are illiterate imbeciles who don't know how anything works. Some day they will figure out that what seems so terribly important today is forgotten within 2 days.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:06 PM (39g3+)

337 Twitter, Facebook, Google, and possibly even Microsoft are trying to de-platform conservatives.

They all have common carrier protection to some extent.

I disagree with the people who say we should just walk away and not give them the power. They already have plenty of power. Facecock has nearly two billion users. They're probably almost as common as phone service.

Telephone networks are common carrier too. Would you be just as cavalier about de-platforming if your phone carrier started playing dirty tricks on you?

What if they started dropping your calls more frequently or started throttling your data? What if your text messages only made it to a small subset of the people you sent them to?

Posted by: bonhomme at April 06, 2018 02:06 PM (iv0p7)

338 326
Just imagine the freak-out if President Trump tipped using Twitter and switched to Gab.ai

Posted by: tankdemon at April 06, 2018 02:04 PM (sqERa)

He should start a mirror there at least.

Posted by: muckrack at April 06, 2018 02:06 PM (RZ4iC)

339 Should we have to?

I mean I don't need a "conservative" cell carrier alternative if I want to send a text message that says "Hillary belongs in prison"

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 02:02 PM (lKmt3)

You think this stops at social media? Wait till some streaking harpy attacks you at your gym and when you complain they ban you because you're a conservative. Wait till the banks refuse to give you an account. This fun is only starting.

Posted by: DFCtomm at April 06, 2018 02:06 PM (50gG9)

340 310 274 Worf got as much quality tail as him if not more.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (LiyEm)

Picard got better quality tail than Riker. Picard went to Riza and got Vash. Worf went to Riza and brought Jadzia Dax in a bathing suit.

Riker went to Riza and got addicted to fake video game and brainwashed the whole Enterprise.

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 02:07 PM (cAnNx)

341 We're all gonna' end up with our own personal server ... and a list of people we'll allow to enter our virtual space.

It'll be like little Digital Gated Communities.

And mine sure as Hell ain't gonna' use Pixy.

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 02:07 PM (fiGNd)

342 "that way you still count as a user for their advertiser numbers, but you are basically muted without you knowing it"

right, so I don't get to see Cruz or Ace when I think they are just not posting, but I'll get flooded with any that are just ads or that push any PC approved thought.

Twitter, FB pretend to be open to all, that is their product. But they are covertly (very deliberate deception) brainwashing and manipulating for leftist purposes, or for oligarch/globalist control, like we see in the MSM ... enemies foreign and domestic.

Posted by: illiniwek at April 06, 2018 02:07 PM (bT8Z4)

343 I'm worried about the monopoly aspect. You get everyone using your service until you're as big as Ma Bell, then you decide some people don't deserve phones.

Posted by: David Hogg's angry little face at April 06, 2018 02:07 PM (yFtHm)

344 Amazing. Some dumb bastard has nearly a million other dumb bastards following his every twit.

Posted by: Mom, CEO MomCorp at April 06, 2018 02:07 PM (gbWkA)

345
Someday this Pixy interface is bound to catch on as a social media alternative.

Posted by: Sphynx at April 06, 2018 02:07 PM (rXie1)

346 Fine line though...

If we say that Facebook, Twitter, etc are common carriers, then that opens them up to government regulation. And that, in today's environment, would give them deep state cover to mess with political enemies.

I prefer the suggestion that if they are a platform for the purposes of the law, then they need to act like one otherwise they get treated like any other advocacy group.

Posted by: WitchDoktor, AKA VA GOP Sucks at April 06, 2018 02:08 PM (tVWQB)

347 that way you still count as a user for their advertiser numbers, but you are basically muted without you knowing it.

very passive aggressive
Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM (hMwEB)

just saw that VM - so, that would be enough to take them to the cleaners, faking ad numbers number of users to spike up ad fees

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:08 PM (wm1u1)

348 Vash.

Gash.

Rash.

Posted by: Captain Kirk at April 06, 2018 02:08 PM (ATVNj)

349 Wait till the banks refuse to give you an account. This fun is only starting.

Posted by: DFCtomm at April 06, 2018 02:06 PM (50gG9)

May I present to you .... Operation ChokePoint.

Applauded by many Republicans ... because it targeted professional gamblers and porn stars.

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 02:08 PM (fiGNd)

350
My bad. It's Minx 0.7 alpha

Posted by: Sphynx at April 06, 2018 02:08 PM (rXie1)

351 Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM (qB3GS)

They make money on everything but their journalism. The Hearst Corporation has extensive real estate, communications and other commercial interests. A couple of times a year they have their business pages cluck about how hardy and robust their empire is but non of the gains come from their journalistic endeavors unless you count BuzzFeed as an asset. Their major papers are the San Fran Comical, San Antonio Express and Houston Comical.

Posted by: DanMan at April 06, 2018 02:08 PM (XTiHL)

352 >>And its big money, for some reason because I seriously doubt its as effective in sales as people seem to believe in advertising.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:06 PM (39g3+)

Yeah. I was having this argument with a guy who is a professor of marketing at a decent sized school.

I kept saying, "yeah, but... what do the actual return on advertising dollars look like on Twitter / Facebook / Google compared to, say, a targeted TV ad?"

Because I mean... the entire valuation of these companies is based on the idea that there is some huge return on advertising dollars if you advertise with google or Facebook... but if that was true, no one would be advertising in any other medium, right?

And internet advertising would be more expensive than an ad in the NY Times, right?

Because it's not.

I don't know, I may be alone here, but I think we're back in the PETS.COM 1999 internet bubble days.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 02:08 PM (F5+ro)

353 340 Picard also had that hottie he transferred off the Enterprise because he didn't want to have to order her to risk her life.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:09 PM (LiyEm)

354

Posted by: Archer at April 06, 2018 02:09 PM (gbWkA)

355 Most of Twitter's pull is the chance that someone famous or that you esteem likes or responds to you, or --oh bliss-- retweets your clever comment. And the famous love it because it gives them the sense of controlled interaction with fans without having to actually, you know, interact with them.

That's 99.9% of its appeal.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:09 PM (39g3+)

356 Twitter is going down in flames anyway. Might as well recruit some conservative rich people and buy the thing and use it for political purposes.

Posted by: William Eaton at April 06, 2018 02:09 PM (MuTTO)

357 And its big money, for some reason because I seriously doubt its as effective in sales as people seem to believe in advertising. "

Talking w/one of the jr mouse's friends who claimed that a marketing class showed a positive correlation btwn "social media mentions" and "sales"... but then that said information came from selling social media IPOs.

Go figure.

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 02:10 PM (7LY+6)

358 Twitter used to be very good fun.
There are still twitter streams I enjoy reading, though I don't jump anymore to any significant degree...and mainly end up at twitter following a link of someone who is being very funny or sometimes awful, instead of participating in real time.

I miss the cocktail party days, and remember and when men and women of pith, mostly conservatives, really did rule twitter.

That's all gone now and not much of worth has taken it's place.

Posted by: sarahw at April 06, 2018 02:10 PM (Sp1NT)

359 Kind of disappointing that the one who finally gave Paolo his comeuppance was Twitter.

Posted by: cool breeze at April 06, 2018 02:10 PM (UGKMd)

360 >>Vash.

>Gash.

>Rash.

Say that three times and rub some aloe on it.

*Waves Glowing Flashlight Over Captain's Log*

Posted by: Dr Crusher at April 06, 2018 02:10 PM (mF1qm)

361 and I think the Founders contemplated "but that guy's an affhole and I don't want him here".
Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM

FIFY, historical accuracy-wise.

Posted by: Duncanthrax at April 06, 2018 02:10 PM (ctuyM)

362 Ha,Leonard Nimoy is in this episode od Wagon Train as a Basque.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:10 PM (LiyEm)

363 As soon as Amazon kills off most local stores, they'll decide that some people are unworthy of purchasing clothes, books, and groceries.

Posted by: David Hogg's angry little face at April 06, 2018 02:10 PM (yFtHm)

364 Come on, everybody knows Jack Dorsey wants to have it both ways: He wants Twitter to be considered an open forum, but also wants to be able to punish views he finds objectionable, without any penalty or accountability.

He'll probably reinstate Ted Cruz only because he is a U.S. Senator.

Posted by: mercenary13 at April 06, 2018 02:10 PM (GIuL5)

365 Twitter is going down in flames anyway. Might as well recruit some conservative rich people and buy the thing and use it for political purposes.
Posted by: William Eaton

where's Mr Moo Moo?

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at April 06, 2018 02:10 PM (ANFJ0)

366 -
If all the people complaining about Twitter would
stop sending Twitter traffic, maybe Twitter would start to feel the
pain. No, just one guy doing it by himself wouldn't have much effect.
But, if the majority of right-leaning sites did the same, perhaps
Twitter would decide they had a problem.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at April 06, 2018 01:57 PM

-------------------------

Someone (not me, of course) should set up a service that dupes the prominent non-lefties twitter feeds onto Gab or whatever. Then you could follow or link that instead of giving the twitter assholes traffic. ( I'm sure twitter would get the lawyers involved pretty quickly.)

Posted by: irright at April 06, 2018 02:11 PM (pMGkg)

367 That's 99.9% of its appeal.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:09 PM (39g3+)

The feeling that you have a chance to be heard is very powerful.

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 02:11 PM (hMwEB)

368 340 310 274 Worf got as much quality tail as him if not more.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (LiyEm)

Picard got better quality tail than Riker. Picard went to Riza and got Vash. Worf went to Riza and brought Jadzia Dax in a bathing suit.

Riker went to Riza and got addicted to fake video game and brainwashed the whole Enterprise.

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 02:07 PM

Wasn't that the story where Wesley popped his cherry with a young Ashley Judd?

Posted by: Diogenes at April 06, 2018 02:11 PM (8DZhw)

369 You think this stops at social media? Wait till some streaking harpy attacks you at your gym and when you complain they ban you because you're a conservative. Wait till the banks refuse to give you an account. This fun is only starting.
Posted by: DFCtomm at April 06, 2018 02:06 PM (50gG9)

Which is already happening with the gun industry...

Hell... a company here in Calif. that makes Swords and Equipment for historic Fencing Competition? (not even Sharp)... got their account frozen by Quick Books... it took MONTHS to get their money back.

Posted by: Don Q. at April 06, 2018 02:11 PM (NgKpN)

370 I'm asking people to get votermom's idea that they shadowban to continue counting you as a "user" for advertising purposes to Cruz.

A publicly traded company cannot misrepresent ANY numbers, or else it's an SEC violation.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 02:11 PM (8rNrN)

371 367 That's 99.9% of its appeal.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:09 PM (39g3+)

The feeling that you have a chance to be heard is very powerful.
Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 02:11 PM (hMwEB)

Its the modern replacement for the Drunk at the end of the Bar, yelling at the TV...

Posted by: Don Q. at April 06, 2018 02:12 PM (NgKpN)

372 Talking w/one of the jr mouse's friends who claimed that a marketing class showed a positive correlation btwn "social media mentions" and "sales"... but then that said information came from selling social media IPOs.

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 02:10 PM (7LY+6)

It's like an ouroboros doing that thing in its own mouth.

Posted by: hogmartin at April 06, 2018 02:12 PM (y87Qq)

373 Some social media regulation should be in order. I'd like a regulation that required the monopolies to post their banning code-algorithms, software modification source code publicly on the internet for a review time, say, for 30 days, before implementation.

That includes the shadow-banning game. Every poster targeted for any form of censorship would have 30 days to submit an appeal to the social media outlet before the ban takes place.

Posted by: mrp at April 06, 2018 02:12 PM (Pqytn)

374 >>Wasn't that the story where Wesley popped his cherry with a young Ashley Judd?

Mom - Are all Scampers that puffy?

Posted by: Wesley Crusher at April 06, 2018 02:12 PM (mF1qm)

375 Picard also crushed Bev Crusher.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:12 PM (LiyEm)

376 GoggleTube and F*c*book are either common carriers, or publishers they are NOT both.

Posted by: sven10077 at April 06, 2018 02:12 PM (SzZnW)

377 Its the modern replacement for the Drunk at the end of the Bar, yelling at the TV...

Posted by: Don Q. at April 06, 2018 02:12 PM (NgKpN)

Dude ... I haven't even opened my first one yet.

(soon ...)

Posted by: ScoggDog at April 06, 2018 02:12 PM (fiGNd)

378 I don't know, I may be alone here, but I think we're back in the PETS.COM 1999 internet bubble days.
Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 02:08 PM (F5+ro)

All the social media companies lose 90% of their value....at some point in the future. Guess that point and you're one rich SOB.

Posted by: DFCtomm at April 06, 2018 02:13 PM (50gG9)

379
My not inconsequential yearly purchasing has zero to do with advertisements I see. Zero.

It's totally based on a need I perceive.

Maybe leftists are just more susceptible to advertising. In which case, the large internet information gatherers realize they don't want our asses clogging up their system.

Posted by: Forgot My Nic at April 06, 2018 02:13 PM (LOgQ4)

380 Yeah. I was having this argument with a guy who is a professor of marketing at a decent sized school.

I kept saying, "yeah, but... what do the actual return on advertising dollars look like on Twitter / Facebook / Google compared to, say, a targeted TV ad?"

Because I mean... the entire valuation of these companies is based on the idea that there is some huge return on advertising dollars if you advertise with google or Facebook... but if that was true, no one would be advertising in any other medium, right?

And internet advertising would be more expensive than an ad in the NY Times, right?

Because it's not.

I don't know, I may be alone here, but I think we're back in the PETS.COM 1999 internet bubble days.
Posted by: Harry Paratestes

_____________

Some companies are finding its not all that effective, Procter & Gamble is one of the largest ad buyers on Earth and they made a dramatic pull back of social media ad buys over this. They found it did very little

But as a counter example, I have a friend that's works at a PR firm and thinks social media ads are incredibly effective for how much you can micro target and the cost is dirt cheap. Television advertising by comparison is ridiculously expensive.

I personally think advertising in general has very little return on the money.

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 02:13 PM (lKmt3)

381 370 I'm asking people to get votermom's idea that they shadowban to continue counting you as a "user" for advertising purposes to Cruz.

A publicly traded company cannot misrepresent ANY numbers, or else it's an SEC violation.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 02:11 PM (8rNrN)

ace, if that's true, then why isn't the SEC investigating to find out exactly how many accounts on Twitter are bots and not real?

...Because I've seen estimates ranging from 1 or 2% all the way up to 75% of all twitter accounts...

But yeah, I don't think the SEC gives a shit. And I think investors are being taken for a ride here. A bunch of old people with no idea how technology works getting dazzled by something like twitter...

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 02:13 PM (F5+ro)

382 Joran Dax was best Dax.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at April 06, 2018 02:13 PM (ANFJ0)

383 Wasn't Picard also fucking Guinan?

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM (mF1qm)

384 353 340 Picard also had that hottie he transferred off the Enterprise because he didn't want to have to order her to risk her life.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:09 PM (LiyEm)

Yeah. I was just using Riza as the baseline because all three went there.

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM (cAnNx)

385 The feeling that you have a chance to be heard is very powerful."

Does anyone over the age of 10 actually believe the "rich n'famous" do their own twits/pages/etc and not their management/PR?

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM (7LY+6)

386 twitter seems to reflect the axiom about South Africa "fascism for the blacks, capitalism for the whites, and something somewthing for the other group"

you got daesh twitter
you got black twitter.

no fuss no muss,

but white folk twitter needs a certain culling of the wrong sort of speech. And, sorry folks, your speech has been surrendered by our party as beyond the pale.

Posted by: Kuhyt at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM (Kuhyt)

387 We dodged one bullet at least,DC Fontana and David Gerrold the story consultants wanted to include all kinds of homo stuff including gay marriage but the producers said no way.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM (LiyEm)

388 The feeling that you have a chance to be heard is very powerful.
Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 02:11 PM (hMwEB)

so true , very empowering

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM (wm1u1)

389 383 Wasn't Picard also fucking Guinan?
Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM (mF1qm)
_________________________________________________

No. Sam Malone from Cheers was.

Posted by: Diane Chambers at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM (ATVNj)

390 Worf went to Riza and brought Jadzia Dax in a bathing suit.
Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 02:07 PM

Judzia Dax: The Mary Ann of TNG.

Posted by: Duncanthrax at April 06, 2018 02:15 PM (ctuyM)

391
I would like to see an internet "March for our Sanity", set a date and conservatives cancel their twitter accounts on the same day. Wouldn't even have to make a silly sign.

Easy for me to say, since my social media is limited to right here at the Sea Pods Cafe.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 06, 2018 02:15 PM (r+sAi)

392 But as a counter example, I have a friend that's works at a PR firm and thinks social media ads are incredibly effective for how much you can micro target and the cost is dirt cheap. Television advertising by comparison is ridiculously expensive.

I personally think advertising in general has very little return on the money.
Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 02:13 PM (lKmt3)

Yes, you can microtarget for cheap.

But what is the return on that? There are plenty of formulas that companies use to figure out their return on advertising dollars, i would love to see an honest assessment.

Because, speaking anecdotally and for myself, I run ad blockers and, as someone who grew up on the internet, have trained my eyes to ignore internet ads.

I don't think I've ever bought anything because I saw an online ad for it.

I really have to wonder if theres much efficacy in micro targeting at all.

Because if there's not, there goes all of google, facebook, twitters, etc. value. overnight.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 02:15 PM (F5+ro)

393 376 GoggleTube and F*c*book are either common carriers, or publishers they are NOT both.
Posted by: sven10077 at April 06, 2018 02:12 PM (SzZnW)

They are both, or at least they will claim to be either or depending on the lawsuit they are involved in, until their status has been clarified by law...but EO would probably be more likely these days.

Posted by: DFCtomm at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (50gG9)

394 " a private company and has the right to shadowban whoever it likes"

for one thing they are publicly traded,

for another they offer an open forum but that is a lie (when they shadow ban one ideology). Selling a fake product.

for another they have deals with spies, to sell our conversations we thought (are told, led to believe) are private, as well as all our metadata. Selling a dangerous product.

Their liability is that they deceived in order to get people to give (or exchange for a product) up what they thought was kept private. Selling deviously collected material that could be used for blackmail.

Posted by: illiniwek at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (bT8Z4)

395 Denise Crosby as Tasha Yar.

That is all.

Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (ATVNj)

396 362
Ha, Leonard Nimoy is in this episode of Wagon Train as a Basque.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:10 PM (LiyEm)

***
A small-mouth Basque? Or a sea Basque?

Posted by: Publius Redux at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (Fb9aZ)

397 340 Picard also had that hottie he transferred off the Enterprise because he didn't want to have to order her to risk her life.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:09 PM (LiyEm)
=========

He also had Famke Janssen.

Posted by: bicentennialguy at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (vg8iE)

398 fucking TNG.

Riker as a nerd sex god. Then there's the holodeck where the nerd fantasied about beating up riker and getting with troi. Basically, the writers knew about as much about women as they knew about warp drives.

Posted by: Kuhyt at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (Kuhyt)

399 Because I mean... the entire valuation of these companies is based on
the idea that there is some huge return on advertising dollars if you
advertise with google or Facebook... but if that was true, no one would
be advertising in any other medium, right?
=====

My Pillow and Chik-Fil-A are TV and word of mouth and print.

Kinda destroys the value of you MUST start your business with a Facebook, Pinterest, or whatever.

Posted by: mustbequantum at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (MIKMs)

400 A bunch of old people with no idea how technology works getting dazzled by something like twitter..."

Bingo.

When I see numbers tossed around like "2 billion users" my Bovine Scatology detector goes "Really?"

Suuuure. Now pull the other one.

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (7LY+6)

401 I bet Picard also nailed Admiral Necheyev.

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (cAnNx)

402 It isn't product promotion (advertising) that's effective. It's the consumer reviews that matter.

Posted by: mrp at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (Pqytn)

403 Does anyone over the age of 10 actually believe the "rich n'famous" do their own twits/pages/etc and not their management/PR?
Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM (7LY+6

only when the celeb is drunk
drunk celeb tweets are a riot

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (hMwEB)

404 I don't know, I may be alone here, but I think we're back in the PETS.COM 1999 internet bubble days.

Right now, largely because a bunch of kids are in charge of that department, a bunch of companies are convinced that social media is it, that's their big concern, and their main focus. Its why advertising is almost never about the actual product, but about weird memorable crap that hopefully becomes "viral."

But they aren't getting sales. My favorite example is the "breakfast with the king" ad campaign. Millions spent. Tons of viral video clicks and shares. People were talking all about it. Won lots of awards.

Did nothing for sales. They dumped the campaign because it was basically a money trash basket.

But I'm focusing more on the demographics data. I think its useful for advertisers to know I'm a single 50 year old white Vermin Supreme voter who loves cats and Forged In Fire, but its a pretty limited usefulness.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (39g3+)

405 Does anyone over the age of 10 actually believe the "rich n'famous" do their own twits/pages/etc and not their management/PR?

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM (7LY+6)

I believe Rosie O'Donnell does her own tweets. It would be tough finding someone even dumber than her to do her tweeting for her.

Posted by: Donna&&&&&&V yay! Baseball Season is here!! at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (H80UQ)

406 383 Wasn't Picard also fucking Guinan?

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM

What actually happened was Picard was hiding in a Jefferies tube and while rubbing his head in exasperation, was heard to say "That fucking Guinan."

Posted by: Diogenes at April 06, 2018 02:17 PM (8DZhw)

407 It's not about business. It's about the little totalitarians of their special councils flexing their power over others. "I shadow banned him" *Sloosh*
Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 02:00 PM (cAnNx)

i get all that, but there must be something else other than just being bitchy

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:01 PM (wm1u1)

========

If people are explicitly banned, everyone would know it. They might jump ship and find someplace else to interact. Thus the attempt to stop the flow of information would fail.

With shadowbanning, the information flow is stopped and people remain ignorant and complacent for a longer period of time, allowing the rot to spread further until it is detected.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at April 06, 2018 02:17 PM (/qEW2)

408 Twitter is going down in flames anyway.

Ayup. Their stock was at $69 (schwing!) Jan 2014. It's down 59% at $28.17 today.

Posted by: bonhomme at April 06, 2018 02:17 PM (iv0p7)

409 >>391.Easy for me to say, since my social media is limited to right here at the Sea Pods Cafe. Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 06, 2018 02:15 PM (r+sAi)

I hear that. All the twitter/facebook sturm und drang is completely lost on me. They looked like stupid kid-toys when they came out, they look like stupid kid-toys now.

Posted by: Zod at April 06, 2018 02:17 PM (Bdeb0)

410 383 Wasn't Picard also fucking Guinan?
___________________________________________

Yes. She got pregnant and had to go to the Guinan-cologist for a "procedure."

Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at April 06, 2018 02:17 PM (ATVNj)

411 "fascism for the blacks, capitalism for the whites, and something somewthing for the other group"

it went fascism for blacks , socialism for boers, capitalism for the English , Asians, and Jews.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at April 06, 2018 02:17 PM (ANFJ0)

412 I think the immutable law of the internet is every social media site will devolve into moms talking about vaccines, trump, and birthday parties.

Posted by: Kuhyt at April 06, 2018 02:17 PM (Kuhyt)

413 I'm asking people to get votermom's idea that they shadowban to continue counting you as a "user" for advertising purposes to Cruz.

A publicly traded company cannot misrepresent ANY numbers, or else it's an SEC violation.

===

uh oh, votermom ended Twitter ...

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:18 PM (wm1u1)

414 395 Data nailed her.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:18 PM (LiyEm)

415 -
--
Wasn't Picard also fucking Guinan?

Posted by: garrett at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM

---------------

No. A lot of people think that, but Guinan was played by Whoopi Goldberg.

Posted by: irright at April 06, 2018 02:18 PM (pMGkg)

416 I really have to wonder if theres much efficacy in micro targeting at all.

Because if there's not, there goes all of google, facebook, twitters, etc. value. overnight.
Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 02:15 PM (F5+ro)
---------

There must be, or all those companies wouldn't keep doing it. Isn't the advertising what keeps all those social media companies afloat? If that dried up, so would they.

Posted by: bluebell at April 06, 2018 02:18 PM (oMtOd)

417 405 Does anyone over the age of 10 actually believe the "rich n'famous" do their own twits/pages/etc and not their management/PR?

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 02:14 PM (7LY+6)

I believe Rosie O'Donnell does her own tweets. It would be tough finding someone even dumber than her to do her tweeting for her.
Posted by: Donna&&&&&&V yay! Baseball Season is here!! at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (H80UQ)

Pretty sure Cher does her own too. No publicist with the slightest shred of professional pride would ever write that illiterate, unhinged drivel.

Posted by: Insomniac at April 06, 2018 02:18 PM (NWiLs)

418 Picard was hiding in a Jefferies tube
_______________________________________

Are you sure it wasn't a Fallopian Tube?

Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at April 06, 2018 02:19 PM (ATVNj)

419 We dodged one bullet at least,DC Fontana and David Gerrold the story consultants wanted to include all kinds of homo stuff including gay marriage but the producers said no way.

Ugh. David Gerrold.

Doofus writes one mildly entertaining yet very campy episode, after which he started acting like King Trek of Trek Mountain.

Serious jerk.

Posted by: WitchDoktor, AKA VA GOP Sucks at April 06, 2018 02:19 PM (tVWQB)

420 Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at April 06, 2018 02:17 PM (/qEW2)

votermom had an idea, look upthread

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:19 PM (wm1u1)

421 411 "fascism for the blacks, capitalism for the whites, and something somewthing for the other group"

it went fascism for blacks , socialism for boers, capitalism for the English , Asians, and Jews."

ah.

sad to say, the lefts' recent suicidal science experiment on "can't we all get along" seems to be a "no". People just cocoon deeper and deeper while other groups get a bit exploitative of the surrendered spacess.

Posted by: Kuhyt at April 06, 2018 02:19 PM (Kuhyt)

422 397 340 Picard also had that hottie he transferred off the Enterprise because he didn't want to have to order her to risk her life.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:09 PM (LiyEm)
=========

He also had Famke Janssen.

Posted by: bicentennialguy at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM

Kirk had anyone he damned well wanted.

Posted by: Diogenes at April 06, 2018 02:19 PM (8DZhw)

423
If people are explicitly banned, everyone would know it. They might jump ship and find someplace else to interact. Thus the attempt to stop the flow of information would fail.

With shadowbanning, the information flow is stopped and people remain ignorant and complacent for a longer period of time, allowing the rot to spread further until it is detected.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at April 06, 2018 02:17 PM (/qEW2)

So a shadowban is a vasectomy.

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 02:20 PM (cAnNx)

424 Won lots of awards. "

Annnd that's the big one.

The Ad industry loves awards. To itself.

We're living in Mad Men 2.0, the Sillycon Valley Years.

Posted by: Anon a mouse at April 06, 2018 02:20 PM (7LY+6)

425 I personally think advertising in general has very little return on the money.

I think so too. Beyond reminding people you exist and getting people aware of a new product, I think advertising is mostly a waste of money. Does Coca Cola really need to spend 50 million on a Superbowl ad? Do they really get 50 mill in sales from that? I seriously doubt it.

Does anyone over the age of 10 actually believe the "rich n'famous" do their own twits/pages/etc and not their management/PR?

Some of them do - at least part of the time - some do not. You can usually tell, the ones who do are dumb as hell and tweet ridiculous stuff.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:20 PM (39g3+)

426
The one thing I've noticed is that I'll do research on Amazon on something that I'm considering buying. Maybe something with a high dollar value. If I see an ad at all, which is not often because of my security settings, sure-as-shit it's for that very same high dollar value item.

Somebody is paying to refresh my memory about something I'm considering.

Posted by: Forgot My Nic at April 06, 2018 02:20 PM (LOgQ4)

427 votermom had an idea, look upthread

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:19 PM (wm1u1)

not much of an idea, just seemed like an obvious passive aggressive motive

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 02:20 PM (hMwEB)

428
414 395 Data nailed her.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:18 PM (LiyEm)

Just because the dildo talks does it actually nail her?

Posted by: buzzion at April 06, 2018 02:20 PM (cAnNx)

429 OT ,but I wanted to make sure people were aware of The Rock's recent statement that he would have also kneeled or raised a fist at the playing of the National Anthem if he were in the NFL.

I don't know why this makes me angrier than usual for things celebrities vomit from their word holes.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at April 06, 2018 02:21 PM (qB3GS)

430 Yes, you can microtarget for cheap.

Posted by: Harry Paratestes at April 06, 2018 02:15 PM (F5+ro)

Google is the best since it can give you an ad exactly when you are looking for an item, since even the next day is probably too late. Why am I still getting ads for toilets that I was googling two weeks ago, since I bought the replacement toilet that evening. It's focused but way, way too late.

Posted by: DFCtomm at April 06, 2018 02:21 PM (50gG9)

431 Denise Crosby as Tasha Yar.

Eww, Data's sloppy seconds.

Posted by: bonhomme at April 06, 2018 02:21 PM (iv0p7)

432 428 Starfleet decided he was indeed a life form iirc.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:21 PM (LiyEm)

433 Kirk boned a shapeshifter in the sixth movie. who might have been a dude.

in fairness, they were in Klingon prison. it could have been worse.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at April 06, 2018 02:21 PM (ANFJ0)

434 there are some folks who think that your set top box can generate custom ads for your tv experience based on your internet searches and what not.

Posted by: Kuhyt at April 06, 2018 02:22 PM (Kuhyt)

435 They first came after the Nazis, and I didn't do anything because I wasn't a Nazi...

Then they redefined what a Nazi was, until I was one...

Progressives have a new playbook...

Posted by: Don Q. at April 06, 2018 02:22 PM (NgKpN)

436 @427 makes sense, there had to be something

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:22 PM (wm1u1)

437 OT ,but I wanted to make sure people were aware of The Rock's recent statement that he would have also kneeled or raised a fist at the playing of the National Anthem if he were in the NFL.

I don't know why this makes me angrier than usual for things celebrities vomit from their word holes.

It makes me angry, I think for the same reasons as the conversation in the morning thread about contractors falsely saying they are Christians merely to get business...

This guy made his name and money from appealing to Middle America - the very people he is spitting on with that statement.

Posted by: WitchDoktor, AKA VA GOP Sucks at April 06, 2018 02:22 PM (tVWQB)

438 As the first openly nonbinary regular cast member, Wesley Crusher was pretty courageous and empowering. Watching that little girl transition into an almost, sorta man-like thing over many seasons . . . TNG was really ahead of its time.

Posted by: Bear with Assymetrical Balls at April 06, 2018 02:22 PM (uYSAz)

439 Yes, you can microtarget for cheap.

But what is the return on that? There are plenty of formulas that companies use to figure out their return on advertising dollars, i would love to see an honest assessment.

Because, speaking anecdotally and for myself, I run ad blockers and, as someone who grew up on the internet, have trained my eyes to ignore internet ads.

I don't think I've ever bought anything because I saw an online ad for it.

I really have to wonder if theres much efficacy in micro targeting at all.

Because if there's not, there goes all of google, facebook, twitters, etc. value. overnight.
Posted by: Harry Paratestes

_______________

Again, I think advertising in general has a poor rate of return, but I'm not going to pretend it has zero value.

What companies see is an online advertising campaign can reach like 10,000 times the amount of people and put it front of the specific group they want as opposed to a $50,000 tv ad, so they think it's getting more bang for the buck.

Also, we sometimes forget there's a lot of stupid people out there. Like who votes for someone based on a tv ad, but obviously there's enough people that this can decide elections. And no one is going to risk losing an election by doing zero tv ads to see what happens.

Posted by: Maritime at April 06, 2018 02:22 PM (lKmt3)

440 A publicly traded company cannot misrepresent ANY numbers, or else it's an SEC violation.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 02:11 PM

Print media has to submit to an independent audit of their circulation numbers for exactly that reason. Maybe it has changed. But there has never been a requirement for internet companies to submit to an independent audit of their page view numbers, that I know of.

Because there were print media content publishers who were inflating their circulation numbers and the advertisers caught on to it.

I'm not sure about broadcast media, but the same holds true for Network TV. They sell advertising based on numbers of viewers (ratings).

Posted by: Skandia Recluse at April 06, 2018 02:22 PM (roQNm)

441 I don't know why this makes me angrier than usual for things celebrities vomit from their word holes.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at April 06, 2018 02:21 PM (qB3GS)

Because he seems like a nice guy and it's upsetting to realize that he's just as sjw as the rest

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 02:22 PM (hMwEB)

442 Who is Twitter? Let's see some names, faces, addresses, and the usual Et cetera of what they do to conservatives.
Why is it a rule that liberal ***holery must go unnoticed and unpunished?

Posted by: ro-man at April 06, 2018 02:22 PM (RuIsu)

443 What happens in Klingon prison stays in Klingon prison...
James T. Kirk

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:23 PM (LiyEm)

444
but I wanted to make sure people were aware of The Rock's recent statement that he would have also kneeled or raised a fist at the playing of the National Anthem if he were in the NFL.

Of course he never had the opportunity because he wasn't talented enough to play in the NFL so he went into pro wrestling

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at April 06, 2018 02:23 PM (lKyWE)

445 I believe Rosie O'Donnell does her own tweets. It would be tough finding someone even dumber than her to do her tweeting for her.
Posted by: Donna&&&&&&V yay! Baseball Season is here!! at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (H80UQ)
------------

Same with Kanye West. He is, or at least was, known for the utter lunacy of his tweets.

Josh Groban did a thing on Kimmel about that, long ago:

https://youtu.be/0Axzxe1a78E. Very funny.

Posted by: bluebell at April 06, 2018 02:23 PM (oMtOd)

446 431 Denise Crosby as Tasha Yar.

Eww, Data's sloppy seconds.
Posted by: bonhomme at April 06, 2018 02:21 PM (iv0p7)

Looks like you blew a seal.

No that was just Data.

Posted by: josephistan at April 06, 2018 02:23 PM (7HtZB)

447 I like the Orville where Seth whatshisname was married to hubba hubba adrianne palicki

Posted by: Kuhyt at April 06, 2018 02:23 PM (Kuhyt)

448 yo

Posted by: Tom at April 06, 2018 02:23 PM (tWj/h)

449 433 Kirk boned a shapeshifter in the sixth movie. who might have been a dude.

in fairness, they were in Klingon prison. it could have been worse.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at April 06, 2018 02:21 PM

KlQit Copd Niktu daP 'qrlcor!

Translated: "You sure have a purdy mouth."

Posted by: Diogenes at April 06, 2018 02:23 PM (8DZhw)

450 393 Posted by: DFCtomm at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (50gG9)

Their little game of "in and out" would be barely tolerable if they were politically neutral and just jamming people on damages with their games.

It is intolerable since they picked sides.

Posted by: sven10077 at April 06, 2018 02:23 PM (SzZnW)

451 Advertising on Facebook is so cheap I've tried it. Never got any returns, but its cheap as hell. So I can see the appeal for companies but at the same time... I barely even notice there are ads, and I never, ever click on them on purpose. Sometimes there's a lag spike and I click on one by accident, but I shut it down. I don't think its worth spending a dime on Facebook ads.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:24 PM (39g3+)

452 if I were twitter I would argue that a shadowbanned user is still an ad viewer, so no harm no foul

Posted by: @votermom @vm pimping great books usually free or sale at April 06, 2018 02:24 PM (hMwEB)

453 437 OT ,but I wanted to make sure people were aware of The Rock's recent statement that he would have also kneeled or raised a fist at the playing of the National Anthem if he were in the NFL.

I don't know why this makes me angrier than usual for things celebrities vomit from their word holes.

It makes me angry, I think for the same reasons as the conversation in the morning thread about contractors falsely saying they are Christians merely to get business...

This guy made his name and money from appealing to Middle America - the very people he is spitting on with that statement.

Posted by: WitchDoktor, AKA VA GOP Sucks at April 06, 2018 02:22 PM (tVWQB)

He's positioning himself to run as a Democrat. So he has to provide bona fides.

Well, if he's gonna pick sides...it makes me sad. But it won't make me hesitate.

Posted by: Mark Andrew Edwards at April 06, 2018 02:24 PM (xJa6I)

454 Advertising works on me only regard to new products . Otherwise I may not know they are out there.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at April 06, 2018 02:24 PM (qB3GS)

455 It isn't product promotion (advertising) that's effective. It's the consumer reviews that matter.
Posted by: mrp at April 06, 2018 02:16 PM (Pqytn)

Consumer reviews get stealth-spammed too. Trying to find an objective review of VOIP services or something is eye-opening because it's about two pages of results before you get to an actual independent source. Same with AMZN product pages that have a stack of 5-star reviews from Bob and Linda and Steve in glowing Shenzhen English...

Posted by: hogmartin at April 06, 2018 02:24 PM (y87Qq)

456 Agree with you Ace. Twitter is doing the shadow ban because they are afraid of conservative ideas. They don't want the ideas spread and want to waste your energy and time. I'm done with twitter.

Posted by: Draki at April 06, 2018 02:25 PM (rTz7y)

457 >>only when the celeb is drunk
drunk celeb tweets are a riot

Heh, yes.
Or the unintentionally funny ones like CardiB, who's just discovered that when you make more money, you are taxed a lot more.

Posted by: Lizzy at April 06, 2018 02:25 PM (W+vEI)

458 Speaking of "shadow banning" why does the HQ ban commenters for silly comments and without any notice?

How does the HQ regulate THEIR banning practices?

It's your place, BUT an explanation for a banning would be polite.

Axing for a friend.

Posted by: Tom at April 06, 2018 02:25 PM (tWj/h)

459 336:

"
I predict that Twitter will one day just start to die out. People will realize that 2-day outrage fests and 1-hour Tweetstorms aren't remotely as important or meaningful as they believed. Right now businesses live in fear of a social media outcry because they are illiterate imbeciles who don't know how anything works. Some day they will figure out that what seems so terribly important today is forgotten within 2 days."

It's happening now domestically to Facebook. Pretty well all social media is very fragile and most analysts are at "hold" or "sell." Maybe new platforms will come along, but in a few years what we now consider the Big Dogs will be America On Line.

Posted by: Trump poisoned my cat at April 06, 2018 02:26 PM (II0OZ)

460 One of the weirder SciFi movies - Silent Running. Bruce Dern - crazy astroloon.

Posted by: Archer at April 06, 2018 02:26 PM (gbWkA)

461 Because he seems like a nice guy and it's upsetting to realize that he's just as sjw as the rest

Yeah he seemed more decent than that, and smart enough to avoid doing something so stupid as to alienate any fans. Too bad for him. His movies pretty much stunk anyway.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:26 PM (39g3+)

462 I think the correct alternative to Twitter is not gab.ai, but to just get the fuck off these timewasting pieces of shit altogether.

Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:28 PM (8rNrN)

This.

I missed Twitter, a little. But my life is better without it and without Facebook.

Posted by: Mark Andrew Edwards at April 06, 2018 02:26 PM (xJa6I)

463 C'mon, Tom, you know you don't have any friends.

Posted by: Bear with Assymetrical Balls at April 06, 2018 02:27 PM (uYSAz)

464 Ace not on twitter? More posts then?

Posted by: Tom at April 06, 2018 02:27 PM (tWj/h)

465 As the first openly nonbinary regular cast member, Wesley Crusher was pretty courageous and empowering. Watching that little girl transition into an almost, sorta man-like thing over many seasons . . . TNG was really ahead of its time.

If the autists of 4chan haven't already done it, you should get this over to them stat.

Maybe they can get a movement started to get Wheaton some SJW awards for bravery.

Posted by: bonhomme at April 06, 2018 02:28 PM (iv0p7)

466 -
--
Advertising works on me only regard to new products . Otherwise I may not know they are out there.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at April 06, 2018 02:24 PM

-------------------------

Same here. Does anyone switch from Coors to Bud because they like the Superbowl commercials?

Posted by: irright at April 06, 2018 02:29 PM (pMGkg)

467 460 Radical environmentalist kills the whole crew to save the ship of trees iirc.

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:29 PM (LiyEm)

468 if I were twitter I would argue that a shadowbanned user is still an ad viewer, so no harm no foul

==

user vs ad viewer, has to be delineation and tied to ad dollars ?? (and here i am out of my depth...)

Posted by: runner at April 06, 2018 02:30 PM (wm1u1)

469 440:

"Because there were print media content publishers who were inflating their circulation numbers and the advertisers caught on to it."

Fraud kept print afloat well past its expiration date. I don't know, either, if subscription audits still exist and how digital interplay would factor into it if it does.

You'll know social media platforms are on their last legs when we are assured that important people still use them.

Posted by: Trump poisoned my cat at April 06, 2018 02:30 PM (II0OZ)

470 466 -
--
Advertising works on me only regard to new products . Otherwise I may not know they are out there.

Posted by: Sebastian Melmoth at April 06, 2018 02:24 PM

-------------------------

Same here. Does anyone switch from Coors to Bud because they like the Superbowl commercials?

Posted by: irright at April 06, 2018 02:29 PM (pMGkg)

Real power of advertising is getting to the top of Internet search engines...

That is REALLY effective now...

Posted by: Don Q. at April 06, 2018 02:31 PM (NgKpN)

471 It won't be the last time I post it, but this is all just warming up for 2020.

Posted by: Moron Robbie - Bama's Boot Stomping on the Face of College Football Forever at April 06, 2018 02:31 PM (rF9rk)

472 Nood

Posted by: steevy at April 06, 2018 02:32 PM (LiyEm)

473 "471 It won't be the last time I post it, but this is all just warming up for 2020."

It is, but social media usage will be flagging quite a bit by then. I don't know how advertisers will respond because television isn't in much better shape than the dead tree industry as far as revenue.

Posted by: Trump poisoned my cat at April 06, 2018 02:35 PM (II0OZ)

474 Radical environmentalist kills the whole crew to save the ship of trees iirc.

Well its a little more complicated, but the complications are retarded.

That ship holds all of the plant life literally left from earth in the universe. Humans have overpopulated the planet, see, and have covered the world with industry and houses and all the plants were saved on this one ship!

How the planet survives without any plants or where people are getting their food -- meh, this is my setup to warn people of the evils of overpopulation! Away with your logic and reason!!!

Then, for no good reason, the people on the ship other than Bruce "I shot John Wayne in the back" Dern decide they need to jetisson the plants into the sun and kill them all so they can have the ship. So Dern murders them all and teaches the cute little robots how to maintain the plants as it orbits the sun.

Because before that it was... out by Jupiter or something. So you had bitchen graphics of Jupiter to look at as the plants all withered from being too far from the sun. Basically it was sci fi written by someone who knows nothing about science fiction. Would win awards these days. It was pretty well done but dumb as hell.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at April 06, 2018 02:35 PM (39g3+)

475 (165) The Last Waltz is on ooohTube

Posted by: ro-man at April 06, 2018 02:35 PM (RuIsu)

476 I have an idea of how to make a Twitter competitor that could actually steal market share from it (a good kind of brand differentiation) and would love to talk to someone with skills or money to make that happen. I would just love to kill all of these companies.

And the media, obviously.
Posted by: ace at April 06, 2018 01:40 PM (8rNrN)

I had a conversation about this with Pixy Misa and he mentioned he was working on something along those lines. He started it after his nth suspension, I believe.

Posted by: physics geek at April 06, 2018 02:35 PM (huQJB)

477 470:

"Real power of advertising is getting to the top of Internet search engines...

That is REALLY effective now..."

This and it's the most insidious of the lot. Google really needs to be broken up pronto.

Posted by: Trump poisoned my cat at April 06, 2018 02:36 PM (II0OZ)

478 Ben Domenich in The Federalist today about the Williamson firing says that the continued Marcuse techniques by the left will end in an "explosion", and that if you think the election of Trump was the explosion, you haven't seen nothing yet.

Ben Domenich, meet Kurt Schlicter.

Posted by: mercenary13 at April 06, 2018 02:37 PM (GIuL5)

479 Good thing ace isn't a vegan bodybuilder or another tragedy might have occurred at twitter hq.

Posted by: Steve and Cold Bear at April 06, 2018 02:51 PM (/qEW2)

480 Sorry but all the pearl clutching over Williamson's firing - huh?

Magazine hires guy, magazine fires guy. Guy is writing lots of idiotic drivel in any case, and magazine is hardly worth noticing.

Their circus, their monkeys. Baffled that Schlichter et al pretend to believe this is some kind of "censorship" issue, or that it represents anything new in terms of the authoritarian racists' mindset or behavior. Kurt thinks anyone with a clue looks to The Atlantic for info and analysis on a regular basis?

Even if they did, this latest stunt reveals nothing new or important, about anything.

Posted by: rhomboid at April 06, 2018 02:53 PM (QDnY+)

481 I return to the review I dropped in here about the Prince Of Persia movie (which was crap): "it was better than Scorpion King".

the new Jumanji was shit too by the way.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at April 06, 2018 02:57 PM (ANFJ0)

482 lol that there will be any "explosion" on behalf of Kevin Dickhead Williamson. Ben Domenech is never interesting.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at April 06, 2018 02:59 PM (ANFJ0)

483 A little late to the party, but Cruz actually asked them about this at a hearing last month. Search YouTube (ironically) for "Sen. Cruz Questions Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube on Censorship of Conservatives".

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at April 06, 2018 03:09 PM (2lndx)

484 But if Twitter is no longer just an open forum but are in fact endorsing some views and punishing others, then they could be construed to be "publishers" of the tweets they permit to be seen, and would therefore not have the protections of the CDA's immunity clause.

SJW Editors

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at April 06, 2018 03:11 PM (fceHP)

485 The Left isn't like a crocodile. They are, rather, more like Cthulhu but without his physical attractiveness.

Posted by: The Atom Bomb of Loving Kindness at April 06, 2018 03:12 PM (CkxFg)

486 How much federal money does Twitter get from Uncle Shiphead?

How much does Google - er, Alfalfabet - get?

How much does Facebook get?

If they takes the money, why are they not held to the same standard as schools that take federal money - the Constitution, including its amendments, also applies to them and their actions?

Never mind. We both know the answer to that question:

They own the right politicians.

Posted by: Mark Matis at April 06, 2018 03:15 PM (LzG0h)

487 Yeah, except they'll never actually be "up in arms" because that would require them to have bear arms, which are all icky and rednecky.

Posted by: Chris M at April 06, 2018 03:16 PM (FGZtn)

488 You know who won't get banned by Twitter?

AllahPundit

Posted by: Nom de Blog at April 06, 2018 04:13 PM (FTb2K)

489 So...do you propose that the government compel Twitter to publish all comers? Under what authority could it do that? Sorry, but it's a corporation, not a government actor. Twitter can censor anything it chooses. And that would be none of the government's business.

Posted by: jesme at April 06, 2018 04:47 PM (85r3+)

490 The cleanest thing Congress could do would be to impose first amendment duties on ubiquitous communication providers. Just like the phone company couldn't turn your phone off if you criticized them, these communications giants "own" their medium.

Unlike websites, where there are a jillion providers, Twitter, Facebook, Google Search and similar have tth ability to throttle speech, probably better than a government can. Don't let them.

Posted by: Kevin M at April 06, 2018 04:48 PM (WG7aa)

491
I'm sure if back in the day, AT&T forbid Republicans from using their phone service, that would also be fair play, and we would just have to wait around for another phone company to be formed that would maybe let use the phone service.

Are people really this ignorant? The phone companies were federally regulated public utilities. This was done because phone service is a natural monopoly; if one company has built a phone network, it's virtually impossible for others to compete by building rival networks. This limitation simply doesn't exist for Internet "edge services" like Twitter. Anyone is free to start an alternative version and persuade people to use it. if they do, cool. If they don't, too bad. Either way, it's not for the government to involve itself in such matters.

Posted by: jesme at April 06, 2018 04:51 PM (85r3+)

492 why not number your tweets. then anyone could see if they are shadowbanning certain tweets

Posted by: capn crunch at April 06, 2018 04:52 PM (3Fk8f)

493 If Christian bakers have to bake a cake for a gay wedding then Twitter has to publish what it doesn't agree with.

Posted by: KillGoogleandFacebook at April 06, 2018 05:57 PM (jzx4H)

494 Ever since Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. decided to start monitoring content, they quit being merely a platform and became a publisher and all libel laws should be applicable. If we did not have spineless GOP, a quick tweak to the law whereby if you monitor it you own it will end all of this crap.

Posted by: Tim M. at April 06, 2018 06:57 PM (iwfBp)

495 I second #1. Gab is great. You just have to stick with it long enough to figure out whom you want to block.

Posted by: jdgalt at April 07, 2018 12:05 AM (3SFo/)

Processing 0.08, elapsed 0.0979 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0317 seconds, 503 records returned.
Page size 271 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.