[kingkawn]

The policing of speech got to this level when the site owner expresses no responsibility for contributing to the murderous radicalization of its members.

[bassman9000]

Far worse content is seen in Twitter, and they keep their domain. How so.

edit: immediate downvoting with no response. Really? So isn't there abhorrent content divulgated by Twitter/Facebook/YouTube/etc? Are any of their domains threatened by it? Any of the downvoters, feel free to engage in discussion.

[mikesickler]

The difference is that the worst stuff you generally see on Twitter is the stuff that is highest-voted content on Gab.

[jaydz]

The difference is Twitter is willing to remove the "far worse content" while Gab is not.

[c0brac0bra]

The shooter's content was scrubbed and gab notified the FBI once they were made aware of it. What else were they supposed to do?

[bassman9000]

Is there any chance they don't yet have the tools to police it? It's taken a fair amount of time and resources for other platforms to do it, to the point that YouTube/Twitter rely on users to do so.

And when threatened, they've done so:

https://www.geekwire.com/2018/gab-user-deletes-anti-semitic-...

Again, seems to me we're holding to different standards.

[kingkawn]

If you read interviews with Gab’s owner you will see there is no intention to mitigate the site’s extremism or radicalization of its members toward violence.