[abarringer]

oh com'n. As if twitter doesn't allow people to post stupid junk? Multiple accounts that posted "Kill all white women" "Today seems like a good day for another reminder that all republicans deserve to die" are still active along with plenty of other insane things. You can cherry pick bad stuff from any social media site.

[chickenpotpie]

Twitter puts an active effort into removing those posts. You can definitely make the case they don’t go far enough, but Parler did the bare minimum. You would have to cherry pick the reasonable content off that site.

[Karunamon]

Mea culpa: I had the completely wrong idea on this post. See down thread. I would delete this comment if I could.

Is that why "Hang Mike Pence" was allowed to trend with 14K tweets, and later that same day "Hang Pence" with 55K?[1]

I'd wager every penny I own that almost none of those people were banned or sanctioned in any way.

[1]: https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1347791913806532609

[NineStarPoint]

Not only did twitter end up removing it, but it was a hashtag in response to a video from the protests of people yelling “Hang Mike Pence”, primarily not people actually calling for Mike Pence to be hanged. That I keep seeing this example being thrown around from conservative sources shows either a desire to argue in bad faith or a complete inability to research things beyond the absolute surface level. And it’s not like there aren’t other examples one could use to make reasonable complaints about censorship bias on twitter.

[Karunamon]

Did they actively remove it, or did it just age out of trending like everything does after a relatively short amount of time?

[debaserab2]

Shouldn't you be the one researching the argument you're supporting?

[Karunamon]

I wasn't the one that made the claim it was actively removed.

[chickenpotpie]

And then Twitter removed it. Could have been faster definitely, but Parler would have never taken it down at all.

[dagmx]

It was brought about because the insurrectionists were shouting that after posts on Parler called for it. Twitter then moderated and banned it.

You're really cutting out a ton of context here to fit a narrative. Parler was the source of the posts and parler would not moderate it.

[danso]

How many of those tweets were users commenting on news reports that the rioters were chanting "Hang Mike Pence"? https://twitter.com/search?q=hang%20mike%20pence&src=typed_q...

[jmull]

That argument doesn't hold water.

"Hang Mike Pence", as has been noted many times, was trending because people were discussing the videos showing Trump rioters chanting that.

People were not banned for using that phrase for the same reason you and I are not going to be banned/flagged for using it here: we aren't calling for violence and murder.

edit: previously called this a bad-faith argument, but that's not fair.

[anigbrowl]

as has been noted many times

A big problem on social networks (including right here on HN) is that it's very easy for people to behave disingenuously and ask questions to which they already know the answer.It's a very effective wayt o either spread misinformation or steal the time of people who are concerned about misinformation, because it's much cheaper to repeat a BS allegation than it is to debunk it.

Another problem (more peculiar but not unique to HN) is that calling out such behavior is often regarded as uncivil. To my mind disingenuity is far more uncivil; I prefer a rude truth to a polite lie.

[Karunamon]

Yet another problem is the common willful conflation of simply being wrong with bad faith or disingenuity. People generally won't correct themselves if they know they're going to get screamed at or dogpiled either way.

[anigbrowl]

That's a lesser problem, because people who get something wrong once are typically fine with being corrected, and contrariwise people are unlikely to dogpile someone for making a single mistake.

Examples of disingenuity include people asking naive-seeming questions to which those same people have already received detailed answers in the past, or repeating factual assertions that they made previously and which were shown and acknowledged to be false. It's not so common on HN but sadly very common on big social media sites or on news commenting platforms like disqus.

[MikeKusold]

If people are required to upload official identification before posting, why would you not want this site up? It seems like a low-effort honeypot by the FBI. Let all the radicalized people come, easily tie their online & offline identities together, then monitor them.

[oceanplexian]

Several tweets like this one from Khamenei are still up: https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/1263551872872386562

Is "The only remedy until the removal of the Zionist regime is firm, armed resistance." not a call to violence?

If Trump had posted the same Tweet do you think Twitter would have removed it?

[amyjess]

A friend of mine got permanently suspended from twitter because she and a friend were bantering with each other and she made a joking threat. Her friend who the "threat" was directed at has tried to petition twitter to undo her suspension, but they've just ignored her.

Twitter regularly bans people for anything that smells of violence, even when the "threat" is one person joking with their friend.

[mistersquid]

> Her friend who the "threat" was directed at has tried to petition twitter to undo her suspension, but they've just ignored her.

Can you quote the specific threat issued, anonymized as appropriate?

[narcissismo]

It seems like you can see it all now, rather than having to cherry pick.

https://cybernews.com/news/70tb-of-parler-users-messages-vid...

I'd be interested in seeing the hate ratio between 70TB of that site's posts versus an equivalent volume of Twitter traffic.

[creatorbytes]

But that puts the burden on who defines hate. Similar to the issue with banning “hate speech”. Where’s the line?

We know the extremes, but the extremes aren’t the problem.

“Basketball is stupid” - hate speech targeting a minority demographic, thereby racist.

I wish the above was hyperbole, but there’s a non-zero group size of people in nearby college communities that would agree.

[tantalor]

The difference is some sites (Twitter) have policy and infrastructure for moderating spam/abuse, and some (Parler) do not.

[ketamine__]

According to Parler's CEO the easiest way to get banned is by posting "fuck you" or uploading pictures of poop. That is what he is focused on...

Source is Kara Swisher's interview with John Matze.

[tshaddox]

Those two examples are likely rhetorical and are (as far as I can tell) not intended to and extremely unlikely to incite violence, much less imminent violence. If there were, however, organized groups actually planning and carrying out killings, and those groups used those slogans as a rallying cry, then indeed people and groups distributing those slogans ought to be banned from social networks.

[arbitrage]

... that's not a counter argument, you realize that, right? Saying things like that shouldn't be sanctioned on twitter, either.