[charly187]

This just isn't true. We can argue whether or not Parler was not moderating correctly - but to imply they did not have a policy against violence is not true:

6. Threats of Violence, Advocacy of Imminent Lawless Action, Threats to Dox, Bribery or Criminal Solicitation

So-called “fighting words” are not a violation of our Guidelines.2

6.1 However, reported parleys, comments, or messages sent using our service will be deemed a violation of these Guidelines if they contain:

6.1.1 a “serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to aparticular individual or group of individuals,” with either the intent or reckless disregard as to whether the communication will “place the victim in fear of bodily harm or death.”

6.1.2 an explicit or implicit encouragement to use violence, or to commit a lawless action,such that: (a) the Parleyer intends his or her speech to result in the use of violence orlawless action, and (b) the imminent use of violence or lawless action is the likelyresult of the parley, comment, or message

6.1.3 a threat to dox anyone for any reason.

6.1.4 an offer to give or receive money, or other goods or services, in exchange for (a) afavor from any public official, or (b) the commission of any illegal action by anyone

[tptacek]

Since the previous comment where you said this is dead, I'll repeat my response here: Amazon presented Parler with a list of violent posts that they had reported to Parler and that Parler had refused to remove. The whole letter Amazon sent to Parler was reported out by Buzzfeed, including screenshots of the violent posts that Parler did not remove.

[Natsu]

Parler's complaint references here says that they did remove them and also that the article referenced was leaked before it was sent to Parler.

We'll have to watch this play out in court, later.

[tptacek]

I don't know whether that's true or false but I also don't know why it matters. Absent a confidentiality clause AWS is free to publish whatever they want. Certainly, people routinely publish their private communications with AWS.

[Natsu]

I may be misreading things, but it sounds to me like they published the list of things to remove and Parler removed them after notification, but they're using the publication to try to make it look like they were notified before they actually were.

But this is a complaint, so I can't just assume that any of these things are actually true and that's why I want to reserve judgement until we hear how all the evidence plays out in court.

[tptacek]

I think we agree: the material timing information here "when did AWS alert Parler to violent material" and "when did Parler remove that violent material".

[Natsu]

Yes, I agree with that.