[curlypaul924]

> From what I understand, Parler was bankrolled and designed to do exactly what it was ultimately shutdown for. That is, be a concentrated anger-machine-echo-chamber.

How is/was Parler different from Facebook in this regard? Facebook makes money on ads, so the longer you stay on their site, the more money they make. One way to get people to stay longer is by encouraging the sorts of posts that gets people riled up.

I'm not accusing Facebook of being complicit in the events of last week, but from personal observation, I see a lot more low-effort, angry posts on Facebook than I do on Twitter or Reddit.

[LarryDarrell]

Yes, the mechanism is the same.

However, Facebook has lines that when crossed result in being moderated. Their moderation system is obviously imperfect and a lot of the time they act too late, but it's there.

Parler was courting all the line-crossers with the promise that there would be no such moderation on their platform. That ended with predictable results.

[WalterSear]

There was more moderation going on, on Parler, than anywhere else. Users would start out shadow-banned until the moderators approved of their groupthink.

It wasn't just calculated to bring out the worst: it was actively fostering it.