[lelandfe]

Remember when a guy murdered 11 people in a Pittsburgh synagogue? When it was revealed the shooter had posted about it on Gab beforehand, every service powering the social network pulled the plug. Epik was who brought them back online.[0]

The hero of hate speech is not exactly a sterling reputation to have.

[0] https://www.wired.com/story/how-right-wing-social-media-site...

[qeternity]

I actually agree with the comment above: good speech doesn’t usually need defending…it’s almost always bad speech that does. But then again, I tend to side with free speech maximalists.

Rob Monster and crew are bad people because they actually believe this rhetoric, that’s why they defend it. They aren’t taking on a noble cause of defending free speech. They are defending speech with which they agree, and tends to be pretty shitty…that’s why they’re bad.

I don’t think they should be forced to stop, in fact I really hope the 1A is never diluted to that level. But the 1A cuts both ways: we get to sit back and talk about how awful Rob Monster is.

[quantumwannabe]

So you believe that Facebook should be shut down because the Christchurch shooter livestreamed his crime there?

[fortyseven]

Sigh. Facebook would not be a willing participant in this situation.

[pure_simplicity]

What makes you think Gab is any different from Facebook in this regard (referring to the platforms' role in the examples of violence in the ancestor comments)? Gab wasn't created to host illegal content, but to allow all strictly legal content. Neither Facebook nor Gab is willingly participating in anything that is published on their platform, because they are platforms, not publishers.