Why conservatives’ favorite Twitter alternative is about to disappear from the internet

On Sunday, Amazon will kick Parler — the conservative social media platform that brands itself as a “free speech” alternative to sites like Twitter — off of its web-hosting service, potentially putting an end to a site that has become a nexus of extremism.

The push to take action against Parler also follows decisions this week by Twitter and Facebook to ban President Donald Trump from heir platforms for inciting violence — and thus deprives the president of what could have been an alternative to those services. Many conservatives aggrieved with those platforms have fled to Parler in recent months.

https://www.vox.com/2021/1/10/22223250/parler-amazon-web-services-apple-google-play-ban

These are private businesses and I support their right to deny services to anyone, but I wonder if this will be a good idea in the long run.

The authorities already have the ability to monitor these sites (much like they could this one I imagine). So I don't know if shutting down Parler is going to make us safer.

Secondly, governments have been known to influence private corporations by threat of regulation. Not saying its happening here, but it might be.

Maddog wrote:Secondly, governments have been known to influence private corporations by threat of regulation. Not saying its happening here, but it might be.

Speculation, if not pure fantasy. It's basically a common sense decision based on the interests of stockholders.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:Secondly, governments have been known to influence private corporations by threat of regulation. Not saying its happening here, but it might be.

Speculation, if not pure fantasy.  It's basically a common sense decision based on the interests of stockholders.

Have you ever run anything besides your fucking mouth?

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Speculation, if not pure fantasy.  It's basically a common sense decision based on the interests of stockholders.

Have you ever run anything besides your fucking mouth?

Yes, I have. Have you ever run anything...I mean, not your ex-wife, whom you ran off? But something productive or creative? You seem to live a rather mundane life.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Have you ever run anything besides your fucking mouth?

Yes, I have.  Have you ever run anything...I mean, not your ex-wife, whom you ran off?  But something productive or creative?  You seem to live a rather mundane life.

I have been self employed for decades. I understand making business decisions that keep you from getting on the wrong side of some bureaucrat. Thankfully I can avoid many relationships with the worthless fuckers..

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yes, I have.  Have you ever run anything...I mean, not your ex-wife, whom you ran off?  But something productive or creative?  You seem to live a rather mundane life.

I have been self employed for decades.  I understand making business decisions that keep you from getting on the wrong side of some bureaucrat.  Thankfully I can avoid many relationships with the worthless fuckers..

Bullshit.  You've got the people skills of a piranha fish. I suspect "self-employed", for you, means homeless and living in a tent.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I have been self employed for decades.  I understand making business decisions that keep you from getting on the wrong side of some bureaucrat.  Thankfully I can avoid many relationships with the worthless fuckers..

Bullshit.  You've got the people skills of a piranha fish.  I suspect "self-employed", for you, means homeless and living in a tent.

Well you suspect wrong.

You could ask Eddie or Ben.

The rules of social platforms are :
''Don't deliberately spread misinformation that could cause harm to the public. And don't threaten violence.''
Extremely reasonable rules, what's the problem?

JulesV wrote:The rules of social platforms are :
''Don't deliberately spread misinformation that could cause harm to the public. And don't threaten violence.''
Extremely reasonable rules, what's the problem?

Because that's very subjective.

Maddog wrote:

JulesV wrote:The rules of social platforms are :
''Don't deliberately spread misinformation that could cause harm to the public. And don't threaten violence.''
Extremely reasonable rules, what's the problem?

Because that's very subjective.

There is a logical structure to TRUTH: it is facts >> conclusion. Follow that pattern, and there is little trouble finding truth. The subjectivity is in the fringes, where duplicity and equivocation of meaning, or words, come into play.

Lies are an infection on the process of beginning with facts. There is no subjectivity in the garbage put out by Qanon, Profa or Trump himself, or other sites that start with conclusions and hunt for chance facts to support them. They simply dream up conclusions and take it from there. That is lying.

Uncritical thinkers adopt the lie and tacitly assume the fact is there, (or simply adopt the false conclusion without fact), hence building an infrastructure on a vacant foundation. Eventually, as with any structure, it must fail of its own weight.

That is what happened with the Trump lie that he won the election, but elements stole it from him. In over 60 legal cases, courts asked: where are the facts to support that conclusion? The Trump legal team could not produce the facts, and in testimony to the good faith of courts to follow simple logic, judges simply dismissed the case. If lawsuits are the calibration, that’s 60 instances of a lie failing of its own weight.