Parler ?

[sl1pstream 551]

1 hour ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

 

https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/06/liberal-media-sure-are-obsessed-with-villifying-parler-as-alternative-to-twitter/

 

 

 

 

Free speech always wins.

 

The tactics employed by the left, the media, etc. were expected, and the forthcoming efforts to deplatform Parler is expected too. 

 

When you have no ideas anyone wants.

Parler just launched, I'd like to see those numbers again in a few weeks or even months.

You also can't deplatform a platform. No one's stopping you from using it. Get a premium subscription!

 

No one's villifying it. Facebook and Twitter are garbage. At this point there have been hundreds of social networking sites over the years that were going to take on Facebook and Twitter and they've all faded into obscurity. It's the same thing every time. People download the apps to try it out until they realize that their social circle doesn't move over so they drop the app and go back to the big ones. Every time. Pretty much every alternative to Facebook and Twitter has been DOA.

 

Good for Parler for trying to make some quick money off of Trump's base, but I don't expect anyone to be using this for more than a few months, just like every alternative out there.

 

Besides, this looks way too complicated to be an alternative to Twitter. Its UI looks way closer to FB than it does to Twitter.

 

The persecution complex is still pretty hilarious though. It's also hilarious that the suggestion that the right is looking for a safe space is somehow villifying the app, when what you're talking about is exactly that, a safe space. 

 

As a politician, moving from mainstream social media to a tiny platform is also pretty dumb. Limiting the reach of your message to those who already agree with you doesn't help you. Ideally you'd want to grow your base and that doesn't seem possible on a platform on which everyone already agrees with you. 500,000 People aren't a whole lot, considering how many people have access to the internet, worldwide.

Edited June 28, 2020 by sl1pstream

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

The actual persecution complex comes from those who think deplatforming others is how they get their way politically. Yes, you can deplatform a platform, look at how Gab has been deplatformed by Apple, Google, Visa, Stripe, Godaddy, and a handful more companies trying to ruin a platform because dissenting views upsets them. Thankfully Gab is running again.

 

What the other platforms didn't have going for them that Parler does is prominent people in news/media, Congress, etc. joining, with perfect timing like this, and that's thanks to said deplatforming efforts. 

 

It's a good day for celebrating.

 

That being said, I agree about the UI, lots of improvements to be made on it. I might post a list of people that are on the platform right now if I get a moment.

Edited June 28, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[sl1pstream 551]

6 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

The actual persecution complex comes from those who think deplatforming others is how they get their way politically. Yes, you can deplatform a platform, look at how Gab has been deplatformed by Apple, Google, Visa, Stripe, Godaddy, and a handful more companies trying to ruin a platform because dissenting views upsets them. Thankfully Gab is running again.

 

What the other platforms didn't have going for them that Parler does is prominent people in news/media, Congress, etc. joining, with perfect timing like this, and that's thanks to said deplatforming efforts. 

 

It's a good day for celebrating.

 

That being said, I agree about the UI, lots of improvements to be made on it. I might post a list of people that are on the platform right now if I get a moment.

It's pretty hilarious that Gab is your prime example, given the horrible garbage that's actually on there.

It's also not going to take too long for some politician to misunderstand free speech and post something way over the line on there, because they think they can't get called out because it's posted on there.

Prominent people also joined Google+. Remember Google+? "Prominent" people on the right also jumped on Locals. How many people have even heard of Locals, unless they were already familiar with Rubin and friends?

And again, use your safe space as much as you want. All I was pointing out was that, unlike its cute marketing spiel, it does come with rules and just like every other half-baked attempt at an alternative social network, it's not going to be as popular as you think it is.

Where do you think these same politicians who are joining Parler would spend their campaign season ad money? Facebook with its 2.6 billion monthly active users or Parler with it's 500,000 members?

Edited June 28, 2020 by sl1pstream

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

17 minutes ago, sl1pstream said:

It's pretty hilarious that Gab is your prime example, given the horrible garbage that's actually on there.

It's also not going to take too long for some politician to misunderstand free speech and post something way over the line on there, because they think they can't get called out because it's posted on there.

Prominent people also joined Google+. Remember Google+? "Prominent" people on the right also jumped on Locals. How many people have even heard of Locals, unless they were already familiar with Rubin and friends?

And again, use your safe space as much as you want. All I was pointing out was that, unlike its cute marketing spiel, it does come with rules and just like every other half-baked attempt at an alternative social network, it's not going to be as popular as you think it is.

Where do you think these same politicians who are joining Parler would spend their campaign season ad money? Facebook with its 2.6 billion monthly active users or Parler with it's 500,000 members?

"The horrible garbage" is the usual caricatures employed, but it's not different whatsoever from how Twitter was and still is. 

 

"Safe space" is what leftists pretend ideologically purifying their platforms create, and the usual projection employed to pretend others need a safe space when in fact its you.

 

And about the "rules", they were "advice". Parler's members aren't "500,000". 

 

Appreciate the effort though. These tantrums are pretty funny, I sense some frustration at leftist attempt to exterminate opposition views, rather than actually come up with ideas people want, failing. 😂

 

I look forward to Parler growing in the face of Twitter and Facebook making that platform even more appealing. 

Edited June 28, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

5 hours ago, sl1pstream said:

https://legal.parler.com/documents/guidelines.pdf

Being an ####### to people will also get you kicked off of Parler. I'm excited to see people whine about yet another platform supposedly not respecting their right to free speech.

Looking at their guidelines, it looks like they're even stricter than Facebook or Twitter. But hey, that's nothing a little marketing can't fix.
The more I read their guidelines, the more ridiculous they sound. I wonder if they made the Catholic school of social media networks on purpose. 

 

My favorite rule is probably this one.

 

How about Areola ?

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

21 minutes ago, sl1pstream said:

It's pretty hilarious that Gab is your prime example, given the horrible garbage that's actually on there.

It's also not going to take too long for some politician to misunderstand free speech and post something way over the line on there, because they think they can't get called out because it's posted on there.

Prominent people also joined Google+. Remember Google+? "Prominent" people on the right also jumped on Locals. How many people have even heard of Locals, unless they were already familiar with Rubin and friends?

And again, use your safe space as much as you want. All I was pointing out was that, unlike its cute marketing spiel, it does come with rules and just like every other half-baked attempt at an alternative social network, it's not going to be as popular as you think it is.

Where do you think these same politicians who are joining Parler would spend their campaign season ad money? Facebook with its 2.6 billion monthly active users or Parler with it's 500,000 members?

Surely no politician would post something way over the line on social media. Lol really ?

[yuna628 9,676]

Another social media website just like any other that has terms and reserves the right to punt you out and edit 'your stuff' for whatever reason they want. *shrug*

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

And another "website" that'll be abandoned if they abandon their free speech policies the way Twitter and Facebook are.

 

In a public platform, public square, whatever you want to call it, free speech always wins. Deplatforming, censorship, and this kind of authoritarianism loses.

Edited June 28, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[sl1pstream 551]

32 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

And another "website" that'll be abandoned if they abandon their free speech policies the way Twitter and Facebook are.

 

In a public platform, public square, whatever you want to call it, free speech always wins. Deplatforming, censorship, and this kind of authoritarianism loses.

Facebook has 2.6 billion active monthly users. How exactly are they being abandoned? Besides, they're all private companies. They're not public squares or public platforms. Free speech laws are about the government, not a private company.

Edited June 28, 2020 by sl1pstream

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

They are public squares and public platforms, open to the public, and why they reap section 230 benefits (public benefits) deferring liability to users rather than themselves. They can't defer liability to others while at the same time being dictators of their speech. Censorship fanatics can try their best to justify it, either way, free speech in the public discourse always wins, in the end. Free speech isn't just solely for the government either, it's a basic principle for any public platform that wants to participate in the public discourse. You don't see the presidential debates, hosted by a private company, where the private company decides to arbitrarily censor the candidates in this fashion. Thankfully we know better despite the awful gaslighting attempts.

Edited June 28, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[sl1pstream 551]

3 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

They are public squares and public platforms, open to the public, and why they reap section 230 benefits (public benefits) deferring liability to users rather than themselves.

What are you even talking about? What 230 benefits? Why are you obsessed with a thing you don't even understand?

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

1 minute ago, sl1pstream said:

What are you even talking about? What 230 benefits? Why are you obsessed with a thing you don't even understand?

I understand it quite well. I know what deferral of liability is, and you can't have your cake and eat it too. Lawsuits have demonstrated section 230 isn't a blank slate to do whatever you want on your platform while reaping the benefits of liability deferral. Either users freely speak for themselves or the site is a publisher for their views. Pick one, guy, and try a different tactic.

[sl1pstream 551]

1 minute ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

I understand it quite well. I know what deferral of liability is, and you can't have your cake and eat it too. Lawsuits have demonstrated section 230 isn't a blank slate to do whatever you want on your platform while reaping the benefits of liability deferral. Either users freely speak for themselves or the site is a publisher for their views. Pick one, guy, and try a different tactic.

What about VisaJourney? Do you think it's okay that posts get moderated on these forums?

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

5 minutes ago, sl1pstream said:

What about VisaJourney? Do you think it's okay that posts get moderated on these forums?

Contextualize. Because it is and isn't, depending on if/how they benefit from section 230. 

Edited June 28, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]