Posted on 07/01/2020 8:28:00 PM PDT by semimojo
Over the last few weeks Parler has become the talk of Trumpist land, with promises of a social media site that "supports free speech." The front page of the site insists that its content moderation is based on the standards of the FCC and the Supreme Court of the United States:...
Besides, as we pointed out, Parler's terms of service allow them to ban users or content for any reason whatsoever -- suggesting they didn't have much conviction behind their "we only moderate based on the FCC and the Supreme Court."...
So, anyway, on Monday, we noted that Parler was actually banning a ton of users for a wide variety of reasons -- most of which could be labeled simply as "trolling Parler." People were going on to Parler to see what it would take to get themselves banned. This is trolling. And Parler banned a bunch of them...
Parler seems to be going through this growth process in the course of about a week. First it was "hey free speech for everyone." Then they suddenly start realizing that that doesn't actually work -- especially when people start trolling you. So, they start ad libbing. Right now, Parler's policy seems more akin to Facebook's "does it make us feel icky" standard, though tuned more towards its current base: so "does upset the Trumpists who are now celebrating the platform." That's a policy. It's not "we only moderate based on the 1st Amendment." And it's not "free speech supportive." It's also not scaleable.
Yep, a pure unmoderated forum will never work, even when people can ignore other posters, it becomes too much work to filter stuff out after awhile, and people will just give up.
What is their business model? Subscriber-based or Advertiser-based. If they will be advertiser-based, it will never work either, because Advertisers will exert pressure, as you’re seeing with Facebook.
Ping
The author is twisting being banned for using extreme profanity, pornographic content, threats, and attacking, undermining and sabotaging the Parler platform with “free speech”. They are not the same. Will they ban me for criticizing Trump? No. Will they ban me for supporting BLM? No. Will they ban me for criticizing Islam? Christianity? Being pro Choice? Pro Life? For or against gun control? Pro Israel? Pro Palestine?
I have to chuckle at the people who think political ideology beats out economics with the tech companies.
“What is their business model? Subscriber-based or Advertiser-based. If they will be advertiser-based, it will never work either, because Advertisers will exert pressure, as you’re seeing with Facebook.”
***************************************************
Let’s give them some time to get things worked out. Unlike Twitter, their motives and intentions appear good.
Meh, just stay away from ALL of them!
Nothing worthwhile to gain, much to lose.
But those are hard questions that need to be asked.
The message they gave out were that all porn will be deleted, photos of excrement as an answer to someone, and childish crap like “Fu@k you” etc as a retort.
All very reasonable.
They aren’t allowing communist kids to flood the place with abuse. It’s free speech as America experienced for a few centuries.
According to the article the owner's nuking Antifa supporters.
Is that OK?
LOL. I didn't realize the 1st Amendment had an expiration date.
But those are hard questions that need to be asked.
****************************************
I agree...and they certainly are working on their long term strategy. You can take it to the bank that it won’t be subscription based...that would fall flat IMHO.
That is wonderful. Antifa is not an opponent in a debating society engaging in honest discourse. They are marxist terrorist enemies and are hell bent on ending free speech, the constitution and America.
The time for sophistry is over. Ban their assses the minute they are identified. They are saboteurs and spies and deserve ZERO respect as citizens.
Thought this might happen.
Very good TechDirt article, well worth reading in its entirety.
If he knows they are conspiring to undermine his platform, as he stated, then yes. Also, based the tone and content of the article, do you believe you are getting both sides from Mr Masnick?
You are trolling. For 2 centuries, we had free speech that never included putting porn anywhere you pleased, or literally demanding a right to answer someone with a photo of feces. That is the kind of thing being posted.
The first Amendment never protected that, and it is completely childish to demand that of Parler lest they be against free speech.
On a larger scale, we are literally in a civil war for the very control of the nation against a well funded, well organized, very dedicated, communist insurgency.
This is a refuge where we can organize, communicate, and rapidly pass information without revolutionary socialists silencing us. Hope that doesn’t offend you too much.
I'm not sure what the other side would be. We have Parler's posted policies and actions so I don't know what we're missing.
To be sure I think Parler has every right to moderate as they see fit and they would be fools not to do so.
Unmoderated internet forums are generally cesspools that no one wants to spend time on.
I'm just asking those who insist that any moderation FB or Twitter does is unallowable censorship to reconsider.
I have to chuckle at the people who think political ideology beats out economics with the tech companies.
“I have to chuckle” at the people who think political ideology isn’t the driving force of progressive lead tech companies and their advertisers. They’re on a defeat Trump political jihad right now and only doctrinaire libertarians sitting comfortably in their armchairs can’t see it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.