This week, Twitter turned their 'verification' system (which was intended to just be a way for a well-known personality to show they are who they really say they are and not some guy who made a fake account) into a system of punishment and obedience, when they removed Milo Yiannopoulos' "Verified" checkmark. Not because he was an impostor, but because he had expressed right-wing views the ultra-leftist CEO and management of Twitter didn't like.
They came as close to UnPersoning him as Twitter's structure allows.
So conservatives and libertarians had a small uprising called #jesuismilo, that became the top trend on Twitter for a while, and then started talking a lot about how to find an alternative to Twitter.
This is something I have a bit of personal experience. I succeeded in creating an alternative to RPG.net when everyone else failed.
So I thought I'd share some of my personal advice on how to make a successful free-speech social platform, as a guy who beat what was, in 2005, the RPG-hobby's equivalent to Twitter.
Enjoy, and as always please share, retweet, like, +1, or comment!
RPGPundit
Currently Smoking: Lorenzetti Poker + H&H's Beverwyck
Twitter might have done that, because someone created a spoof twitter account for "Chapo" Guzman, shortly before his re-capture, and threatened Donald Trump.
ReplyDeleteI don't see what one thing has to do with another. Milo was verified, he was who he said he was, no one, not even any of the Twitter SJWs are disputing that. That's the only official purpose of the Verified checkmark.
DeletePundit, you're like Tron, you fight for the right things :D
ReplyDeletePundit, you are correct, it doesn't. I misread your post. However, there is a valid reason for Twitter's actions, and it goes beyond the left, right and SWJ rhetoric. I believe in free speech and liberty, I despise totalitarianism and culture it breeds, be it Soviet or Austro-Hungarian, right wing or left, my favorite toast of all time is - Death to All Dictators.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, speech is an action, that can cause harm and thus make the speaker accountable. Tell security officials at the airport or a flight attendant, that you have a bomb, and you will be arrested and prosecuted as a criminal. Become an Islamist cleric, bless someone's deranged decision to become a mass murderer, and the State will cap your ass with a drone strike! Use a racist propaganda in California to Incite a bunch of skinheads to murder an African grad student with baseball bats in Oregon, and Courts will use the principle of vicarious liability to lodge a multi-million dollar judgement against your organization to shut down your printing press and kick you out of your house. These are not violations of your right to free speech, but onsequences of irresponsible actions, akin to driving your car into a crowd of pedestrians, maiming many.
I have no idea what this Milo fellow said, but Twitter seems to have exercised its own right to minimize its legal liabilities as a corporation.
No they didn't. What they did was take away a little tick that signifies he is who he really says he is.
DeleteHe was symbolically "UNPersoned" just like they used to do in the Soviet Days.
If there was something he did which was provably a violation of law or user rules, they should explicitly state what that is, and then ban him. But they couldn't or were too afraid of doing that. Either way, they are clearly NOT being a responsible corporation. They are either failing to protect their membership or (and in fact this is the real answer) they are engaging in the pettiest of personal attacks on a dissident against the Seattle-leftist SJW Narrative that the CEO and several of the directors of the company are known to express.
Once he was UNPersoned, nothing he says can be attributed to him and everyone is off the hook.
ReplyDeleteSoviet system was more incompetent, than you think, and the UNPersoned got a bigger audience once they were persecuted, than had they been ignored by the system. Often time it was the incompetent system persecuting posers who had nothing real worth sating. Take that one to heart.
BTW, what do you think would have happened to Pussy Riot, had they pulled their stunt in St. Patrick's Cathedral in Manhattan? I tell you, they would have never got past security with their make-up, guitars, and all. Free speech and oppression in a nutshell.
By changing the Verified check from "this guy is who he says he is" to "this guy is an approved Twitter user", Twitter is opening itself up to all sorts of liability.
DeleteBy changing the Verified check from "this guy is who he says he is" to "this guy is an approved Twitter user", Twitter is opening itself up to all sorts of liability.
DeleteSpeaking of liability, did you read the part where they have 50000-70000 ISIS accounts engaging in recruiting and propaganda?
DeleteIf they weren't in the business of policing the politics of its users, that'd be one thing, but if they assume responsibility for judging Milo, that means they are responsible for allowing ISIS to keep using them with impunity.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete