Hacked! - Parler, Conservative Alternative to Twitter

[Angry Floof]

If it's a Nazi spreading misinformation or harassing people, it's free speech. If it's anyone else, it's HARASSMENT. If it's Twitter saying "no harassment or misinformation," it's yOu wAnT tO aRrEsT pEoPLe fOr sPeAkInG!!!!11!!! If it's Parler banning people for free speech, they're justified in banning for HARASSMENT. If it's Twitter or Facebook banning for misinformation or harassment, it's unfair and draconian and a vIoLaTiOn oF fReE sPeEcH!!!!!111!!!!

 

[ZiprHead]

You're the one that brought up leftists being censored for harassment (your word) and you seemingly approved of that. Now you're moving goal posts.

What? When did I say or imply I approved?

If you didn't then why did you bring it up in defense of Parler?

 

[Jarhyn]

If it's a Nazi spreading misinformation or harassing people, it's free speech. If it's anyone else, it's HARASSMENT. If it's Twitter saying "no harassment or misinformation," it's yOu wAnT tO aRrEsT pEoPLe fOr sPeAkInG!!!!11!!! If it's Parler banning people for free speech, they're justified in banning for HARASSMENT. If it's Twitter or Facebook banning for misinformation or harassment, it's unfair and draconian and a vIoLaTiOn oF fReE sPeEcH!!!!!111!!!!

This is the very definition of "lawful evil":

Have a law for both, "harassment is bad", "free speech is good" and just vacillate between which definition you apply based on whose behavior you are looking at.

Lawful Evil, emphasis on the evil. Generally the response is getting some chaotic/neutral good up in here and punch some nazis.

 

[ZiprHead]

These people think Bill Gates is going to track them via microchips in vaccines yet they willingly give all their information to the Mercers and Cambridge Analytica.

 

[Elixir]

Falsely accusing others of crimes (such as voter fraud or child rape/molestation) ain't free speech. That's defamation.

Oh but nooooo it's not defamation if you actually believe it. And what Reel 'Murkin doesn't believe the Bidens are cannibal traffickerz 'n commie election stealers?
Defamation would accusing Rudi Giuliani of trying to seduce a 15 year old, knowing that she's "much too old" for him. Or is that "harrassment"? Only your Parler knows for sure.

 

[Jarhyn]

View attachment 30484

These people think Bill Gates is going to track them via microchips in vaccines yet they willingly give all their information to the Mercers and Cambridge Analytica.

Yeah, that didn't get past me either.

But it makes it easier to ban and censor left-leaning voices so there's that for them, I guess

 

[Metaphor]

You're the one that brought up leftists being censored for harassment (your word) and you seemingly approved of that. Now you're moving goal posts.

What? When did I say or imply I approved?

If you didn't then why did you bring it up in defense of Parler?

When did I defend Parler? What goalpost have I put up that I've moved?

Parler can decide for itself what its policies are, as does Twitter. If it has an anti-harassment policy, I'm not surprised, and an anti-harassment policy would have the prospect of banning as one of its mechanisms. I also said that somebody who is bragging about joining Parler for the sole purpose of "screwing with MAGA folks" sounds like those people were joining it to harass people, or ended up harassing people. Or perhaps there's some much more benign connotation of 'screw with' that the poster meant. Also, it would be interesting for that twitter user to post receipts of his ban and 'all his leftist friends' bans and the reasons for them, but I suspect he won't.

 

[Metaphor]

If it's a Nazi spreading misinformation or harassing people, it's free speech. If it's anyone else, it's HARASSMENT. If it's Twitter saying "no harassment or misinformation," it's yOu wAnT tO aRrEsT pEoPLe fOr sPeAkInG!!!!11!!! If it's Parler banning people for free speech, they're justified in banning for HARASSMENT. If it's Twitter or Facebook banning for misinformation or harassment, it's unfair and draconian and a vIoLaTiOn oF fReE sPeEcH!!!!!111!!!!

I can't for the life of me understand what you are saying.

You posted links to allegations that Parler banned "leftist" people. The leftist in question (and all his friends, apparently) joined Parler specifically to 'screw with MAGA folks'. He does not say what actions led him to being banned. Was he banned with no explanation at all? How does he know he was banned for being 'leftist' (presumably, the reason you think he was banned)?

But even if he was banned merely for challenging 'MAGA folks', how does that reflect on the other people using Parler (the "conservatives") and not Parler itself? Why does Parler banning people turn people using it into hypocrites?

I disagree with some of the rules on this board; that doesn't make me a hypocrite for using the board.

 

[Metaphor]

View attachment 30484

These people think Bill Gates is going to track them via microchips in vaccines yet they willingly give all their information to the Mercers and Cambridge Analytica.

Parler's verification is 'opt-in'. If people want to opt-in, what's the problem? Twitter has the exact same 'blue checkmark' process.

Why are leftists so obsessed with the existence of an alternative to Twitter?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

View attachment 30484

These people think Bill Gates is going to track them via microchips in vaccines yet they willingly give all their information to the Mercers and Cambridge Analytica.

Parler's verification is 'opt-in'. If people want to opt-in, what's the problem? Twitter has the exact same 'blue checkmark' process.

Why are leftists so obsessed with the existence of an alternative to Twitter?

Perhaps leftists are annoyed with it, just guessing here, because it's filled with hateful conspiracy theorists whose claims aren't in any way based in reality.

 

[Metaphor]

View attachment 30484

These people think Bill Gates is going to track them via microchips in vaccines yet they willingly give all their information to the Mercers and Cambridge Analytica.

Parler's verification is 'opt-in'. If people want to opt-in, what's the problem? Twitter has the exact same 'blue checkmark' process.

Why are leftists so obsessed with the existence of an alternative to Twitter?

Perhaps leftists are annoyed with it, just guessing here, because it's filled with hateful conspiracy theorists whose claims aren't in any way based in reality.

If it were, so what?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Perhaps leftists are annoyed with it, just guessing here, because it's filled with hateful conspiracy theorists whose claims aren't in any way based in reality.

If it were, so what?

LOL. "Who cares if there's a massive effort to delegitimize the election and defame democratic politicians as pedophiles?" That's really your argument?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

The "facts over feelings" crowd sure doesn't seem to care about facts very much.

 

[Angry Floof]

If it's a Nazi spreading misinformation or harassing people, it's free speech. If it's anyone else, it's HARASSMENT. If it's Twitter saying "no harassment or misinformation," it's yOu wAnT tO aRrEsT pEoPLe fOr sPeAkInG!!!!11!!! If it's Parler banning people for free speech, they're justified in banning for HARASSMENT. If it's Twitter or Facebook banning for misinformation or harassment, it's unfair and draconian and a vIoLaTiOn oF fReE sPeEcH!!!!!111!!!!

I can't for the life of me understand what you are saying.

Of course not. If you recognized right wing hypocrisy, you might not be so inclined to engage in it.

You posted links to allegations that Parler banned "leftist" people.

They are.

The leftist in question (and all his friends, apparently) joined Parler specifically to 'screw with MAGA folks'.

Exercising their free speech, just as maga morons exercise theirs doing the same thing on Twitter and elsewhere without consequence. (Again a hint: they're being banned for inflammatory hate speech and spreading misinformation. But not surprising that you can't seem to distinguish those.)

He does not say what actions led him to being banned. Was he banned with no explanation at all? How does he know he was banned for being 'leftist' (presumably, the reason you think he was banned)?

At least one very clearly explained that he criticized their insistence on gathering people's person info to join and was banned. Some of it may be opt-in, but when I started to join, it required a phone number. Twitter and Facebook have never required a phone number..

But even if he was banned merely for challenging 'MAGA folks', how does that reflect on the other people using Parler (the "conservatives") and not Parler itself? Why does Parler banning people turn people using it into hypocrites?

Because they're doing the same thing they accuse Twitter and Facebook of, being unfair and infringing on free speech, etc., and then they go and do the same thing. Only Parler actually does what they accuse others of.

I disagree with some of the rules on this board; that doesn't make me a hypocrite for using the board.

No one said you were. What it makes you (or the other not-a-Nazi in this thread, not sure) is wrong in the claim that this board's policy of not allowing discussion of moderation is the same as Parler's not tolerating criticism of itself (something else Twitter and Facebook have never done).

You're smart enough to understand all this. Please stop making people repeat themselves over and over as you try to change their words or their words' meanings or introduce straw man arguments or throw hissy fits or whatever.

 

[Metaphor]

Perhaps leftists are annoyed with it, just guessing here, because it's filled with hateful conspiracy theorists whose claims aren't in any way based in reality.

If it were, so what?

LOL. "Who cares if there's a massive effort to delegitimize the election and defame democratic politicians as pedophiles?" That's really your argument?

Yes. Why do you care? Why do electronic messages, broadcast to friends or publically, but at any rate only visible to people who seek them out, bother you?

What is this obsessive need to police other people's speech? Are you unable to think for yourself? Are you so worried about your inability to distinguish lies from the truth that you need a megacorporation to make the decision for you? If I make a joke and only like-minded people hear it, is it still offensive? And even if it is offensive, so what?

 

[Metaphor]

Of course not. If you recognized right wing hypocrisy, you might not be so inclined to engage in it.

Oh yes. Like what, specifically?

They are.

No: you have allegations they were banned, but you don't have other evidence they were banned, nor evidence they were banned for being 'leftist'.

Exercising their free speech, just as maga morons exercise theirs doing the same thing on Twitter and elsewhere without consequence. (Again a hint: they're being banned for inflammatory hate speech and spreading misinformation. But not surprising that you can't seem to distinguish those.)

No. People can be lifetime banned, and have been, on Twitter for "misgendering".

"Spreading misinformation" isn't something I'd ban someone for if I was setting up the rules.

At least one very clearly explained that he criticized their insistence on gathering people's person info to join and was banned. Some of it may be opt-in, but when I started to join, it required a phone number. Twitter and Facebook have never required a phone number..

Facebook seemed to require a phone number when I joined (in 2007), but I might be misremembering.

In any case, I didn't say I approved Parler banning people for questioning its policies. Nor, if that's what Parler did, does this say something about "MAGA morons", but about a bad policy from Parler.

Because they're doing the same thing they accuse Twitter and Facebook of, being unfair and infringing on free speech, etc., and then they go and do the same thing. Only Parler actually does what they accuse others of.

Who is the 'they'? Are you accusing other users of Parler of banning somebody?

No one said you were. What it makes you (or the other not-a-Nazi in this thread, not sure) is wrong in the claim that this board's policy of not allowing discussion of moderation is the same as Parler's not tolerating criticism of itself (something else Twitter and Facebook have never done).

I never claimed this board banned people for discussing, or wanting to discuss, the board's rules.

 

[ZiprHead]

If you didn't then why did you bring it up in defense of Parler?

When did I defend Parler? What goalpost have I put up that I've moved?

Parler can decide for itself what its policies are, as does Twitter. If it has an anti-harassment policy, I'm not surprised, and an anti-harassment policy would have the prospect of banning as one of its mechanisms. I also said that somebody who is bragging about joining Parler for the sole purpose of "screwing with MAGA folks" sounds like those people were joining it to harass people, or ended up harassing people. Or perhaps there's some much more benign connotation of 'screw with' that the poster meant. Also, it would be interesting for that twitter user to post receipts of his ban and 'all his leftist friends' bans and the reasons for them, but I suspect he won't.

Almost your entire raison de'tre with every one of your OPs is combatting what you see as discrimination, censorship, and hypocrisy yet you have little criticism for a decidedly right-wing site practicing all three.

 

[Metaphor]

If you didn't then why did you bring it up in defense of Parler?

When did I defend Parler? What goalpost have I put up that I've moved?

Parler can decide for itself what its policies are, as does Twitter. If it has an anti-harassment policy, I'm not surprised, and an anti-harassment policy would have the prospect of banning as one of its mechanisms. I also said that somebody who is bragging about joining Parler for the sole purpose of "screwing with MAGA folks" sounds like those people were joining it to harass people, or ended up harassing people. Or perhaps there's some much more benign connotation of 'screw with' that the poster meant. Also, it would be interesting for that twitter user to post receipts of his ban and 'all his leftist friends' bans and the reasons for them, but I suspect he won't.

Almost your entire raison de'tre with every one of your OPs is combatting what you see as discrimination, censorship, and hypocrisy yet you have little criticism for a decidedly right-wing site practicing all three.

Parler states on its front page:

[h=1]the world's town square[/h] Speak freely and express yourself openly, without fear of being “deplatformed” for your views. Engage with real people, not bots. Parler is people and privacy-focused, and gives you the tools you need to curate your Parler experience.

If that's 'decidedly right wing', okay. I like the sentiment, so maybe I'm 'right wing'. (Or a Nazi, apparently).

If Parler has not lived up to its own stated standards, because it banned people for criticising Parler, that's sad. It makes Parler less good than it could have been.

My OPs are about the Orwellian, pants-on-head derangement of the expressed thoughts and beliefs of the Woke. I have never called for them to be censored. I want to discuss their derangement and point out how they are wrong and why, or sometimes merely to mock them.

 

[Elixir]

View attachment 30484

These people think Bill Gates is going to track them via microchips in vaccines yet they willingly give all their information to the Mercers and Cambridge Analytica.

Parler's verification is 'opt-in'. If people want to opt-in, what's the problem?

Vass ist das problem?? Zerr iss no problem. Soon ve own enough off you, ve can take care off any problem!

 

[Metaphor]

View attachment 30484

These people think Bill Gates is going to track them via microchips in vaccines yet they willingly give all their information to the Mercers and Cambridge Analytica.

Parler's verification is 'opt-in'. If people want to opt-in, what's the problem?

Vass ist das problem?? Zerr iss no problem. Soon ve own enough off you, ve can take care off any problem!

Right.

Have a nice day, luv.