It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Twitter Censors the Right Again: Milo Permanently Banned

page: 2
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 09:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysticPearl

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Someone correct me ... isn't Twitter a privately-owned concern?

I'm not sure any laws regarding "public accommodation" apply ... it's not a paid service so there's no real or implied breach of contract ... yeah, seems like The Big Twit can do what it wants with its bandwidth.

Twitter's second largest shareholder is a Saudi prince.

No wonder they have such a problem with a gay conservative.

here


Right, right ... so, they're a public corporation, to which all normal subscriptions are free, right?

So, no contract, nothing held out, the public can use the service as long as they follow the rules and all bans are held to the discretion of Twitter Inc? Why in the world do you think this is a vendetta against Milo? He's an activist. He pushes these boundaries intentionally. He knows the risk he takes.




posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

No, I haven't read any of his tweets and that's because I don't use Twitter. I do keep up with current events and am familar with his recent suspension.

Bottom line, he broke the rules, again, so he must suffer the consequences of his own actions. People get banned all the time so why is Milo held to a higher standard with conservatives?
edit on 19-7-2016 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:01 PM
link   
a reply to: BIGPoJo

To be honest, I have no idea what you're talking about because I don't bother reading Twitter, ever. But, if all these people are breaking the rules then they too must suffer the consequences. Feel free to report them and check back to see if they are held accountable, if that makes you feel better about all of this.



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Tjoran

The reality though is that you can get away with bad behavior more when nobody cares about who you are and you can hide so easily.

Milo is very well known and with that many followers when you cause trouble it gets noticed. So what did you expect to happen???

Twitter is a private business. They are under no obligation to do anything outside what they say they'll do in their business. They kept warning him and he keeps making trouble. Trouble that has a massive following behind it that cannot be ignored so they finally took action.

When you are a leader of many people who follow you and act according to the things you say it means being responsible for the things you say sometimes. If he was a nobody, nobody would care. But he's not nobody.

I'm not saying it's a good thing or that I think that's how things should be, but that is how things are.



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Answer is after a quick review of the Twitter T&C ... yes, there is an implicit contract established by Twitter and the user.

This seems to cover the question at hand:



8. Restrictions on Content and Use of the Services Please review the Twitter Rules (which are part of these Terms) to better understand what is prohibited on the Twitter Services. We reserve the right at all times (but will not have an obligation) to remove or refuse to distribute any Content on the Services, to suspend or terminate users, and to reclaim usernames without liability to you. We also reserve the right to access, read, preserve, and disclose any information as we reasonably believe is necessary to (i) satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request, (ii) enforce the Terms, including investigation of potential violations hereof, (iii) detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or technical issues, (iv) respond to user support requests, or (v) protect the rights, property or safety of Twitter, its users and the public.


Terms of Service - Twitter



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

Well, ISIS accounts do get banned if they break the rules but the US gov't works with Twitter to keep eyes on them, you know for intelligence reasons.

That said, plenty of hate groups are alive and well on Twitter.



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:05 PM
link   
Hilarious...just hilarious.



+9 more 
posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

Nothing you posted is fact. She's still on twitter. Account is active.

The facts, the actual tweets, both Milo's and hers, I posted.

And here you are conveniently ignoring those facts. So essentially, you're arguing you don't like facts which disrupt your narrative.



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills




Well, ISIS accounts do get banned if they break the rules


You did say IF there, right? IF?



Sheeiiiiit!!!!



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Her account wasn't hacked, she was high on crack coc aine tweeting, a common issue on twitter.



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: BIGPoJo

To be honest, I have no idea what you're talking about because I don't bother reading Twitter, ever. But, if all these people are breaking the rules then they too must suffer the consequences. Feel free to report them and check back to see if they are held accountable, if that makes you feel better about all of this.


You don't know so don't bother mentioning it, the facts are that @jack is an internet facist whom is dating @deray a BLM leader and @nero was banned because he is "alt right" which on twitter is "not right." Got it?


+15 more 
posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills

No, I haven't read any of his tweets and that's because I don't use Twitter. I do keep up with current events and am familar with his recent suspension.

Bottom line, he broke the rules, again, so he must suffer the consequences of his own actions. People get banned all the time so why is Milo held to a higher standard with conservatives?


Often times when posting on ATS I am sure all of us have had the feeling that people are chiming in on matters without even looking at the material. It is very rare when you have these suspicions, and the person actually admits that they didn't read the material they are commenting on.

Kudos to you!!! Way to find him guilty and yell at others for defending him without even taking the time to look up what was said! I wonder what the standard was for you to see that there was an argument between two people that got one banned on Twitter, and you to decide to judge what side was correct?

Did you flip a coin? Is is that the woman must be right and the man wrong? Is it his skin color or sexuality? Or perhaps his political views?

I think your credibility in this thread is null at this point. IN all seriousness, try to put your biases aside next time you want to comment a story and actually take the time to read it before you insult other members.



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Tjoran

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Tjoran
The lawsuit this is going to start is going to be epic.

There won't be any lawsuit. Milo had been warned multiple times and he obviously chose to ignore those warnings. He agreed to follow the t&c for twitter then chose to break it when you do that you get banned.


Yet the accounts of people calling for white people to be murdered, Or the other accounts being racists against blacks, or police or what have you, are all untouched. Funny how that works..

Oh sure like no one else but the troll you like has gotten banned. Also as far other accounts not being banned that's a load of BS unless you have forgotten that Azealia Banks was banned for her racist tweets. Funny how after she was banned everyone was crying freedom of speech is only for whites but after a white boy is banned people are crying the exact opposite.



You said it yourself, she was banned "for her racist tweets"..... Milo said nothing of the sort as far as racism.



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Someone correct me ... isn't Twitter a privately-owned concern?

I'm not sure any laws regarding "public accommodation" apply ... it's not a paid service so there's no real or implied breach of contract ... yeah, seems like The Big Twit can do what it wants with its bandwidth.


Twitter is privately owned by a Suadi Prince now for your information.



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: MysticPearl

I'm not well versed in Twitter, nor am I aware of any back story, but his tweets are anything but conservative. They are more libertine than anything.

Twitter's ethics and rules around speech are one thing but there is no evidence towards any theory of conservative censorship without more examples of conservatives getting banned for their political views, and it appears this isn't one of them.
edit on 19-7-2016 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tjoran
The problem is, People break the rules all the time. And yet they remain unpunished. Twitter is using this as an excuse.


No way!

#killallmen
#killallwhitemen

What T&C??


+2 more 
posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Grambler

No, I haven't read any of his tweets and that's because I don't use Twitter. I do keep up with current events and am familar with his recent suspension.

Bottom line, he broke the rules, again, so he must suffer the consequences of his own actions. People get banned all the time so why is Milo held to a higher standard with conservatives?


Yes, I know. He reviewed Ghostbusters badly, and as we all know, if you do that ... you are misogynist. So it doesn't matter what she did or said. We know your position is that he broke the rules by being misogynist by calling he movie what it was - a piece of crap.



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: BIGPoJo

To be honest, I have no idea what you're talking about because I don't bother reading Twitter, ever. But, if all these people are breaking the rules then they too must suffer the consequences. Feel free to report them and check back to see if they are held accountable, if that makes you feel better about all of this.


She will not be held accountable, because she was in a SJW movie which is promoted on twitter. Look, I have seen people IRL on crack and this is the face they make.




posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:18 PM
link   
I have to ask, why is twitter even a thing?

My exposure, thank God, is extraordinarily limited==as in none--but I've never understood the attraction of 140 character limit messages about stupid doings in other peoples lives.

Both of these nit wits hold no interest to me what so ever.

--------------

So, naturally enough, I'm commenting on 'em. Prior to today I'd never heard of this gal, and given her language, not sure I'd like her in person... As for the gay conservative? ...and I'm supposed to care about his opinion, why?

Both a couple of idiots, in my totally unbiased opinion...



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

It seems we're missing out.

I always wondered how Twitter was any sort of bearing on any sort of thing besides nonsense, which seems to have spilled out into the real world. The bloody news covers Twitter. Imagine that.




top topics



 
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join