5 ms·

WTF you’re just tone -policing after losing the argument now.

rhaksw 4y ago
Saying WTF is fine. My point was if there's still incredulity about where I was coming from after two clarifying comments in an already long chain then I have nothing more to say. Same goes for you.
- jshen 4y ago
  You haven’t clarified anything. Biden was not in government, and you haven’t explained how that’s not the end of the argument here.
  - rhaksw 4y ago
    The notion that campaign messaging can indicate what the candidate might do while in office should not be surprising. Calls for censorship coming from individuals or groups who later assume positions within government are worth reviewing because it may inform how they operate while in office. Calls that come after taking office may be punishable. Therefore, any influence exerted during campaigns of private citizens, while unpunishable, is still interesting to follow. An incumbent up for re-election is not free to exert such influence, though I imagine it still happens on their behalf, and I'd say those unpunishable actions are worth following too. All private messages aren't interesting, but these ones are because they called for censorship. Also, censorship just means suppression of content. It doesn't have to be done by a government.
    - jshen 4y ago
      What messages “called for censorship“ and what did they ask to censor? I haven’t seen any such messages outside of asking to remove non consensual sexual images of a family member that was against twitters TOS and probably illegal. Let’s stop being vague, what messages are you talking about?
      - rhaksw 4y ago
        Everyone knows the Hunter Biden story [1] was censored. Ro Khanna (D-CA 17th) thought Twitter should've allowed it [2]. Here is a US representative, a Democrat no less, arguing that the story should be allowed to remain on the basis that even if it was hacked material, journalists are not responsible for the illegal actions of a source, and because the story is of national interest. On the other hand, the "DNC" [3] and "Biden team" [4] were apparently asking Twitter to clean up certain content in relation to that story. Regardless of what that removed content was, the suppression of the story has itself been national news for awhile and it's worth clearing the air with facts to understand what occurred. One of them was a blurred image of Hunter Biden [5]. So again, it's interesting because these are calls for censorship, and campaign messaging can indicate what the candidate might do while in office. None of this, by the way, should be construed to be limited to the Biden campaign or Democrats. Groups have been censoring each other for eons. Communists censored everyone but their own messaging, McCarthy censored them, Anthony Comstock did it, religions and dictators do it, and on and on. [1] https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad/ https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden... [2] https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598838041371516929 https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598838041371516929 [3] https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598828601268469760 https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598828601268469760 [4] https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598827602403160064 https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598827602403160064 [5] https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1598837329250045953 https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1598837329250045953
        jshen 4y ago
        Notice that you didn’t show any message from Biden asking them to do that. This is what was so dishonest about Tiabi’s thread. He conflated two different events. You are saying that Twitter suppressed a story, which they did, on their own!!! Now Twitter can suppress whatever they want, and we can disagree or agree with it, but there was NO evidence presented that anyone asked them to do that. Edit: this explains it better than I did. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/elon-musk-and-tucker-carlson-dont-understand-the-first-amendment/672352/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/elon-musk-... Edit: you know where there were direct messages from a campaign and officials while in government? It was from the Trump team and Fox. Tons of them.

Saying WTF is fine. My point was if there's still incredulity about where I was coming from after two clarifying comments in an already long chain then I have nothing more to say. Same goes for you.

jshen 4y ago
You haven’t clarified anything. Biden was not in government, and you haven’t explained how that’s not the end of the argument here.
- rhaksw 4y ago
  The notion that campaign messaging can indicate what the candidate might do while in office should not be surprising. Calls for censorship coming from individuals or groups who later assume positions within government are worth reviewing because it may inform how they operate while in office. Calls that come after taking office may be punishable. Therefore, any influence exerted during campaigns of private citizens, while unpunishable, is still interesting to follow. An incumbent up for re-election is not free to exert such influence, though I imagine it still happens on their behalf, and I'd say those unpunishable actions are worth following too. All private messages aren't interesting, but these ones are because they called for censorship. Also, censorship just means suppression of content. It doesn't have to be done by a government.
  - jshen 4y ago
    What messages “called for censorship“ and what did they ask to censor? I haven’t seen any such messages outside of asking to remove non consensual sexual images of a family member that was against twitters TOS and probably illegal. Let’s stop being vague, what messages are you talking about?
    - rhaksw 4y ago
      Everyone knows the Hunter Biden story [1] was censored. Ro Khanna (D-CA 17th) thought Twitter should've allowed it [2]. Here is a US representative, a Democrat no less, arguing that the story should be allowed to remain on the basis that even if it was hacked material, journalists are not responsible for the illegal actions of a source, and because the story is of national interest. On the other hand, the "DNC" [3] and "Biden team" [4] were apparently asking Twitter to clean up certain content in relation to that story. Regardless of what that removed content was, the suppression of the story has itself been national news for awhile and it's worth clearing the air with facts to understand what occurred. One of them was a blurred image of Hunter Biden [5]. So again, it's interesting because these are calls for censorship, and campaign messaging can indicate what the candidate might do while in office. None of this, by the way, should be construed to be limited to the Biden campaign or Democrats. Groups have been censoring each other for eons. Communists censored everyone but their own messaging, McCarthy censored them, Anthony Comstock did it, religions and dictators do it, and on and on. [1] https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad/ https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden... [2] https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598838041371516929 https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598838041371516929 [3] https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598828601268469760 https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598828601268469760 [4] https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598827602403160064 https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598827602403160064 [5] https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1598837329250045953 https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1598837329250045953
      - jshen 4y ago
        Notice that you didn’t show any message from Biden asking them to do that. This is what was so dishonest about Tiabi’s thread. He conflated two different events. You are saying that Twitter suppressed a story, which they did, on their own!!! Now Twitter can suppress whatever they want, and we can disagree or agree with it, but there was NO evidence presented that anyone asked them to do that. Edit: this explains it better than I did. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/elon-musk-and-tucker-carlson-dont-understand-the-first-amendment/672352/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/elon-musk-... Edit: you know where there were direct messages from a campaign and officials while in government? It was from the Trump team and Fox. Tons of them.