Parler

[Bret Ripley]

I’ve neglected to keep up with our local cults. Is JZ still fleecing the rubes in Sequim?

She's actually in Yelm, but with 5G I daresay her aura can reach even unto Sequim.

[Some Schmo]

I don't have the right to scream "fire" in a movie theatre, I don't have the right to say "bomb" on an airplane, and I don't have a right to propagate fake news on social media. The fact that this issue is so brazenly partisan says plenty about how much the Right relies on fake news and misinformation. It literally defines who they are.

But Republican rubes love being misled if it means somehow sticking it to the libs, even in a meaningless, rhetorical sense.

I pretty much see the right wing extremists (authoritarians who can't admit it, probably because they aren't smart enough to realize it) as addicted to BS. Nonsense is their drug of choice.

At this point, if you were to detach them from their BS-support system, they might go sane, and who knows what would happen if they started thinking reasonably?

[subgenius]

If my virility were lacking, I might have married a butch military woman to compensate. It happens.

For one to be lacking in something one most have it to begin with. But that is ok, I understand you are not just mentally and emotionally imbalanced, but also physically challenged with your lopsided ballast. But I must apologize for being naïve in the ways of compensating by marriage, as having to find a purchase receipt for my wife is something I am totes unfamiliar with - but, I am curious, does Brazil do an exchange for defective merchandise or do they just mail you replacement parts?
But do not mind me (most small angry men with 1990s boy band haircuts do), you need to get back to your virtue signaling and your complaining about, but not refusing, the benefits of being white.

[canpakes]

For one to be lacking in something one most have it to begin with.

Incorrect, but don’t let that stop your meltdown.

[subgenius]

For one to be lacking in something one most have it to begin with.

Incorrect, but don’t let that stop your meltdown.

By the context of use and by the most common definition, it is correct. But thanks for the greenlight, how typically gracious of you.

(spolier alert: actually don't require your "go ahead")

[canpakes]

Incorrect, but don’t let that stop your meltdown.

By the context of use and by the most common definition, it is correct. But thanks for the greenlight, how typically gracious of you.

(spolier alert: actually don't require your "go ahead")

1. Hey, cool of you to try to redefine the English language to suit your error, but you’re still wrong.

2. No worries on requiring a ‘go ahead’; I’m merely noting your typical behavior cycle. But don’t let that interrupt your meltdown.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

#notsurprised

https://www.newsweek.com/parler-censori ... ag-1549891

Parler is censoring content.

- Doc

[Dr Exiled]

#notsurprised

https://www.newsweek.com/parler-censori ... ag-1549891

Parler is censoring content.

- Doc

Didn't newsweek say it searched Parler and found 21 search results for the hashtag in question?

[Gadianton]

Either way, this is a huge problem on "free speech" platforms. "Free speech" in the extreme sense doesn't work for the same reason that anarchy doesn't work. The proof will always be that platforms geared toward "free expression" often attract "extreme expression" and some creative person will figure out how to trip the relay the platform claimed it didn't have.

Maybe tomorrow I'll look for this youtube video I watched on the history of 4chan. It doesn't get any more "free speech" than that. Yet, it has a long history of censoring content, deleting entire forums, and bearing constant accusations of totalitarianism from its members.

[Gadianton]

Has everyone watched "The social dilemma" on Netflix? (Netflix throws its FANG brothers under the bus, with prejudice)

I think they may have overreached in a few spots, but the basic ideas were sound, and good examples of why you can't count on opening up more free speech outlets as a way to solve for poor information quality.