TWITTER vs FREE SPEECH - User Banned After Calling Out FEMFREQ
Chris Ray Gun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4P2aGeb9Cg
EXCLUSIVE: Twitter Shadowbanning ‘Real and Happening Every Day’ Says Inside Source
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/02/16/exclusive-twitter-shadowbanning-is-real-say-inside-sources/
Feminists deplatform Richard Dawkins from science conference
Thunderf00t
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGTmwyKpz0o
Video Richard Dawkins retweeted
Feminists Love Islamists
Sargon of Akkad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecJUqhm2g08
He's recovering from a stroke now
https://soundcloud.com/user-733970241/an-update-on-richards-condition-in-his-own-words
Stephen Fry leaves twitter over the "offended"
http://www.stephenfry.com/2016/02/peedinthepool/
Not their place to do their job...
MTV has gone full SJW
TL;DR - MTV Doesn't Understand History
TL;DR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=860FnDGISNg
Political Correctness - The FALL of MTV
Chris Ray Gun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2Jlz-tVSFk
Re: Is PC Culture Anti-Free Speech?
MrRepzion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-j-yA-H2CI
Meet the Rutgers Protesters
Sargon of Akkad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yix7x7mjpQ0
*live now
CALM DOWN!! Restoring Common Sense to Feminism" - Milo Yiannopoulos and Christina Hoff Sommers
The Minnesota Republic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePzma7LK7-k
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/...-hoff-sommers-at-the-university-of-minnesota/
I think you give Twitter too much power. I'm not sure how many people are getting much out of Twitter past someone attempting to be funny. Most of the time, I think people wait until some other source has written up the Twitter stuff and explained what's going on without all the background static that is Twitter. Even then, what's the plan? To Nationalize the platform? That would go over badly, and most likely if they even somehow pulled that off, it's now a government controlled platform which in many ways are much worse than a for profit company.
The arab spring.....it still matters.
Twitter is deeply intertwined with the media now whether you use it or not, its the platform the media set rely on now. I don't remember where I saw it but its said most "clicks" are now delivered through social media. Hardly anyone just religiously visits a news website and reads it like a newspaper anymore.
As for regulations, on internet issues, those already exist with dmca's and such, but yes, its a mess. It would be better if enough people were aware of these problems that they would be forced to be more transparent with their users on their policies and how their sorting mechanisms worked, never mind the whole ghosting issue.
I'm not disagreeing that the system isn't perfect. I'm glad to read in the link you posted that states are enacting laws to block such lawsuits. Hopefully it'll go faster and those kind of things will be a thing of the past. Even then, the first amendment would block someone from going to jail over it, which is what I was responding to. I was given an example of how bad things are, and a guy was in danger of going to jail. That's bad.. not disagreeing on that. The only point I was making was, it's not in America. Outside the border of America I don't get involved as I don't care for when non-Americans get involved in American politics.
It's not that it isn't perfect, in case after case it doesn't work at all. There is a lot of damage you can do to someone with slapp type abuse of the law without jail ever being a real danger. What happens outside the US matters because again, it normalizes the mentality, the expectations of what is normal, what is acceptable. And no, it won't go any faster than any other area where the laws are consistently abused. Just look at the area more pertinent to tech, patent law, it doesn't matter if you are right, you will simply be sued out of business.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleem!
How will any politician fix this issue? The public narrative is one where the law failed Zoe Quinn, do remember this.
I do want to point out two things here..
1. I do not watch YouTube clips on subjects like these. I'm a reading person and every clip I've seen from this thread on YouTube is someone giving their opinion on what's going on. I don't care what other people think on it, I can form an opinion on my own. I also read much faster and don't have the time to spare to listen to a 10+ min YouTube clip.
2. I know you're not writing this post towards me only, but I do start to glaze over at all the pictures. If you're attempting to make a point to something I've written, please don't bury it in a few pictures. I like to understand your point, and I don't want to miss anything. Again, I'm not saying you're writing this at me, but you do bring up a counter point here in between pictures. I almost missed it completely.
Some people are visual and auditory learners. Nothing I can do about my preference, and sometimes a picture is a thousand words as they say.
My point here was as you said. He's not being silent on his war on guns. He's pretty vocal. He's even been vocal on things people would say is racist. My point is I have a really hard time believing he'd be stealthy and silent on anything, let alone trying to put laws into place that are anti-gender.
He's not silent. The policy changes always sound like a "good idea" so no one pays attention until the repercussions become too hard to ignore. On the face of it, sjw proposals tend to sound innocent enough, because that is what they do, they appeal to the goodness in people, and they take advantage of it. Just look at how far they take the "we must protect people from online bullying" issue.
As for politician's being two faced and doing things which are politically expedient, lets not pretend Obama is above such things.
When America gets someone that is clearly anti-man I'll be more concerned. As it stands I'm just not seeing the change in America I'm being told by this thread is happening.
We didn't get to this point with "clearly" radical people in charge. Even Jack Dorcey, from an outsiders perspective where they only know his media image, he seems like a normal man.
What games have been killed off by these feminists? What games are in currently in danger on being killed off? I get that there have been some games that got a lot of bad PR, and I get that people that wanted them got together and made sure they happened. I can't remember the game where you went around killing people (at least that's what the claim was) but I do remember that people wanted it enough to make sure it got made.. which is how it should be. I'm not sure I see the link between these Feminists acting like bad Bond villains and destroying all games they disagree with. Doom was hated a lot when it was released and the bad PR didn't really effect it. Maybe I'm not tuned in enough to know what's in jeopardy, that's why I ask.
DOAX3 for one, but that isn't how this works. Left wing SJW's watched Right wing SJW's lose the fight to regulate games out of existence(in america) with Jack Thompson. They now work through social pressure and self censorship.
The ultra violence game was Hatred, why did it get made? Because of the push back. A large portion of the votes to get it green lit were driven by the GamerGate controversy and peoples reaction to attempts at censorship. I posted on it long ago, but when they were successfully greenlit on steam, all the major gaming outlets conveniently failed to report the story after they had campaigned against the game. This was one case where we succeeded, which isn't to say games are safe because for every Hatred I'm sure there is another dev out there being buried for being the wrong kind of person.
The feminist/sjw's gate keep using their control of the IGDA, and games awards festivals like the IGF which are corrupt organizations.
The gaming media is corrupt and will promote and bury games based on their ideology.
And of course academia, and "games studies" just continue to feed this mess. Studying games seems to be the new hip version of gender studies.
We don't live in the doom era anymore. Back then the games media tore Jack Thompson to shreds. The things done to mock that man if done to a woman today would be considered high crimes of misogyny.
If I don't think any of her points are valid, which I don't, is there any point in reading those pointless thoughts? One thing I do find odd.. her "opponents" seem to read more of her stuff than anyone else. Isn't it a bit self defeating to give her more attention by constantly reciting and quoting her? In all the time I've read this thread, and while I'm not sure how much longer that will be (every time I think I'm over it, I see a post and it brings a question), I have only read and heard anything she's said because of the anti-posts. If she's really the spawn of Satan and making the universe dumber for listening to her, why do people insist on making sure I hear what she said? If my goal is stopping people from hearing her, it really seems counter productive to make sure people know what's she's saying.
No one would care if these people weren't taken seriously. Not paying attention to extremists doesn't make them go away. It's like claiming the way to get rid of radical Islam is to stop talking about them. Its very easy to pretend it would be this easy, its appealing because its so lazy. She isn't the problem, she is the symptom of the problem. How is this person taken seriously by such much of the media, and even academia, while no one in the main stream dares to say anything against her, she is above criticism. She is like the 1 in 4, even people who know it isn't true, repeat it. Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, they have already successfully censored peoples thinking and speech to a remarkable degree, as I stated, even the president falls in line. And you think that its simply the result of people criticizing people like her? No, the ground work for this was laid decades ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAYQ-rfj1CI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5It1zarINv0
May seem a be conspiracy on that one but it does reflect a bit of what we've been witnessing.
Anyways, the court case moves forward. Why its not subject to anti slapp I'm sure someone else with more thorough knowledge into the law can explain.
http://www.ma-appellatecourts.org/display_docket.php?src=party&dno=2015-P-0540
Facebook
Twitter