at the behest of our gov't.
https://air.tv/?v=h_aYI-oYQiW3MXgoPOQyJQ
When do we get the other side of this twisted partnership, our gov't
goons on the stand to get their fair share of reaming? Cuz that's
where the real criminals are hiding in plain sight.
On 2/8/23 4:10 PM, ScottW wrote:
at the behest of our gov't.
https://air.tv/?v=h_aYI-oYQiW3MXgoPOQyJQ
When do we get the other side of this twisted partnership, our gov'thttps://dnyuz.com/2023/02/08/whistleblower-tells-aoc-that-twitter-changed-rules-to-allow-racist-trump-tweets/
goons on the stand to get their fair share of reaming? Cuz that's
where the real criminals are hiding in plain sight.
"Navaroli explained that she and her team had recommended finding Trump
in violation of Twitter policy for that tweet, particularly because
phrases such as “go back to where you come from” were specifically forbidden in Twitter’s content moderation guidelines.
When she made the recommendation to one of her superiors, Navaroli’s decision was overridden. A few days later, Twitter changed its content moderation policy to remove that phrase as an example of abusive language."
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 2:53:21 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:
https://dnyuz.com/2023/02/08/whistleblower-tells-aoc-that-twitter-changed-rules-to-allow-racist-trump-tweets/
"Navaroli explained that she and her team had recommended finding
Trump in violation of Twitter policy for that tweet, particularly
because phrases such as “go back to where you come from” were
specifically forbidden in Twitter’s content moderation guidelines.
When she made the recommendation to one of her superiors,
Navaroli’s decision was overridden. A few days later, Twitter
changed its content moderation policy to remove that phrase as an
example of abusive language."
Oh the horror. Ocasio-Cortez highlighted a Trump tweet from 2019
demanding why she and several of her colleagues (members of the Squad
and, at the time, all women of color) don’t “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”
So where was Trump referring? Could he be talking about their
districts? I don't know. You don't know.
I'm going to block your post until we get verification. I'm sure you don't want to be
disinforming anyone and will understand my caution. Or will you?
On 2/8/23 5:05 PM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 2:53:21 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:
https://dnyuz.com/2023/02/08/whistleblower-tells-aoc-that-twitter-changed-rules-to-allow-racist-trump-tweets/
"Navaroli explained that she and her team had recommended finding
Trump in violation of Twitter policy for that tweet, particularly
because phrases such as “go back to where you come from” were
specifically forbidden in Twitter’s content moderation guidelines.
When she made the recommendation to one of her superiors,
Navaroli’s decision was overridden. A few days later, Twitter
changed its content moderation policy to remove that phrase as an
example of abusive language."
Oh the horror. Ocasio-Cortez highlighted a Trump tweet from 2019
demanding why she and several of her colleagues (members of the Squad
and, at the time, all women of color) don’t “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”
So where was Trump referring? Could he be talking about theirThat's why the rule was against the phrase itself, to avoid having to mindread or evaluate the specifics of its use.
districts? I don't know. You don't know.
I'm going to block your post until we get verification. I'm sure you don't want to beNo, I don't understand what you're saying. In this case there was a rule against using a specific phrase. Trump used it, she recommended his post
disinforming anyone and will understand my caution. Or will you?
be rejected but her higher ups changed the rule rather than reject it
or Trump to rephrase it.
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:24:49 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:
In this case there was a rule against using a specific phrase.
Trump used it, she recommended his post be rejected but her higher
ups changed the rule rather than reject it or Trump to rephrase
it.
I agree with the result. If every phrase is banned that might insult
someone, you'd have nothing to say.
On 2/8/23 9:31 PM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:24:49 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:
In this case there was a rule against using a specific phrase.
Trump used it, she recommended his post be rejected but her higher
ups changed the rule rather than reject it or Trump to rephrase
it.
I agree with the result. If every phrase is banned that might insult someone, you'd have nothing to say.Excluded middle.
Specific phrases were banned, not "every phrase."
The
rules were changed for Trump's benefit.
The Trump request (the Tiegen) was made during his presidency, unlike
the Biden requests.
Just to be clear, there are two different scenarios in question: Biden's campaign acting on his behalf to request a Terms of Service review of nonconsensual nude images posted without permission;
and twitter's
one-day freeze of the NY Post laptop story.
Casting the net wider, pestering twitter to take down or put back up
content was constant and done by both sides, including by the Trump
White House.
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 7:42:11 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:
On 2/8/23 9:31 PM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:24:49 PM UTC-8, MINe109Excluded middle.
wrote:
In this case there was a rule against using a specific phrase.
Trump used it, she recommended his post be rejected but her
higher ups changed the rule rather than reject it or Trump to
rephrase it.
I agree with the result. If every phrase is banned that might
insult someone, you'd have nothing to say.
That's banned.
Specific phrases were banned, not "every phrase."
Out of context....that's banned too.
The rules were changed for Trump's benefit.
The Trump request (the Tiegen) was made during his presidency,
unlike the Biden requests.
Just to be clear, there are two different scenarios in question:
Biden's campaign acting on his behalf to request a Terms of
Service review of nonconsensual nude images posted without
permission;
Campaign finance should be looking into misappropriation of campaign
funds. Unless they had pic's of Joe out there? Are there? I
wouldn't be surprised.
and twitter's one-day freeze of the NY Post laptop story.
Casting the net wider, pestering twitter to take down or put back
up content was constant and done by both sides, including by the
Trump White House.
But not to the same degree.
In any case twitter should have told them all to F' off. Like I tell
you when you try to control my speech.
On 2/9/23 10:09 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Thursday, February 9, 2023 at 7:42:11 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:
On 2/8/23 9:31 PM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 3:24:49 PM UTC-8, MINe109Excluded middle.
wrote:
In this case there was a rule against using a specific phrase.
Trump used it, she recommended his post be rejected but her
higher ups changed the rule rather than reject it or Trump to
rephrase it.
I agree with the result. If every phrase is banned that might
insult someone, you'd have nothing to say.
That's banned.Arny wore it out.
Specific phrases were banned, not "every phrase."
Out of context....that's banned too.It's in context, which was discussion of banned phrases.
Reductio ad absurdum.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 166:56:22 |
| Calls: | 10,385 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,057 |
| Messages: | 6,416,529 |