here's a clip taken from youtube of steven crowder, who @TeamYouTube have said does not violate their policies. youtube are apparently happy to have this material on their websitepic.twitter.com/NsIDtHAwCE
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @shaun_vids @shaun_jen and
God forbid someone make a joke....Freedom of expression in the modern public square should not be infringed. These are monopolies and should be broken up and/or be subject to the 1st amendment.
95 replies 1 retweet 183 likes -
Replying to @stranded_360 @shaun_jen and
Well guess what, this isn’t a public square it’s a private company who have terms of service. Crowder broke the terms and should be punished accordingly
3 replies 0 retweets 76 likes -
Replying to @realajfstudios @stranded_360 and
so how do you feel about cake-makers who refuse to bake cakes for gay weddings
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BUSSCRO @stranded_360 and
I think that’s a different situation. Service shouldn’t be refused based based on sexual orientation, but it should for hateful speech and bullying. One you can’t control, the other you can
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @realajfstudios @stranded_360 and
Question: Are you familiar with Chapo Traphouse? If you're not, I'll try to find a different example we're both familiar with. The point being, I genuinely don't believe one can define "bullying" in such a way that allows for heated and mocking rebuttal. Catharsis is valid.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BUSSCRO @stranded_360 and
Well I don’t want to get into semantics regarding when “bullying” is and isn’t ok, all I’m trying to get across is that YouTube has guidelines that state harassment and racism isn’t allowed
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @realajfstudios @stranded_360 and
But saying "harassment isn't allowed" is meaningless if you can't address the semantics of what constitutes harassment. Think of it as saying "qweghoubqerg isn't allowed".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BUSSCRO @stranded_360 and
I mean I think the extent of whether something is considered harassment is up to YouTube decide. But obviously there should be justification for why it isn’t allowed, and given that YouTube is a site accessible by children, it makes sense
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @realajfstudios @stranded_360 and
I think "private enterprises have a right to wall off their own gardens" disintegrates once a particular private enterprise's garden hits critical mass. You didn't have Ma Bell deciding what could and couldn't be said on their phone lines - let police police, let carriers carry.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
If the OP was "let's all block Scrowder - share w/ friends and family", that's fair and completely defensible. But trying to get corporations to silence those who offend you (speaking in the generic "you", not "you, RealAF") is philosophically stinky, & worse, pragmatically dire.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.