-
@MajorRage if you can trust the value of those assets.
His franchise and hotel income is also under threat. -
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@NTA said in US Politics:
In an email obtained by BuzzFeed News, an AWS Trust and Safety team told Parler Chief Policy Officer Amy Peikoff that the calls for violence propagating across the social network violated its terms of service. Amazon said it was unconvinced that the service’s plan to use volunteers to moderate calls for violence and hate speech would be effective.
That's pretty laughable from AWS who've successfully argued against being held liable for content on their platforms. It's either cartel behaviour to shut down a new market entrant, some pretty amazing double standards or sucking up to the new administration. Probably all three.
So let the Ayatollah go nuts. He's not getting the kind of coverage / trouble that 88M followers gets you.
Unregulated, unaccountable, inconsistent censorship based on follower numbers and market share? What could possibly go wrong?
Well, if they want to suck up to Biden, best to sack all white men. He's made it perfectly clear that he's priorities are non-whites and woman.
And the US now has a Vice President who actively campaigns for discrimination against people on the basis of skin colour to be made legal
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@NTA said in US Politics:
In an email obtained by BuzzFeed News, an AWS Trust and Safety team told Parler Chief Policy Officer Amy Peikoff that the calls for violence propagating across the social network violated its terms of service. Amazon said it was unconvinced that the service’s plan to use volunteers to moderate calls for violence and hate speech would be effective.
That's pretty laughable from AWS who've successfully argued against being held liable for content on their platforms. It's either cartel behaviour to shut down a new market entrant, some pretty amazing double standards or sucking up to the new administration. Probably all three.
So let the Ayatollah go nuts. He's not getting the kind of coverage / trouble that 88M followers gets you.
Unregulated, unaccountable, inconsistent censorship based on follower numbers and market share? What could possibly go wrong?
Well, if they want to suck up to Biden, best to sack all white men. He's made it perfectly clear that he's priorities are non-whites and woman.
And the US now has a Vice President who actively campaigns for discrimination against people on the basis of skin colour to be made legal
Let's wait and see. One thing to talk it up in opposition, different once you get to sit in the big kids' seats
-
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@NTA said in US Politics:
In an email obtained by BuzzFeed News, an AWS Trust and Safety team told Parler Chief Policy Officer Amy Peikoff that the calls for violence propagating across the social network violated its terms of service. Amazon said it was unconvinced that the service’s plan to use volunteers to moderate calls for violence and hate speech would be effective.
That's pretty laughable from AWS who've successfully argued against being held liable for content on their platforms. It's either cartel behaviour to shut down a new market entrant, some pretty amazing double standards or sucking up to the new administration. Probably all three.
So let the Ayatollah go nuts. He's not getting the kind of coverage / trouble that 88M followers gets you.
Unregulated, unaccountable, inconsistent censorship based on follower numbers and market share? What could possibly go wrong?
Well, if they want to suck up to Biden, best to sack all white men. He's made it perfectly clear that he's priorities are non-whites and woman.
And the US now has a Vice President who actively campaigns for discrimination against people on the basis of skin colour to be made legal
Let's wait and see. One thing to talk it up in opposition, different once you get to sit in the big kids' seats
A bit more than just talking it up in opposition - she was the California Senator and prime mover for Proposition 16 in California which aimed to deliver exactly that
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@NTA said in US Politics:
In an email obtained by BuzzFeed News, an AWS Trust and Safety team told Parler Chief Policy Officer Amy Peikoff that the calls for violence propagating across the social network violated its terms of service. Amazon said it was unconvinced that the service’s plan to use volunteers to moderate calls for violence and hate speech would be effective.
That's pretty laughable from AWS who've successfully argued against being held liable for content on their platforms. It's either cartel behaviour to shut down a new market entrant, some pretty amazing double standards or sucking up to the new administration. Probably all three.
So let the Ayatollah go nuts. He's not getting the kind of coverage / trouble that 88M followers gets you.
Unregulated, unaccountable, inconsistent censorship based on follower numbers and market share? What could possibly go wrong?
Well, if they want to suck up to Biden, best to sack all white men. He's made it perfectly clear that he's priorities are non-whites and woman.
And the US now has a Vice President who actively campaigns for discrimination against people on the basis of skin colour to be made legal
I think you mean from next week.
The current VP has a history of discrimination of a different kind:
-
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@NTA said in US Politics:
In an email obtained by BuzzFeed News, an AWS Trust and Safety team told Parler Chief Policy Officer Amy Peikoff that the calls for violence propagating across the social network violated its terms of service. Amazon said it was unconvinced that the service’s plan to use volunteers to moderate calls for violence and hate speech would be effective.
That's pretty laughable from AWS who've successfully argued against being held liable for content on their platforms. It's either cartel behaviour to shut down a new market entrant, some pretty amazing double standards or sucking up to the new administration. Probably all three.
So let the Ayatollah go nuts. He's not getting the kind of coverage / trouble that 88M followers gets you.
Unregulated, unaccountable, inconsistent censorship based on follower numbers and market share? What could possibly go wrong?
Well, if they want to suck up to Biden, best to sack all white men. He's made it perfectly clear that he's priorities are non-whites and woman.
And the US now has a Vice President who actively campaigns for discrimination against people on the basis of skin colour to be made legal
I think you mean from next week.
The current VP has a history of discrimination of a different kind:
Absolutely nothing in that article to show he favours discrimination at all - unlike Harris. Just that he once wrote a letter opposing gay marriage and one or two Democrats saying, well, he's not a Democrat.
But the sheer ignorance of the author on Bush's hugely-successful African AIDS program (PEPFAR) is breath-taking. Abstinence was included in that program as some African countries, many being deeply & almost fundamentally Christian, demanded it. Bush rightly thought it more important to actually get HIV drugs to Africans rather than virtual signal. Pence was right to support it and should be applauded for it.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@NTA said in US Politics:
In an email obtained by BuzzFeed News, an AWS Trust and Safety team told Parler Chief Policy Officer Amy Peikoff that the calls for violence propagating across the social network violated its terms of service. Amazon said it was unconvinced that the service’s plan to use volunteers to moderate calls for violence and hate speech would be effective.
That's pretty laughable from AWS who've successfully argued against being held liable for content on their platforms. It's either cartel behaviour to shut down a new market entrant, some pretty amazing double standards or sucking up to the new administration. Probably all three.
So let the Ayatollah go nuts. He's not getting the kind of coverage / trouble that 88M followers gets you.
Unregulated, unaccountable, inconsistent censorship based on follower numbers and market share? What could possibly go wrong?
Well, if they want to suck up to Biden, best to sack all white men. He's made it perfectly clear that he's priorities are non-whites and woman.
And the US now has a Vice President who actively campaigns for discrimination against people on the basis of skin colour to be made legal
Positive discrimination is a much more complex argument than simply being boiled down to “racism “.
That’s a typical Trump like baselining of a well debated and researched concept with decades of practical examples to draw on and debate. -
@Crucial said in US Politics:
Positive discrimination is a much more complex argument than simply being boiled down to “racism “.
That’s a typical Trump like baselining of a well debated and researched concept with decades of practical examples to draw on and debate.It isn't complex, it's very simple: judging people by skin colour is racism. Those advocating "positive" apartheid (for that's what it is) are effectively arguing people of a certain skin colour are, as racial or cultural group, inferior as they can't compete. It's divisive, patronising and insulting - and something Martin Luther King hated for good reason.
It's as stupid an idea as saying black people in Olympic sprinting events should be handicapped to be fair to white sprinters in the interests of equality and diversity.
And what on earth has Trump got to do with it?
-
@Victor-Meldrew you don't think there is any place for "righting" past wrongs? giving a leg up to those that may be starting from a less fortunate position because of the wrong done to previous generations of their family?
-
I'm out now. We've spent God knows how long collectively lamenting the fact that polarisation is killing debate. You had a perfectly reasonable argument to counter what VM said but you had to go and ruin it with "Trump like". Unnecessary.
It's not Trump like, it's a fellow poster's opinion.
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@NTA said in US Politics:
In an email obtained by BuzzFeed News, an AWS Trust and Safety team told Parler Chief Policy Officer Amy Peikoff that the calls for violence propagating across the social network violated its terms of service. Amazon said it was unconvinced that the service’s plan to use volunteers to moderate calls for violence and hate speech would be effective.
That's pretty laughable from AWS who've successfully argued against being held liable for content on their platforms. It's either cartel behaviour to shut down a new market entrant, some pretty amazing double standards or sucking up to the new administration. Probably all three.
So let the Ayatollah go nuts. He's not getting the kind of coverage / trouble that 88M followers gets you.
Unregulated, unaccountable, inconsistent censorship based on follower numbers and market share? What could possibly go wrong?
Well, if they want to suck up to Biden, best to sack all white men. He's made it perfectly clear that he's priorities are non-whites and woman.
And the US now has a Vice President who actively campaigns for discrimination against people on the basis of skin colour to be made legal
Positive discrimination is a much more complex argument than simply being boiled down to “racism “.
That’s a typical Trump like baselining of a well debated and researched concept with decades of practical examples to draw on and debate.Do you seriously believe that big research firms, top universities, big tech etc. are denying educated people of colour or women jobs in preference for white men? Or are we fighting for them to gain access to fruit picking, cleaning and waitressing and other entry level menial roles?
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
Positive discrimination is a much more complex argument than simply being boiled down to “racism “.
That’s a typical Trump like baselining of a well debated and researched concept with decades of practical examples to draw on and debate.It isn't complex, it's very simple: judging people by skin colour is racism. Those advocating "positive" apartheid (for that's what it is) are effectively arguing people of a certain skin colour are, as racial or cultural group, inferior as they can't compete. It's divisive, patronising and insulting - and something Martin Luther King hated for good reason.
It's as stupid an idea as saying black people in Olympic sprinting events should be handicapped to be fair to white sprinters in the interests of equality and diversity.
And what on earth has Trump got to do with it?
Massive overreach on what California was advocating.
Their current laws do not allow ANYONE to take race, sex, orientation, age etc into account (zero affirmative action ability in any situation). They were proposing to allow affirmative actions in certain situations.
This is exactly what NZ has under the Human Rights Act and Bill of Rights. Prescribed reasoning and guidelines for appropriateness and application with burden of proof on those performing the action.Trump has nothing to do with it except as an example of simplifying an argument to a base element to claim 'correctness'. It is a common political tactic of his.
@JC said in US Politics:
I'm out now. We've spent God knows how long collectively lamenting the fact that polarisation is killing debate. You had a perfectly reasonable argument to counter what VM said but you had to go and ruin it with "Trump like". Unnecessary.
It's not Trump like, it's a fellow poster's opinion.
And it can't be both? Considering that Trump is the current rather big example of creating that line of thinking and that this is a US Politics thread where he is by far the main topic of conversation I don't think that juxtaposing the two are out of line at all.
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
And it can't be both? Considering that Trump is the current rather big example of creating that line of thinking and that this is a US Politics thread where he isn't by far the main topic of conversation I don't think that juxtaposing the two are out of line at all.
If you want. It adds nothing to the debate apart from implying VM is using Trump's arguments. IMO you were perfectly able to play that ball without also playing the man, but you chose not to. Sorry buddy, but that's just disappointing from a man who's obviously got a few brains.
As I say, if that's where the discussion is heading I'm out.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew you don't think there is any place for "righting" past wrongs? giving a leg up to those that may be starting from a less fortunate position because of the wrong done to previous generations of their family?
That can be done, but not based on race. Economic hardship is not solely skin pigmentation based and where politicians have to be careful with "positive" discrimination. It is still discrimination. Righting wrongs with more wrongs is unlikely to solve many problems.
-
-
@taniwharugby 100%, saw that when it went viral, it may not be only people of colour at the back but id put money the front row were all white
-
My wife showed me that video, it absolutely made her blood boil. She was genuinely angry about how blatantly racist it is, and could not believe people were stupid enough to fall for it. It just completely ignores a host of far more important factors than immutable human characteristics that influence how "privileged" people are.
-
@No-Quarter can you elaborate?
-
@JC said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
And it can't be both? Considering that Trump is the current rather big example of creating that line of thinking and that this is a US Politics thread where he isn't by far the main topic of conversation I don't think that juxtaposing the two are out of line at all.
If you want. It adds nothing to the debate apart from implying VM is using Trump's arguments. IMO you were perfectly able to play that ball without also playing the man, but you chose not to. Sorry buddy, but that's just disappointing from a man who's obviously got a few brains.
As I say, if that's where the discussion is heading I'm out.
It is your perogative to add an implication and to misunderstand.
I related VMs argument to a method that Trump uses. One that sets out to cause division and often deliberately misinterprets fact. I have not accused him of deliberate misinterpretation. Just pointed out that it could be taken that way.
I have not 'played the man' any more than pointing out where that type of simplification and possible misunderstanding leads. Isn't that what we should be doing? Providing a reasoned argument why someone else's line of thinking is flawed?
US Politics