6
RoccoRatchet 6 points ago +6 / -0

The only ties they have are that Ben & Jerry's advertises on Twitter. Leftists have been exaggerating the connection to make the the decision to end the deal seem more impactful.

10
RoccoRatchet 10 points ago +10 / -0

Ben & Jerry's is having a financial issue. This is just a convenient excuse to cover their tracks, while earning brownie points among leftists in the process.

-1
RoccoRatchet -1 points ago +2 / -3

Yes, because he's being forced into this situation by a group that most likely made false claims about an agreement with Twitter, and a subversive element that still exists within the company. There's a difference between having to put out fires, and expecting him to rewrite their whole code to accommodate Daily Wire.

4
RoccoRatchet 4 points ago +5 / -1

Twitter is a social media platform with millions of users across hundreds of nations, used by varying individuals and entities for an equally varying number of reasons. Twitter needs people in place to ensure everything they do complies with the laws and regulations of all these countries, and to ensure that it isn't being used to facilitate illegal activity.

8
RoccoRatchet 8 points ago +8 / -0

Respect to the people who voiced their objections to this degeneracy. I also offer a small commendation to the MLB for retracting, instead of doubling down on pushing this garbage onto the people, and forcing themselves to eat losses for the rest of the month. There may yet be hope.

0
RoccoRatchet 0 points ago +4 / -4

Because alt tech attracts smooth-brained rightoid manchildren with a horrendously skewed sense of entitlement. As bad as mainstream options are, rife with leftist degeneracy and absolutely delusional perspectives, it's still hard to convince normal people to make the switch when they see the kind of people that occupy sites like this. That says a lot. People here call Right-leaning men in healthy relationships "cucks" because they don't go out and commit assault or murder of a transsexual, homosexual, or Jew, or spend hours on end ranting about how said thing needs to happen. I'd be considered extreme by Centrist standards, and even I tire of rightoid antics.

-4
RoccoRatchet -4 points ago +1 / -5

I just did, and in that time you decided to iron the wrinkles out of your brain.

2
RoccoRatchet 2 points ago +2 / -0

My friends and I use them ironically, which is probably what they're targeting. You can't have straight, white males posting stupid things and having a good time. Everyone should be posting regressive emojis instead.

10
RoccoRatchet 10 points ago +10 / -0

The jump cuts annoy me. I hate that everything has to be condensed for zoomers with no attention span. It wouldn't have bothered me to watch Tate's whole speech play without the obnoxious editing, because he does make a good point.

-4
RoccoRatchet -4 points ago +3 / -7

Whoosh

I hate stupid rightoids so fucking much.

-4
RoccoRatchet -4 points ago +3 / -7

He had the "hate speech" designation removed from the video. To "remove the restrictions" at this point would be to completely eliminate filters put in place limiting reach for obscene content, allowing it to run rampant on the site. He's not going to do that. He shouldn't do that.

-1
RoccoRatchet -1 points ago +3 / -4

It only reads like that to ignorant rightoids who think a CEO of a company as large as Twitter is going to micromanage everything all the time.

0
RoccoRatchet 0 points ago +3 / -3

We’re updating the system tomorrow so that those who follow @realDailyWire will see this in their feed, but it won’t be recommended to non-followers (nor will any advertising be associated with it)

The system, or algorithm, won't promote the video. He never claimed it would. He also never said "I won't recommend this video."

-3
RoccoRatchet -3 points ago +3 / -6

It's not like he's personally limiting the number of people that can see it. When something is determined to be "sensitive content", the audience is limited by the algorithm to those who subscribe to the creators of that content, and whomever "follows" those that share the content. Elon can choose to share that content with his audience if he chooses.

I admittedly haven't seen "What is a Woman?" yet, so I can't say what in the video could be considered objectionable.

11
RoccoRatchet 11 points ago +15 / -4

This isn't the "Gotcha!" you, and apparently the other people in this thread, think it is. Elon hasn't "backtracked" on anything in this case. He said the "hate speech" label applied to the video was a mistake, which was corrected. I don't know if it's a coincidence that the head of Twitter's Trust and Safety is now no longer with the company. It seems like incidents of censorship of Right-leaning figures are typically accompanied by another Twitter employee being promoted to customer.

If you're referring to this follow-up tweet, thats not a backtrack. Elon can support something, while simultaneously acknowledging that the video is considered "sensitive content" that won't be promoted by the algorithm. He can personally promote said content if he chooses to. Any argument about him supposedly "flip-flopping" holds no weight here. If any argument could be made, it's that referring to "What is a Woman?" as "sensitive content" is absolutely absurd in the face of what our children are being exposed to, and what is being done to them.

Lastly, I feel compelled to remind everyone here that it was never confirmed that Twitter agreed to promote "What is a Woman?"

7
RoccoRatchet 7 points ago +7 / -0

I'm pressing X go to doubt on this one. I can't imagine Twitter would have ever entertained the idea of a deal that would have promoted "What is a Woman?". Jeremy furthers the incredulity of this story by claiming Twitter "responded with enthusiasm", and extended the deal, without even having seem the video in question. My impression of this situation is that he is trying to stir up bad publicity for Twitter in order to draw a crowd, and to pressure them into providing the video with some sort of support for free.

4
RoccoRatchet 4 points ago +7 / -3

Why is Imp right all the time.

is a handshake account

Alright Imp, how many alts does this make?

1
RoccoRatchet 1 point ago +2 / -1

You are, because you're getting outraged over a fake image.

1
RoccoRatchet 1 point ago +1 / -0

There's no way to know whether this is in the game. The only media that has been released for the Silent Hill 2 remake are trailers, and a sort of interview with the development team. Whatever "leaks" have been published are just re-uploads of these with pure speculation. Nothing that has been put out has even hinted at a racial trigger warning.

19
RoccoRatchet 19 points ago +19 / -0

I've done some digging, and I can't find even a hint of a source that this is legitimate. There is just no way something like this wouldn't have gotten more coverage if it was real. I rate this image fake and gay/10.

4
RoccoRatchet 4 points ago +4 / -0

They lost a significant chunk of money, and thousands of employees.

11
RoccoRatchet 11 points ago +11 / -0

What I'm getting from this is that they've learned absolutely nothing.

2
RoccoRatchet 2 points ago +2 / -0

I don't think I've ever seen an advertisement for a firearm, much less an ad that relies on attractive women, so I really can't perceive this as anything other than H&K inventing something to crusade against.

Edit: Apparently Heckler & Koch deleted the tweets referenced here.

2
RoccoRatchet 2 points ago +2 / -0

Still making handshake posts a year after account creation? That's some serious commitment to the cause.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›