[rob666]

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

Didn't really play out like that.
But let's put it into perspective here.

Milo, a outspoken anti-feminist, anti-liberal, Briebert columnist that has made success on ruffling college tard's feathers for a year previously, criticizes a clearly feminist fueled Hollywood production, which by all rights isn't inciting any level of bullying. The people that bullied Leslie Jones did so on their own accord.
Leslie Jones went all victimized instead of simply shutting it out and not responding, which just fueled them even further.

Milo was simply the scapegoat so that Twitter seemingly took some form of "action"...

This all started a while back. He's been warned repeatedly that he's violating the terms of service, but I guess he feels that the martyr publicity outweighs being banned from Twitter. Sure looks like he's encouraging his followers to bully to me.

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by rob666 ↗

This all started a while back. He's been warned repeatedly that he's violating the terms of service, but I guess he feels that the martyr publicity outweighs being banned from Twitter. Sure looks like he's encouraging his followers to bully to me.

Twitter in itself is a pissing match for all sides of the coin. Unless you're in deep with what goes on there, you won't understand the context of events.

The downside to having 140 characters or less (add/minus qwerky meme) is they can be totally taken out of context, and used to paint a bad picture.

Aside from that, unless you're yourself part of the opposite sides of the tracks, you won't always see the harassment or agitations that comes from the other camp.

SJWs are just as brutal, or in many cases worse, than anything Milo could possibly represent. In the case of the lady in the opening article, she jumped head-first into the middle of it. Should have done like most responsable public figures did, and stayed clear of the bullshit.

[rob666]

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

Twitter in itself is a pissing match for all sides of the coin. Unless you're in deep with what goes on there, you won't understand the context of events.

The downside to having 140 characters or less (add/minus qwerky meme) is they can be totally taken out of context, and used to paint a bad picture.

Aside from that, unless you're yourself part of the opposite sides of the tracks, you won't always see the harassment or agitations that comes from the other camp.

SJWs are just as brutal, or in many cases worse, than anything Milo could possibly represent. In the case of the lady in the opening article, she jumped head-first into the middle of it. Should have done like most responsable public figures did, and stayed clear of the bullshit.

Milo lives for this kind of shit. He's a self described troll, that loves the publicity that comes out of situations like this. It's his claim to fame, and without his provocative comments and actions nobody would know who he is.

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by rob666 ↗

Milo lives for this kind of shit. He's a self described troll, that loves the publicity that comes out of situations like this. It's his claim to fame, and without his provocative comments and actions nobody would know who he is.

I agree. He chooses to be in the spotlight of politically driven controversy. Leslie also chose to be in the spotlight of the general public, chose to be an actor, and chose to take part in a controversial role.

So the only difference between the two, one is a spec on the blip, the other is part of a highly funded industry.

When you make those choices, it's best to grow a thicker skin.

[rob666]

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

I agree. He chooses to be in the spotlight of politically driven controversy. Leslie also chose to be in the spotlight of the general public, chose to be an actor, and chose to take part in a controversial role.

So the only difference between the two, one is a spec on the blip, the other is part of a highly funded industry.

When you make those choices, it's best to grow a thicker skin.

Making the choice to be a public figure means you're going to endure criticism, but there is a point where it becomes bullying.

That, coupled with repeated warnings, and some of Milos affiliations is my guess why he was banned. Twitter knew how he'd react to being banned, and no doubt knew it was playing into his hands.
But, I don't think Milo gave them a choice.

If I owned Twitter, I'd probably do the same thing based on his relationship with Greenberg alone. You have a guy inciting some pretty extreme views, that has connections to right wing terrorists, who's followers have shown that they're willing to harass Milos targets in an extremely disgusting manner.
Free speech is great, trolling is fun, but I wouldn't want my site to be his platform for this type of shit.
This is the kind of thing that some people don't see as trolling, and will take too far.


Meanwhile, Milo is laughing all the way to the bank.

[fredy]

Lol.
Its fucking twitter. who gives a shit. close the app and get on with your day. throwing pity parties online for cheap sympathy is funny. people need to grow up. sensitive dweebs

911 isnt a conspiracy bernie for president
the n word

[el_topo]

Who gives a shit

[Steve]

Gavin McInnes destroyed him, that was amusing to watch.

[curvature]