GAB, a social network that promote free speech a bit too much

[Noctosphere]

So yea, I've heard a lot about Gab lately with the pittsburg shooting
Apparently, Gab promotes the free speech right to a new level, where hating is authorized
Gab apparently allows peoples to do hate speeching, death threat and appologies of sexual harrassment
you know... such stuff...
This website should be taken down as, even if we have free speech, it must be moderated like everything else
Hey, the guy from the Pittsburg synagogue shooting had published he was going to do it before he did
If someone reported it to cops, maybe it could have been avoided
But now, people on Gab call him a hero

Seriously, cops should take down that social network who totally lack of moderation

 

[JiveTheTurkey]

If someone reported it to cops, maybe it could have been avoided

This should have been step 1.

But now, people on Gab call him a hero

They should have been moderating/reporting this to police this before they got called out for what happened. I only saw their site post and I think they're overall happy with being recognized by many across the nation. People died and I just keep reading "Thank god I found a free speech version of Twitter"- like what!?... smh

Gab apparently allows peoples to do hate speeching

This website should be taken down

Sorry but I disagree with this. Twitter, Facebook and even YouTube have users by the thousands that get away with making these threats and hate remarks against people of race(predominanty against whites), christian religion, and political party and they have yet to be moderated by the people shutting down anti-sjw or NPC accounts. The Parkland shooter made death threats and was even tipped off to the FBI but nobody took any action before disaster struck. Gab is not the first or only to (allegedly) allow hate speech or threats.

 

[Noctosphere]

This should have been step 1.

They should have been moderating/reporting this to police this before they got called out for what happened. I only saw their site post and I think they're overall happy with being recognized by many across the nation. People died and I just keep reading "Thank god I found a free speech version of Twitter"- like what!?... smh


Sorry but I disagree with this. Twitter, Facebook and even YouTube have users by the thousands that get away with making these threats and hate remarks against people of race(predominanty against whites), christian religion, and political party and they have yet to be moderated by the people shutting down anti-sjw or NPC accounts. The Parkland shooter made death threats and was even tipped off to the FBI but nobody took any action before disaster struck. Gab is not the first or only to (allegedly) allow hate speech or threats.

well, facebook, twitter and youtube moderate those comment as much as they can
GAB, on the other hand, ALLOWS hate speech

 

[CallmeBerto]

As long as it isn't illegal what is the problem? Just cause YOU don't like it doesn't mean anything.

 

[The Catboy]

As long as it isn't illegal what is the problem? Just cause YOU don't like it doesn't mean anything.

Directed death threats would actually be illegal. That aside, just avoid the site and move on. You don't have to veiw the content on that site. As well it's sadly better to allow these people to have their space.

 

[chrisrlink]

As long as it isn't illegal what is the problem? Just cause YOU don't like it doesn't mean anything.

DIDN'T YOU JUST READ THOSE ASSHOLES ON GAB PRAISED THE GUY FOR KILLING PEOPLE yes it's illegal cause one of them committed murder

 

[CallmeBerto]

DIDN'T YOU JUST READ THOSE ASSHOLES ON GAB PRAISED THE GUY FOR KILLING PEOPLE yes it's illegal cause one of them committed murder

Praise a killer = is a killer. Listen I don't agree but that isn't a crime. Now making the death threats like LV said is.

 

[chrisrlink]

with no moderation this needs to be shut down before another mass murder occurs

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I'm surprised Anonymous isn't doing anything yet bout it

 

[DBlaze]

So what some people are saying is, if 1 person does something horrible, an entire platform should be shut down?
Rotten apples are present in all communities, you may as well shutdown all social media platforms and forums that way.

A site with no moderation is an interesting idea, albeit within laws.

 

[CallmeBerto]

The site has some moderation guys. It recently banned lewd lolis because it is a grey area in most places and illegal in many others - https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2018/10/gab-bans-lolicon-calling-it-demonic-garbage/70684/

 

[gamesquest1]

so I guess it would be better these nut jobs have nowhere to expose themselves and their opinions for the authorities to monitor and intervene, I guess if a platform can be shut down based on the actions of users we can kiss goodbye to youtube, facebook, twitter, even gbatemp has had their own users who have been found to have done terrible illegal shit, you could even argue facebook has been even worse by having people livestream murders/abuse etc, once you open the door to complete censorship don't be too surprised when the door slams shut behind you

personally I would like people to be holding the torch to the feet of those who were free to investigate and monitor people on gab but were too busy waiting for the attack to happen, if history has taught humanity anything its that supressing ideologies you don't like doesn't work, its your imperative to go and argue against and hope to sway opinion. sending them all to scurry away and hide and fester only leads to these kinds of events

think of it like something you can relate to, if they ban and remove rom sharing sites, what would you do....suddenly see the error of your way? or maybe just go to the next place, your mind isn't changed by the removal of a rom site, its a minor inconvenience to most people, its a game of whack a mole until you can resolve the core issue, no amount of banning/blocking will change peoples desires to do something unless you want to advocate total and unfettered authoritarian control over the internet

 

[kuwanger]

A site with no moderation is an interesting idea, albeit within laws.

That's a contradiction. Laws are a moderation. Self-censorship to avoid the law is a moderation. If you want "no moderation...albeit within laws", you have to change the laws to allow anything.

 

[Subtle Demise]

Praise a killer = is a killer. Listen I don't agree but that isn't a crime. Now making the death threats like LV said is.

I may sound extreme in saying this, but I don't think death threats should be a crime. Evidence of a crime and just cause to carry out an investigation, yes; but the actual speech shouldn't be illegal.

 

[Chary]

where hating is authorized
Gab apparently allows peoples to do hate speeching, death threat and appologies of sexual harrassment
you know... such stuff...

GAB
Gab.com’s policy on terrorism and violence have always been very clear: we a have zero tolerance for it. Gab unequivocally disavows and condemns all acts of terrorism and violence. This has always been our policy. We are saddened and disgusted by the news of violence in Pittsburgh and are keeping the families and friends of all victims in our thoughts and prayers.

Gab took swift and proactive action to contact law enforcement immediately. We first backed up all user data from the account and then proceeded to suspend the account. We then contacted the FBI and made them aware of this account and the user data in our possession. We are ready and willing to work with law enforcement to see to it that justice is served.

They then go on to talk about how Facebook didn't do much of anything about the Facebook Live attack of that one kid, or other threats of bombing attacks. So if you want GAB held to a standard, then you need to hold Facebook to it too, so by that extension do you want all social media to be killed off because of this?

 

[the_randomizer]

They then go on to talk about how Facebook didn't do much of anything about the Facebook Live attack of that one kid, or other threats of bombing attacks. So if you want GAB held to a standard, then you need to hold Facebook to it too, so by that extension do you want all social media to be killed off because of this?

That wold just be pandering to censorship BS, and as we all know, censorship doesn't solve problems.

 

[kuwanger]

I may sound extreme in saying this, but I don't think death threats should be a crime.

In principle that sounds great, but in practice there are people with a lot of money (or a lot of free time) willing to harass people constantly. This includes making constant death threats, stalking, etc. At worst US history includes companies hiring personal armies and people "disappearing", usually with little to no consequences because even if law enforcement isn't being bought off a lot of time there's a lack of hard evidence.

Having said all that, a site shouldn't be required to self-moderate if it doesn't want to. It should be required to take down content based upon lawful orders and challenge those orders in court if they think they're unlawful. That's obviously a lot of grey area, as many countries have different concepts of what lawful or unlawful is. It seems the most reasonable position to take to abate any legitimate complaints by law enforcement to conspiracy of unlawful things.

 

[the_randomizer]

I may sound extreme in saying this, but I don't think death threats should be a crime. Evidence of a crime and just cause to carry out an investigation, yes; but the actual speech shouldn't be illegal.

If death threats should be legal, then I should have every right to verbally abuse the people who make them right back with all manner of slander and slurs. Sound fair? If they have the right to say threats, I have a right to fight fire with fire. Anyone who makes legit threats deserves to be punched in the kidneys.

 

[Glyptofane]

I don't think the those who can't be named even really care that much or at all about the death threats. It's more about removing access to dissenting wrongthink. Daily Stormer was deplatformed despite constantly disavowing violence. To me, the bigger takeaway is that you never really own your web domains.

 

[CallmeBerto]

If death threats should be legal, then I should have every right to verbally abuse the people who make them right back with all manner of slander and slurs. Sound fair? If they have the right to say threats, I have a right to fight fire with fire. Anyone who makes legit threats deserves to be punched in the kidneys.

Using physical force because someone said something you don't like? Holy shit dude

 

[DBlaze]

That's a contradiction. Laws are a moderation. Self-censorship to avoid the law is a moderation. If you want "no moderation...albeit within laws", you have to change the laws to allow anything.

Yes well, fine, no extra moderation outside of what is legal and what not.
For example some sites you're allowed to post pornographic content and others you're not, but that's because of the rules of the platform, not because of the law.