Yup I have already seen threads with screenshots from linkedn pages of some of those people.
I guess that just as in US, where Youtube is using partisan and highly controversial NGOs like ADL and SPLC; they are using equally ideologically driven people from other countries.
You can call this mistakes if you want but we all know what happened. Dozens of channels that were deleted in past few weeks appealed youtubes decisions and got negative response. So this was not done by just one or two rouge moderators. Even people who oversee moderators are biased and think that censorship is good and will work.
Moderation needs to be controlled by third and politically/ideologically independent party.
Youtube publicly stated that they are working with SPLC and ADL on Youtubes Trusted Flagger Program.
I am not implying that this was plan of evil CEOs from the start. But they let it happen. They let political bias seep in and steer public discourse on largest communication channels we have. This recent ridiculously vague "hate speech" rules can be used to prevent posting anything negative about arbitrary topics is we define those things as "protected groups" first. This is not partisan problem. Sooner or later this censorship that is normal now will be used against the left too.
I’m more on the side of saying that Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and the like are large enough that they should be thought of as public space. Having as much social interaction as we do on platforms that can be controlled on the whims of CEOs and business interests isn’t much different than government control of ideas, and I would argue it’s worse because the government is at least elected.
They have transcended beyond a business-customer relationship and have become the largest meeting space in history, and as such they should be free and open just like a public square.
Its not a mistake and its not a coincidence that this happened.
Youtube employed a lot of left wing NGOs like SPLC and ADL and lots of similar left wing authoritarians.
Left wing commentators were cheering the news that InfoWars might get banned from youtube. They are extremely short sighted. This very tool will soon be turned against them too.
Damore warned about google hiring policies. Susan Wojcicki, CEO of youtube is sister of Sergei Brins (Sergey Brin, together with Larry Page, co-founded Google) ex wife.
ToS on most of social media are too vague for fair moderation and moderators are too ideologically driven.
Social media became largest meeting place humans had in history. Moderation should not be controlled on the whims of CEOs and business interests.
Many consider whole Daily Stormer webpage as satire.
Majority of their readers read it for its creative but controversial humor.
Twitter sat ladies that cry bullied this big IT companies to deny service for Daily Stormer caused webpage to not be accessible. People who enjoyed this style of humor cant enjoy it anymore. This is very definition of censorship.
Cat ladies not visiting web page would be enough to not hurt their feelings. Them going out of their way to prevent others to enjoy this is very authoritarian and one of reasons why tragedies happen.
A Cloudflare executed says they ditched us because "email on this is massive." So much for an anti-DDoS company. The only traffic you have to send them just has to be in the form of valid SMTP, and they'll kill your site.
A Cloudflare executed says they ditched us because "email on this is massive." So much for an anti-DDoS company. The only traffic you have to send them just has to be in the form of valid SMTP, and they'll kill your site.
Cloudflare also kicks people off when they get ddos'd for too long.
Two days ago whe GoDady booted them, and Jester was running campaign against Daily Stormer, CloudFlares statement was that they wont bot them based on brigading flagging.
Joke policing is absolutely wrong and one of best indicators at judging how authoritarian people are.
Everyone who supports this or pretends that jokes are serious hate speech with intention to suppress someones right for free speech is worst kind of human.
If you read it, it was about his opinions about damage that Ideological Echo Chamber causes to company.
This discussion needs to happen at google. And he made it clear that this arent his opinions but he sourced most of controversial claims in memo.
His paper was completely aligned with section 1.5 of Google's code of conduct that says “Any time you feel our users aren’t being well-served, don’t be bashful - let someone in the company know about it. Continually improving our products and services takes all of us, and we’re proud that Googlers champion our users and take the initiative to step forward when the interests of our users are at stake.”
Google CEO Sundar Pichai wrote in memo “We strongly support the right of Googlers to express themselves, and much of what was in that memo is fair to debate, regardless of whether a vast majority of Googlers disagree with it.”
...and fired him anyways. It seems to me that he will easily win on court saying he was fired for political reasons and accuse them of defamation.
I think he knew what he was doing and correctly predicted reaction. If you have been following anti-SJW (for lack of better term) authors lately you can see exactly same pattern repeating over and over. After all he signed memo with his name. He could probably distribute it anonymously if he would want to keep his job. And if you ever tried to argue those points in any "left echo chamber" you probably know that before you convince anybody your account is banned.
SJWs (feminists, PC culture, LGBT, pro-Muslim, BLM, antifa...) when faced with more or less factual data that questions one of their sacred cows (women are equal to men, there are more than two genders, minorities need to be privileged, white privilege, institutional racism and patriarchy still exists...), they overreact with outrage with character assassination and shaming of meagerness. Some call this virtue signalling.
Example of this is how trump supporters are often labeled as nazis, racists, sexists...
While this works well in "echo chambers", it doesnt work as well in court. And I suspect that this guy had law suit for being fired and defamation.
This blog mentions that he already complained to NLRB:
> Damore plans to sue Google; he had previously complained to NLRB and wants to argue that his dismissal was a revenge which would be illegal. See a Damore's defiant answer to Reuters.
Maybe. I have been reading that Bannon wants to start regulating big social media platforms as utilities, to limit their censoring and promoting narrative capabilities.
And I have to say that I agree with him. This platforms became global communication channel. This is not just private company website anymore. So decision to delete peoples accounts and posts cant be given in hands of some biased moderators with personal agenda.
What is going on now on twitter and facebook, is comparable to phone company disabling your line because you have been talking naughty things over the phone.
No reason was given. Peterson tweeted about it. And said that even access to his gmail account was revoked for braking policy. He said no details were given.
Then he tweeted that they reviewed revocation it and still didnt restore account.
He then tweeted few influencers like Rubin, Rogan and Harris.
And then he tweeted that his accounts were restored, again with no explanation.
Right media and Youtube anti-SJWs blame this on one Youtube policy to isolate contradicting videos and authors, but I think this was probably mistake by some bot. Maybe Peterson account was mass flagged by some fringe group.
You tube isnt doing themselves a favor with keeping all the details, since this allow those who accuse them of being biased, to use this as an example of censoring anti-SJW personalities.
Yes term is mostly used as an insult. But there just isnt any other term that would replace it and include all those counterproductive radical left groups that relay on character assassination when faced with logical points they cant refute.
PC culture? regressive left? feminsts? LGBTQIAPK? lefties?
Women traditionally raise children and take care of nest, while men provide resources for family. On average. It can be different, but this is how most families function.
This is the same as women on average are not as tall as man. Its true in most cases, but not always.
Feminist alike always assume that statements like this somehow assume that women are inferior, and to counter this many feminists try to convince women to start acting more masculine. Which is quite ironic actually.
This statement doesnt mean women are inferior. Men actually like women for this traits like patience, compassion, attention to details; because they lack this traits.
There is no need to be upset. Men like femininity at women. On average.
He might have planned all this. He was apparently chess champion as a child.
* Mentioning of left echo chamber was pandering to the right. And he got huge support form right leaning and centrist media and personalities.
* Biological differences he mentioned were sourced, so not his personal opinions. He knew this will trigger outrage from pro feminist camp that will start witch hunt against him, based on unproven accusations that he holds misogynistic beliefs.
* Emphasize on the benefices diversity initiatives have on diverse candidates, was another passive aggressive attack on one of SJW/PC/regressive-left sacred cows.
I dont really know if he planned this, but if you spend any time following anti-SJW sphere, then you should agree that reaction was totally predictable.
Basically he just said that google created environment where people who dont perfectly align with left leaning echo chamber agenda (here he was pandering to anti-SJW anti-PC / centrists, conservatives...) cant safely express their opinions anymore. And he was fired for doing exactly this. Proving his point on himself. Google HR had two bad choices, not fire him and cause outrage among many of their left leaning (snowflakes); or fire him and prove his point that they re indeed left leaning echo chamber.
I base my speculation on fact that he put his full name on memo, instead of pseudonym and this quote:
> Damore plans to sue Google; he had previously complained to NLRB and wants to argue that his dismissal was a revenge which would be illegal. See a Damore's defiant answer to Reuters.
Moderation needs to be controlled by third and politically/ideologically independent party.