Then it’s like Twitter? Interesting…
It was a rhetorical question. I’ve seen Twitter. A lot of knuckleheads on there.
Crazy and or stupid is on all twitter like channels.It was a rhetorical question. I’ve seen Twitter. A lot of knuckleheads on there.
This is like the FBI using multiple “news” articles about one sourced story to obtain a FISA warrant. Could they provide exactly what he said? I’m not aware of any social media outlet that condones personal threats or similar posts.Trump's Truth Social is Banning the People's Truths
Examples:
My Truth Social account was just permanently suspended for talking about the January 6th Committee hearings. pic.twitter.com/MBNTSNe4Z8
— Travis Allen (@TravisAllen02) June 10, 2022
I was suspended from Truth Social for posting about the January 6th hearing last night.
Donald Trump is scared of free speech.
— Jack Cocchiarella (@JDCocchiarella) June 10, 2022
Just put out my first post on Truth social and they deleted it.
Real freedom of speech champs there.
— Joseph (@newsfromplanet0) June 10, 2022
Seeing a lot of folks getting banned from Trump's Truth Social for posting updates about the January 6 Committee hearings.
Apparently free speech has its limits even in Trumpland.
— Max Burns (@themaxburns) June 10, 2022
News Reports About This
All these claims are very vague. Without providing the specific posts that were banned, these testimonials are meaningless. In fact, we don't even know if any of these people had Truth Social accounts to begin with. But it appears they're all in good standing with Twitter.Trump's Truth Social is Banning the People's Truths
Examples:
My Truth Social account was just permanently suspended for talking about the January 6th Committee hearings. pic.twitter.com/MBNTSNe4Z8
— Travis Allen (@TravisAllen02) June 10, 2022
I was suspended from Truth Social for posting about the January 6th hearing last night.
Donald Trump is scared of free speech.
— Jack Cocchiarella (@JDCocchiarella) June 10, 2022
Just put out my first post on Truth social and they deleted it.
Real freedom of speech champs there.
— Joseph (@newsfromplanet0) June 10, 2022
Seeing a lot of folks getting banned from Trump's Truth Social for posting updates about the January 6 Committee hearings.
Apparently free speech has its limits even in Trumpland.
— Max Burns (@themaxburns) June 10, 2022
News Reports About This
No, this is not like the FBI using multiple news articles about one sourced story.This is like the FBI using multiple “news” articles about one sourced story to obtain a FISA warrant. Could they provide exactly what he said? I’m not aware of any social media outlet that condones personal threats or similar posts.
Thank you for providing a classic example of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.All these claims are very vague. Without providing the specific posts that were banned, these testimonials are meaningless. In fact, we don't even know if any of these people had Truth Social accounts to begin with. But it appears they're all in good standing with Twitter.
What did he say then? All the articles that were linked mentioned the person, but didn’t bother to show what was actually posted that got him banned. I would think that is a significant part of the story. Were they too lazy to include it in the story? Did they purposely omit what he said because it was extremely over the top threatening or inflammatory? Or did the post even exist? The reader doesn’t know because it wasn’t included in all the “news” articles that were linked.No, this is not like the FBI using multiple news articles about one sourced story.
I'm not saying it's like anything else. I'm saying it is what it is.
What it is, is a number of individuals sharing what actually happened to them. Those experiences are then being reported in the news. The news outlets did not originate the experience. Truth Social did by banning these people.
In my post above, four examples from four individuals were cited; Jack, Travis, Joseph and Max.What did he say then? All the articles that were linked mentioned the person, but didn’t bother to show what was actually posted that got him banned. I would think that is a significant part of the story. Were they too lazy to include it in the story? Did they purposely omit what he said because it was extremely over the top threatening or inflammatory? Or did the post even exist? The reader doesn’t know because it wasn’t included in all the “news” articles that were linked.
Umm ok, Now I have to conduct experiments because the “news” media couldn’t do their homework. Got it.In my post above, four examples from four individuals were cited; Jack, Travis, Joseph and Max.
You are correct about the content of the posts themselves not being included in the individuals' accounts or in the news stories about their accounts. And I agree it would be helpful if this information was known. Without additional information, it falls to each of us to discern the credibility of these reports.
One way to gain additional information is to run the experiment I suggested above.
Another way would be for you, a Truth Social member, to provide screen shots from Truth Social that show pro-Jan 6 Committee posts being made and being allowed to stand.
That would be easy to do, would it not? Does Truth Social have a search function like Twitter does? Is it possible to search "Jan 6 Committee" to quickly see the posts that search would produce and then see if any pro-Committee posts exist?
I know of no one who said Truth Social would not exist. I know of many, including myself, who said Truth Social would fail. Clearly, I was wrong about that.I mean, some were saying that 1. Truth Social wouldn’t exist and 2. Trump hasn’t posted on his site. Both statements are now obsolete.
Now the goalpost has shifted that he doesn’t have as many followers as he had on Twitter.
Yet, anyways.
You don't have to conduct an experiment of any kind. I'm simply suggesting that if you wish me to believe that Truth Social is not banning people for posting pro-Committee posts, you run the experiment to show you will not be banned for posting a pro-Committee post yourself.Umm ok, Now I have to conduct experiments because the “news” media couldn’t do their homework. Got it.
Like I said before. He was waiting to post until the site was done testing and when people would be able to get on the site, which happened when they partnered with Rumble.I know of no one who said Truth Social would not exist. I know of many, including myself, who said Truth Social would fail. Clearly, I was wrong about that.
It was true for a long time that Trump had only posted a single post on Truth Social. That changed when Trump became more active. I know of no one who said Trump would not become more active on Truth Social. I know of many, including myself, who thought it quite remarkable that Trump was so quiet for so long on the social media platform he originated.
Fact: Trump is active now. Trump has 3 million followers now.
You can believe what you want. It doesn’t mean it is true. I would think one would want more information( like the actual post that banned him before they believe something) I personally wouldn’t like to post something on the site that wasn’t what I actually agreed with. It’s acting deceptively toward whoever is following me and that reads it.You don't have to conduct an experiment of any kind. I'm simply suggesting that if you wish me to believe that Truth Social is not banning people for posting pro-Committee posts, you run the experiment to show you will not be banned for posting a pro-Committee post yourself.