<story><title>Leaked memos Amazon warn &apos;be vigilant&apos; due to threats to blow up data centers</title><url>https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-cloud-exec-warns-employees-vigilant-after-parler-ban-2021-1</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>m-p-3</author><text>Please note that I do not condonce violence of any kind, and I am okay with Parler being shut down. That said, I saw this tweet as a reply&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; They are banned from social media because they were inciting violence.
&amp;gt; 
&amp;gt; Their platform is being shutdown because they were inciting violence.
&amp;gt; 
&amp;gt; And now they are inciting violence because of that?&lt;p&gt;Some of these angry users obviously don&amp;#x27;t appreciate being silenced, no matter how awful their message is. I totally get silencing their message if it&amp;#x27;s threatening someone, but how else can they voice their opposition to Parler being shut down? They become deplatformed, and no one is willing to listen to them or publish their message.&lt;p&gt;At some point, they&amp;#x27;ll just reach a breaking point where they feel the only way to be listened is to use extreme measures. I frankly don&amp;#x27;t know what we can do to defuse this situation other than punishing those directly associated with hateful messages instead of deplatforming everyone on it.</text></item><item><author>ttt0</author><text>I just want to point out, that on the screen cap from the tweet they quoted, the Parler post was from &lt;i&gt;9 secs ago&lt;/i&gt;. Maybe it&amp;#x27;s legit or maybe not, think of it what you will.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;JohnPaczkowski&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;1348113828324667396&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;JohnPaczkowski&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;134811382832466739...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Lutger</author><text>You seem to assume deplatforming is not effective, is that true? Or do you disagree with it on moral grounds?&lt;p&gt;I mean, &amp;#x27;we&amp;#x27; (as in &amp;#x27;the west&amp;#x27;) try to deplatform Jihad based terrorism. I think it&amp;#x27;s a pretty effective strategy, just not complete. Why should we _not_ deplatform far right white supremacy violence and terror?&lt;p&gt;Of course you also need a deradicalization approach, but that doesn&amp;#x27;t scale to the current levels of extremism. We need to stop this massive rise of fascist violence rooted in conspiracy thinking from spreading, which was amplified by social media in the first place, only then can a targeted deradicalization approach be effective.</text></comment>
<story><title>Leaked memos Amazon warn &apos;be vigilant&apos; due to threats to blow up data centers</title><url>https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-cloud-exec-warns-employees-vigilant-after-parler-ban-2021-1</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>m-p-3</author><text>Please note that I do not condonce violence of any kind, and I am okay with Parler being shut down. That said, I saw this tweet as a reply&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; They are banned from social media because they were inciting violence.
&amp;gt; 
&amp;gt; Their platform is being shutdown because they were inciting violence.
&amp;gt; 
&amp;gt; And now they are inciting violence because of that?&lt;p&gt;Some of these angry users obviously don&amp;#x27;t appreciate being silenced, no matter how awful their message is. I totally get silencing their message if it&amp;#x27;s threatening someone, but how else can they voice their opposition to Parler being shut down? They become deplatformed, and no one is willing to listen to them or publish their message.&lt;p&gt;At some point, they&amp;#x27;ll just reach a breaking point where they feel the only way to be listened is to use extreme measures. I frankly don&amp;#x27;t know what we can do to defuse this situation other than punishing those directly associated with hateful messages instead of deplatforming everyone on it.</text></item><item><author>ttt0</author><text>I just want to point out, that on the screen cap from the tweet they quoted, the Parler post was from &lt;i&gt;9 secs ago&lt;/i&gt;. Maybe it&amp;#x27;s legit or maybe not, think of it what you will.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;JohnPaczkowski&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;1348113828324667396&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;twitter.com&amp;#x2F;JohnPaczkowski&amp;#x2F;status&amp;#x2F;134811382832466739...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>clavalle</author><text>&amp;gt; frankly don&amp;#x27;t know what we can do to defuse this situation other than punishing those directly associated with hateful messages&lt;p&gt;Bingo.&lt;p&gt;edit:  I should clarify - hateful messages might not reach the bar, but calls to violence and other illegal activity do.</text></comment>