Cancel Barbie

[GutterBoy 2,899]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

If you mistook my saying "left wing echo chamber" for "not a single conservative account existed on Twitter," then I guess that goes to your lack of ability to nuance.

It was in no definition a "Left wing echo chamber".  There was PLENTY of right wing content on that site for years.  You made an incorrect statement.  Feel free to correct yourself.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,414]

Just now, GutterBoy said:

It was in no definition a "Left wing echo chamber".  There was PLENTY of right wing content on that site for years.  You made an incorrect statement.  Feel free to correct yourself.

Right.  That’s why you liberals didn’t freak out when Musk took over.  Not at all. 

[jerryskids 6,790]

2 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

It was in no definition a "Left wing echo chamber".  There was PLENTY of right wing content on that site for years.  You made an incorrect statement.  Feel free to correct yourself.

No thanks, I'll stick with my already correct statement.  No response to my aneurysm comment I see; that didn't happen I guess?

[jerryskids 6,790]

35 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

The word "woke" doesn't trigger me....it's the over the top reaction to the movie that does. 

You've obviously seen it to decide the reaction is over the top; care to explain why, for those of us who haven't seen it?   

[Strike 5,536]

30 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

https://www.readtpa.com/p/the-big-lie-about-the-libs-of-tiktok

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/04/chaya-raichik-libs-tiktok-groomer-tweets.html

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/features/100467

https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkg75m/chaya-raichik-libs-of-tiktok-cpac

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2022/06/14/far-right-influencers-hyped-coeur-dalene-pride-patriot-front-showed

https://www.losangelesblade.com/2022/07/09/canadian-lgbtq-youth-centre-attacked-by-extremist-libs-of-tik-tok/

https://mashable.com/article/libs-of-tiktok-furries-school-troll-fake

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/1/3/2145218/-When-hatemongers-like-LibsofTikTok-s-Raichik-spread-anti-LGBTQ-smears-real-violence-happens

BTW, this is the liberal playbook:  Oh, look at all the links I'm posting.  Except they're not based on facts and often use the same incidents/circumstances to form their opinion.  In totality, it looks like it proves something.  But, when scrutinized through the lens of critical thinking, it falls apart and doesn't offer anything of value.

[League Champion 1,911]

57 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

liberals

Does your Wife know about your Barbie obsession? For that matter, does she know that you came out of the closet on a Fantasy Football Forum?

[Strike 5,536]

1 hour ago, Strike said:

Except they never did any of that.  All they do is repost other people's stuff, pretty much exclusively liberal crap.  The libs just don't like being exposed.  If you've got some examples of that account doing what you're accusing it of doing, I'm all open to looking at them.  Bet you don't though.

 

58 minutes ago, Strike said:

Then it should be easy for you to post a few examples.  Seems like a quick and easy way to settle this.  Bet you won't though.

And just to be clear, I asked for examples of LOTT violating Twitter's TOS, NOT opinion articles from sites like Slate alleging they did so.  Because that was your allegation to begin with @GutterBoy.  As I've said repeatedly, I deal in facts and data.  Give me some data to support your allegations.

[seafoam1 3,017]

1 minute ago, League Champion said:

Does your Wife know about your Barbie obsession? For that matter, does she know that you came out of the closet on a Fantasy Football Forum?

He's in love with mdcack. The signs are all there 

[GutterBoy 2,899]

4 minutes ago, Strike said:

I didn't move any goalposts you fool.

Come on, it's all right here man.

1 hour ago, Strike said:

LIbsofTikTok was repeatedly suspended and/or banned.  Thanks for proving Jerry's point. 

Never banned, you're wrong.  Then you pivoted to...

 

1 hour ago, Strike said:

All they do is repost other people's stuff.  If you've got some examples of that account doing what you're accusing it of doing, I'm all open to looking at them.  Bet you don't though.

FYI, I said they violated the TOS, actually twitter did, and they did because they were suspended for it, so that's actually the proof you're lookin for, but anyway.

Yes suspended, for violating TOS, specifically hateful speech and harrassment and threats

Which again is wrong, and I provided multiple examples of this.  The first being the litterbox lie, followed up by a link to the school for her followers to voice their concern.  Link: https://www.readtpa.com/p/the-big-lie-about-the-libs-of-tiktok

Again with the children's hospital where she tweeted out that minors were getting hysterectomies, but it was again a lie, and her followers harassed the hospital, Link: https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/features/100467

And Again, with the Idaho event where she work with other white supremacists to harass people at the event.  Link: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2022/06/14/far-right-influencers-hyped-coeur-dalene-pride-patriot-front-showed

 

1 hour ago, Strike said:

If you've got some examples of that account doing what you're accusing it of doing, I'm all open to looking at them.  Bet you don't though.

I provided the examples, proving you wrong again.

Then you went to this....

30 minutes ago, Strike said:

I looked at your first link.  It doesn't provide any proof of LOTT violating any TOS.   The article is about LOTT supposedly retweeting a story that isn't true.  I don't know whether the story is true, but if that's your line in the sand I got a few other accounts to discuss with you, starting with the POTUS.

The "proof" that they violated the TOS was Twitter saying it.  You asked for an example, I gave you an example, and in this example she tweets out a false story and tells her followers what to do next, contact the school.  Harassment.

 

30 minutes ago, Strike said:

I looked at your 2nd link, from slate, and again there is no proof that the account violated any TOS.

The second link has multiple examples of hateful speech, which violate the TOS, as it's stated.  Not sure what proof you need that a tweet is hateful, but twitter did.

 

30 minutes ago, Strike said:

lefty sites....

it should be EASY for you to post ACTUAL TWEETS from LOTT that violate Twitter's TOS.

Then you attack the source, and ignore the ACTUAL TWEETS that are in the links, but you refuse to read the links because they are lefty sites.

We're done.  I've wasted enough time on you.  You clearly are only interested in acting like a douche.

[Strike 5,536]

4 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Come on, it's all right here man.

Never banned, you're wrong.  Then you pivoted to...

 

FYI, I said they violated the TOS, actually twitter did, and they did because they were suspended for it, so that's actually the proof you're lookin for, but anyway.

Yes suspended, for violating TOS, specifically hateful speech and harrassment and threats

Which again is wrong, and I provided multiple examples of this.  The first being the litterbox lie, followed up by a link to the school for her followers to voice their concern.  Link: https://www.readtpa.com/p/the-big-lie-about-the-libs-of-tiktok

Again with the children's hospital where she tweeted out that minors were getting hysterectomies, but it was again a lie, and her followers harassed the hospital, Link: https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/features/100467

And Again, with the Idaho event where she work with other white supremacists to harass people at the event.  Link: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2022/06/14/far-right-influencers-hyped-coeur-dalene-pride-patriot-front-showed

 

I provided the examples, proving you wrong again.

Then you went to this....

The "proof" that they violated the TOS was Twitter saying it.  You asked for an example, I gave you an example, and in this example she tweets out a false story and tells her followers what to do next, contact the school.  Harassment.

 

The second link has multiple examples of hateful speech, which violate the TOS, as it's stated.  Not sure what proof you need that a tweet is hateful, but twitter did.

 

Then you attack the source, and ignore the ACTUAL TWEETS that are in the links, but you refuse to read the links because they are lefty sites.

We're done.  I've wasted enough time on you.  You clearly are only interested in acting like a douche.

I read through two of your links.  Neither included examples of anything that violated Twitter's TOS.  If you want to post a single link that you guarantee will prove she violated their TOS I will look at it.  So pick carefully.  But I'm not going to waste a bunch of time on stuff that doesn't prove anything.  So, post your favorite link and I'll take a look.

BTW, you might want to google the term "and/or".  I knew they had been suspended but didn't know if they'd ever been actually banned so I put and/or.  That doesn't make me wrong.  It means you don't have as good a grasp of the English language as you think you do.

[jerryskids 6,790]

I don't think gutter bothered to read the medpagetoday link:

Quote

Children's National Hospital in Washington, D.C., has been the subject of online attacks and harassing phone calls after a far-right Twitter account published a phone recording last week, in which operators for the facility falsely claimed that the hospital provides gender-affirming hysterectomies to transgender children, a hospital spokesperson said.

The phone call, which was secretly recorded by Chaya Raichik, founder of the conservative Twitter account Libs of TikTok, featured two operators at Children's National Hospital who misstated that the facility provides gender-affirming hysterectomies to patients under the age of 18, according to the Washington Postopens in a new tab or window. The operators made these statements in response to questioning from Raichik, who identified herself as someone seeking a hysterectomy for a 16-year-old transgender boy.

"I've been in touch with quite a few hospitals and a lot of them, they said they won't do it for my 16-year-old," Raichik said in the recording. "I just want to know if you guys do service that age," she added.

The operator said "it depends" and that "each department is different; some departments cut off at 18." After Raichik reiterated that she was asking for a hysterectomy for a 16-year-old, the operator responded: "They're in the clear."

Children's National has faced "a large volume of hostile phone calls, social media messages and emails" following the spread of this misinformation online, a spokesperson for the hospital told MedPage Today.

"We do not and have never provided gender-affirming surgery for anyone under the age of 18," the spokesperson said, adding that clinicians are not permitted to perform a hysterectomy on a minor without a court order.

The hospital spokesperson also noted that the employees recorded on the phone call do not provide care to patients. "The information in the recording is not accurate," the spokesperson said.

The hospital has also stated that it does not provide hormone therapy to patients before puberty begins.

"Care is individualized for each patient and always involves families making decisions in coordination with a team of highly trained pediatric specialists," the spokesperson said.

Children's National Hospital is the second hospital to face online attacks and harassing phone calls from far-right groups in recent weeks. Earlier this month, Boston Children's Hospital became a targetopens in a new tab or window of these groups over similar false claims that the hospital provides hysterectomies to minors. The attacks on both Children's National and Boston Children's were sparked by social media posts from Libs of TikTok, which has more than 1.3 million followers on Twitter.

According to its website, Children's National follows standard-of-care guidelines established by the World Professional Association of Transgender Healthopens in a new tab or window, which does not recommend genital surgery for children as part of gender-affirming care.

The representative from the hospital said "they're in the clear" for a 16 yr old getting a history, the hospital says "derrr we don't do that, it's misdisinformation$#@!" and this is apparently LOTT's fault?   

BTW, if you click through to the WPATH SOC document, regarding minors and surgery it says it depends on the Standard of Care.  So that is some sort of circular reference perhaps? 

Quote

Criteria for breast/chest surgery (one referral) Criteria for mastectomy and creation of a male chest in FtM patients: 1. Persistent, well-documented gender dysphoria; 2. Capacity to make a fully informed decision and to consent for treatment; 3. Age of majority in a given country (if younger, follow the SOC for children and adolescents); 4. If significant medical or mental health concerns are present, they must be reasonably well controlled. Hormone therapy is not a pre-requisite.

Criteria for breast augmentation (implants/lipofilling) in MtF patients: 1. Persistent, well-documented gender dysphoria; 2. Capacity to make a fully informed decision and to consent for treatment; 3. Age of majority in a given country (if younger, follow the SOC for children and adolescents); 4. If significant medical or mental health concerns are present, they must be reasonably well controlled.

 

[League Champion 1,911]

This is what they want us to post 

 

 

[BuckSwope 654]

Shapiro's show today was quite entertaining.  It took him about 45 sec to also describe the reaction the last couple weeks over that other movie.  "Peeleing"  what a knob.

[seafoam1 3,017]

4 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Shapiro's show today was quite entertaining.  It took him an put 45 to also describe the reaction the last couple weeks over that other movie.  "Peeleing"  what a knob.

OMG!!! shapro!!! 

[Casual Observer 597]

4 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Shapiro's show today was quite entertaining.  It took him an put 45 to also describe the reaction the last couple weeks over that other movie.  "Peeleing"  what a knob.

Did you have a stroke in the middle of typing your post?

[BuckSwope 654]

8 minutes ago, Casual Observer said:

Did you have a stroke in the middle of typing your post?

Lol, I don't know what that was.  Damn phone, I cleaned it up.   You listen to today's show? 

[Casual Observer 597]

1 minute ago, BuckSwope said:

Lol, I don't know what that was.  Damn phone, I cleaned it up.   You listen to today's show? 

I don't listen to that neocon twerp.

[BuckSwope 654]

Just now, Casual Observer said:

I don't listen to that neocon twerp.

You should, it's funny.   

[Strike 5,536]

Hey @GutterBoy,

The Twitter files showed that Twitter suspended LOTT despite LOTT NOT violating their TOS:

https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-twitter-files-reveal-libs-of-tiktok-suspended-despite-not-violating-policy

GFY

[RogerDodger 798]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

We're done.  I've wasted enough time on you.  

  

Throw in the towel.  Smart, you were taking a beating again.  

[RogerDodger 798]

2 hours ago, jerryskids said:

I guess that goes to your lack of ability to nuance.

 

1 hour ago, Strike said:

It means you don't have as good a grasp of the English language as you think you do.

So true.

[GutterBoy 2,899]

1 hour ago, Strike said:

Hey @GutterBoy,

The Twitter files showed that Twitter suspended LOTT despite LOTT NOT violating their TOS:

https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-twitter-files-reveal-libs-of-tiktok-suspended-despite-not-violating-policy

GFY

I already told you we're done since you're obviously just acting like a douche, but since you called me out, I have to tell you that you need to read what you posted, because it specifically says that the account indirectly violates the TOS, thus the suspension warning, and if they directing violated it, then it's a ban.  As we've already established, they were never banned, remember you lied about that, so this is nothing new.

None of this proves that Twitter was a left wing echo chamber like you claimed.

Give up douche.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,095]

19 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

I already told you we're done since you're obviously just acting like a douche, but since you called me out, I have to tell you that you need to read what you posted, because it specifically says that the account indirectly violates the TOS, thus the suspension warning, and if they directing violated it, then it's a ban.  As we've already established, they were never banned, remember you lied about that, so this is nothing new.

None of this proves that Twitter was a left wing echo chamber like you claimed.

Give up douche.

You got served, b****.  Take the "L" like a man and move on.

[Strike 5,536]

19 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

I already told you we're done since you're obviously just acting like a douche, but since you called me out, I have to tell you that you need to read what you posted, because it specifically says that the account indirectly violates the TOS, thus the suspension warning, and if they directing violated it, then it's a ban.  As we've already established, they were never banned, remember you lied about that, so this is nothing new.

None of this proves that Twitter was a left wing echo chamber like you claimed. 

Give up douche.

Indirectly violated.  You're getting in to Squisition territory here.

[GutterBoy 2,899]

15 minutes ago, Strike said:

Indirectly violated.  You're getting in to Squisition territory here.

Tell us all again how this proves that Twitter was a lefty echo chamber.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,095]

2 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Tell us all again how this proves that Twitter was a lefty echo chamber.

Goalposts moved by guttertrash!

[Hardcore troubadour 15,414]

5 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Tell us all again how this proves that Twitter was a lefty echo chamber.

You’re right Gutterboy. It was right down the middle. That’s why the left didn’t care at all when Musk got it. 

[GutterBoy 2,899]

1 minute ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Goalposts moved by guttertrash!

It was strikes entire point you focking tool box.

[GutterBoy 2,899]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

You’re right Gutterboy. It was right done the middle. That’s why the left didn’t care at all when Musk got it. 

It wasn't right down the middle, everyone knows that.  But it wasn't a lefty echo chamber either, smart people know that, but not Jerry or strike.

There was plenty of right wing on Twitter before musk, probably more now, I don't know, but there is still enough of both sides to get everyone what they want to see.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,095]

30 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

It was strikes entire point you focking tool box.

Take the "L" here.  You lool like an utter fool.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,414]

4 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

It wasn't right down the middle, everyone knows that.  But it wasn't a lefty echo chamber either, smart people know that, but not Jerry or strike.

There was plenty of right wing on Twitter before musk, probably more now, I don't know, but there is still enough of both sides to get everyone what they want to see.

How come the bulk of the people Musk reinstated when he took over were on the right? 

[GutterBoy 2,899]

4 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

How come the bulk of the people Musk reinstated when he took over were on the right? 

If that's true, it's probably because there were more right wing accounts that got banned previously, and that's because more right wing accounts spread misinformation.

[jerryskids 6,790]

6 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

If that's true, it's probably because there were more right wing accounts that got banned previously, and that's because more right wing accounts spread misinformation.

Like indirectly violating the TOS, which smart people (to use your phrase) know means they can't find actual violations but they don't like your tweets.

[jerryskids 6,790]

I wouldn't think I'd need to explain to a smart guy like Gutter that if the Left defines misinformation, it stands to reason that more conservatives would get "violations."  Yet I feel compelled to explain it anyway.   

[GutterBoy 2,899]

5 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Like indirectly violating the TOS, which smart people (to use your phrase) know means they can't find actual violations but they don't like your tweets.

You didn't read strikes link either.

Has nothing to do with not liking tweets, it's tweeting content that leads to or incites harassment, which is exactly what she did.

 

[GutterBoy 2,899]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I wouldn't think I'd need to explain to a smart guy like Gutter that if the Left defines misinformation, it stands to reason that more conservatives would get "violations."  Yet I feel compelled to explain it anyway.   

You know lefty's got banned too right?

[jerryskids 6,790]

2 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

You know lefty's got banned too right?

For "misinformation"?

[jerryskids 6,790]

7 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

You didn't read strikes link either.

Has nothing to do with not liking tweets, it's tweeting content that leads to or incites harassment, which is exactly what she did.

 

Sweet jeebus, no direct tweet violated it, she got a lifetime achievement award for posting tweets which others, beyond her control, could have used for harassment.  And harassment these days is solely in the eyes of the "victim," so if I tweet that I'm concerned about the social contagion of trans among teenage girls, somebody might get their feelings hurt by that, and I would violate the TOS.  

It's like I'm talking to a wall here.

[GutterBoy 2,899]

3 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Sweet jeebus, no direct tweet violated it, she got a lifetime achievement award for posting tweets which others, beyond her control, could have used for harassment.  And harassment these days is solely in the eyes of the "victim," so if I tweet that I'm concerned about the social contagion of trans among teenage girls, somebody might get their feelings hurt by that, and I would violate the TOS.  

It's like I'm talking to a wall here.

Well the violation is in the eyes of Twitter, and if Twitter thinks you're encouraging harassment by tweeting, "these groomers are targeting teens, maybe someone should do somwthing to protect the kids wink wink", then deal with it.

[Strike 5,536]

16 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

 

It's like I'm talking to a wall here.

You're just talking to a guy who got owned and is looking for any way to weasel his way out of admitting so.  As I said earlier, it's very reminiscent of what @squistion does with regularity.