2619
Comments (393)
sorted by:
185
Diotima 185 points ago +202 / -17

Gab doesnt have a leg to stand on here

122
CisSiberianOrchestra 122 points ago +141 / -19

Andrew Torba is really freaking out this morning. He made another post that was basically "Even if Elon Musk does make Twitter a free speech platform, Apple and Google will just ban the app. Gab solved that problem."

Torba does not like the thought of competition.

78
kernel 78 points ago +85 / -7

You forgot Parler already? Serious?

66
TearsMakeTheBestAmmo 66 points ago +69 / -3

Gettr?

TruthSocial?

74
Ponzo 74 points ago +76 / -2

I enjoy Gettr from a user point of view but if i had to choose between a social media platform i would choose none and nuke all social media from the internet and force people to go back to the real world to interact.

25
NPC01001101010000010 25 points ago +26 / -1

This. If I had a choice to go back in time and kill Hitler or somehow prevent social media from ever becoming a thing, I would choose the latter.

18
GodEmperor2024 18 points ago +19 / -1

Killing Hitler would have given the whole of Europe to the Bolsheviks in the 1930s so you could have caused even more deaths.

6
Julia_J 6 points ago +7 / -1

Hitler murdered millions of Polish people who stopped the expansion of communism in Europe in the first place in 1920. Nazi Germany allied with the Soviets in 1939 and invaded Poland together, which also was the expansion of communism in Europe. Both countries massacred Poland's elite and military officials, with the Soviets killing 22 000 in the Katyn Massacre, including many top Polish military officials who were part of the Polish campaign in 1920.

6
Shalomtoyou 6 points ago +6 / -0

I wondered recently how history would turn out if I went back in time and told Hannibal, after his victory at Cannae, that if he wants to save Carthage he had to roll up his sleeves and destroy Rome while they were vulnerable.

I don't know what life would be like upon returning to 2022, but I imagine very different....

6
deleted 6 points ago +8 / -2
2
Forbidden_outcast 2 points ago +2 / -0

Social media in proper form (apps and Internet forums) didn’t phase me.

What phased me was every single place I went to, to find out what was going on in the world- started shutting down comments.

Even my hometown and state. I read those comments. I knew people weren’t in agreement. And then they conveniently cut the comments off.

That’s what woke me up. And made me an extremely pissed of individual.

We are the majority- they just develop the illusion of fake consensus by shutting down the voice of the majority.

2
Gesirisi 2 points ago +2 / -0

I still remember when CNN had comments. I stopped using their site shortly after they took them away. I loved seeing peoples reactions to stories. Then it became the norm everywhere. That was what, 10 years ago? Did they already know that a large amount were already awake, then?

1
RedPillForceFeed 1 point ago +1 / -0

Want to be even more pissed off?
https://patriots.win/p/15HIhWzTCb/

1
NonyaDB 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'd bring Hitler forward in time at the moment before he pulls the trigger on the pistol in his bunker and make him CEO of Twitter.
"There's a better way, Adolf. I've got a plan..."

11
itpeeswhenibern 11 points ago +12 / -1

Heyooo! Now we’re talking!

I want to see that rotating hard hat and the jackhammer dude when a site is under construction!

5
Kingofkek 5 points ago +5 / -0

Only reason we even had Trump as president is social media

2
concealedaces 2 points ago +2 / -0

Please God 🙏

-2
MocksFordComma -2 points ago +2 / -4

Social media is not bad. I've been able to reconnect with family and friends from years and years past as well as share ideas and learn new things from groups. What's bad is social media addiction, and the brainwashing/manipulation that are walking hand-in-hand with it.

0
Forbidden_outcast 0 points ago +1 / -1

You could just pick up the phone. The internet is fake. It is always fake. There is no in-between.

17
scarasyte 17 points ago +20 / -3

I don't trust gettr parlor or truthsocial because they all censor people. Plus they all have major issues.

Gettr is funded by China.

Parlor gives everything to the FBI.

TruthSocial is just a big fat lie, Trump isn't even on there.

8
deleted 8 points ago +12 / -4
18
tabularasa_556 18 points ago +19 / -1

released on Android

Why won't he just release it as a website that anyone with a computer (more specifically an internet browser, which phones also have) can use? Impossibly stupid business decision

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
2
texas4ever 2 points ago +4 / -2

Exactly. It's like the rallies, he waits for the seats to all fill up, he's not going to make an appearance at 10am when people are just starting to trickle in.

2
Jackdaniell 2 points ago +3 / -1

2 more weeks until get he's on!

2
Stumbleberry1 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'd say 80% conservatives have Android and yeah I've been waiting not a whole lot to rush for

1
Ep1ctetus 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not to split hairs, but Apple owns a 56% market share, so easily 50%+ conservatives have iPhones.

-4
Comeon_man -4 points ago +1 / -5

Just about every android out there is utter trash. Beside Samsung. Apple has no competitors. Every single person you follow has an iPhone because two reasons

  1. It works. Consistently

  2. Your privacy is safer on an apple.

Do you guys still have viruses ? Lol

5
RealmanPwns 5 points ago +5 / -0

TruthSocial has to be used on a phone. All they really want is your phone info contacts and any other goodies they can make money off you.

1
scarasyte 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yeah thats a red flag as well. Any app that needs your phone number and contacts is probably going to collect it and sell it. Parler did that too.

-3
TrannyClausSliceDice -3 points ago +1 / -4

“Funded by China”

Lol oh okay.

7
1
WildStar 1 point ago +2 / -1

I wouldn't consider funding from a Chinese declared Enemy of the State to mean funded by China. Quite the opposite in fact.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
11
MythArcana 11 points ago +11 / -0

Imagine if they ever launch Android or Web clients.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
2
MythArcana 2 points ago +2 / -0

Android is the most popular operating system in the world, with over 2.5 billion active users spanning over 190 countries.

It's a giant club and we ain't in it.

2
ProphetOfKek 2 points ago +2 / -0

Imagine if their software engineers weren’t bailing.

1
TrannyClausSliceDice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why Would they ban twitter but not TS lol?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
3
kernel 3 points ago +3 / -0

Were TruthSocial and Getter removed from "app stores" and deleted from Amazon?

1
SNRNXS 1 point ago +1 / -0

LOL Truth Social.

I still never even got access to it despite people way behind me in line getting in. Many others are in the same boat.

It's a big fat fail.

9
SIMULACRUM 9 points ago +9 / -0

I did. They're still around? I thought they got shut down tbh

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
13
kernel 13 points ago +14 / -1

Hacked. They got removed from "app stores" and deleted from Amazon. That's why everyobody forgot about them fren. Proves Torba's point 100% doesnt it.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
4
kernel 4 points ago +5 / -1

No, AWS deleted Parler that's why they went offline.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2021/01/09/amazon-boots-parler-off-web-hosting-service/

Do you still not understand how all bigtech works?

It's all about centralization vs. decentralization. And by centralizing everything in Google/Apple software repositories (app stores) and in Amazon/Google/Microsoft server farms (cloud) and in centralized communication platforms like Facebook, Twitter and such we have given all our power away to the enemy so they can delete Parler overnight and one week later people think they went offline because they got hacked.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Barthaneous 1 point ago +1 / -0

Parker sucked ass from the beginning

32
Deadline 32 points ago +35 / -3

I mean he's not wrong though? It'll get banned, hosting will become a problem and so on. The one good thing is he has enough money to create his own solutions up to a point.

21
Niqlndym 21 points ago +21 / -0

Too many leftists live and die by Twitter…They won’t be banning apps any time soon. There’d be a wave of mass suicides…

11
DixMcCoy 11 points ago +11 / -0

You say that as if it were a bad thing...

3
Niqlndym 3 points ago +3 / -0

Lol…I didn’t mean to.

12
Kholland65 12 points ago +12 / -0

That’s a win win though. Even if Twitter just gets taken down it’s a big win.

6
SteelBallRun1890 6 points ago +6 / -0

I completely agree. Though If I have ever learned something from the Vine craze a few years back. it's that when one system goes offline, people will go somewhere else and flood it to get that same experience.

Twitter got bigger after Vine shut down because people went there to spend the time there they would otherwise be using on Vine, and were using Twitter a lot more for memes and video clips than before. And what happened a few years later? Cringe-ass Tik Tok started the rounds and was used by only incredibly niche and extremely weird people like furries. And China saw the oppurtunity immediately and bought the damn thing to turn into a data harvesting app. And now everyone still seems to use it after a bit of time.

My point is it won't be long until a darker force comes along and makes another Twitter clone to fill in that gap, with this newer version likely to be even more sinister than the current version. And the masses will likely flock to it again because they desperately want their speech controlled in extremely short, limited window frames (In the case of Twitter I think it's something like 120 words per Tweet?) just like how tik Tok/Vine was incredibly small videos to keep people glued. People have gotten so dumb

2
tabularasa_556 2 points ago +2 / -0

twitter originally was based on SMS which had a character limit. They kept the number of characters within that limit. It was not a case of people "wanting speech controlled" it was a limitation of the technology.

2
lilbuffy 2 points ago +2 / -0

a word limit (1/2)

2
lilbuffy 2 points ago +2 / -0

is a dumbass way of limiting free speech (2/2)

1
TrannyClausSliceDice 1 point ago +2 / -1

Nah. Tiktok used to be music.ly.

20
basedBlumpkin 20 points ago +29 / -9

Torba has been crying about Truth, a platform not even open yet, for months. He’s been sharing MSM hit pieces on it from the same “news” sources that want people like him dead. It’s pathetic. No doubt he’s freaking out about this. If twitter becomes a “free speech absolutist” platform like Elon wants then Gab has no reason to exist.

27
CisSiberianOrchestra 27 points ago +31 / -4

Torba was INCREDIBLY butthurt when Trump decided not to make a Gab account, and it's pretty clear he's been carrying a chip on his shoulder ever since.

15
SIMULACRUM 15 points ago +15 / -0

lmao I just realized how much I like your username haha


Anyway, yeah, I agree. I like Gab and Torba in general, but he really doesn't want other people doing what he's trying to do.

He'll always go down as the guy who got railroaded by the State and built his own platform and microeconomy, but... unfortunately, when you're the "first", you're often just there to be made an example of, and when enough time passes, others can do what you were unable to, and you're just forgotten.

3
IAmNotAnAutist 3 points ago +3 / -0

lycos has entered the chat.

1
SIMULACRUM 1 point ago +1 / -0

Huh. TIL.

"Most visited online destination in the world in 1999" and I never heard of it til today.

6
WildStar 6 points ago +6 / -0

Torba certainly did good work with Gab, but his ego is completely out of proportion. He needs to stop freaking out over anything that might compete with him. More competition is what we need in this market.

2
ReformedSJW 2 points ago +2 / -0

I like how Torba and his friends will claim Kushner somehow won't LET Trump use Gab. Like the Jews control his internet access somehow.

-2
try4gain -2 points ago +6 / -8

100% this. Torba is like, thinking Gab is "just about to go big time" and waiting on Trump and other big big names (Elon) to join his platform because it's "the obvious choice".

Gab is a Christian-centric anti-Jewish social media platform. Many people dont want to get on board with that.

12
magaandkag 12 points ago +14 / -2

What does anti-Jewish even mean anymore? It seems like just trying to be a better person is considered anti-Jewish these days. Gab is just people who get kicked off the Jewish-centric anti-christian anti-free-speech social media platforms.

7
Demonspawn 7 points ago +7 / -0

What does anti-Jewish even mean anymore?

It means people who look at a Jewish man, wearing Jewish garb, belonging to Jewish groups, believing in a Jewish ethno-state, and stating that "Identity politics is evil", who finds that man hypocritical.

That's the definition of anti-Jew today. Having any criticism of their absurdities.

3
TheImpossible1 3 points ago +5 / -2

It means that the place doesn't look like c/ConsumeProduct.

6
IAmNotAnAutist 6 points ago +7 / -1

I love the Christian part. What I hate is his incessant anti trump butthurtery.

2
ReformedSJW 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, there's a difference between Christians and "Christian nationalists" like Torba. The former respect the first amendment.

16
megaronald 16 points ago +17 / -1

GAB has broken features on it that have been there since at least 2016 (I just checked) This is what destroyed GAB from the get go.. F.E. If you type in 'chicken' you get users with chicken in their name but nothing on latest posts from people typing in the word CHICKEN.. This should have been a function from DAY 1 on GAB.

1
BatmanForTrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

Y'all are talking like Torba just runs Gab as a favor, y'all realize it's a business right?? Is he supposed to cheer for his competition?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
patriot68 1 point ago +1 / -0

Does "free speech absolutist" mean unlimited profanity and bad behavior in every possible situation? No thanks.

Who would be attracted to such a platform? People looking for CP, or seeking permission to act like assholes all the time to everyone, or trading gory shock and torture videos. Hanging around people like that is a good way to waste your life away and have nothing worthwhile to show for it.

16
halfstep 16 points ago +16 / -0

I would imagine if Musk bought twitter the government would finally make a move to regulate them almost overnight. And not in the direction anyone would care for.

4
President_Elect_Pepe 4 points ago +4 / -0

I think that is the least of his worries.

The good news is in terms of the app they likely would not remove it and piss off legitimate users of their products.

It’s one thing to fight about Fortnite. It’s another thing entirely to remove twitter which is almost like a default app.

1
anon2309011 1 point ago +2 / -1

Twitter doesn't need an app though. Every smart phone has a web browser.

11
NotAGlowy [S] 11 points ago +12 / -1

Elon should keep the free speech platform under consideration - it allows him to push to fire the activist transgender censors

8
WarOfTheFanboys 8 points ago +11 / -3

Yeah this honestly is kinda sad and desperate.

7
Khryn_Tzu-TTV 7 points ago +7 / -0

You are right.

If I was Elon, I'd make them give me a detailed plan on how they plan to accomplish taking Twitter down. I mean, if it made sense.. Maybe.
But we have to bring the fight to the enemy now - And Twitter is enemy grounds.

I just don't see any way Gab could make good on the offer.

6
Jaqen 6 points ago +6 / -0

Gab will continue on the current trajectory for a while.

Twitter, meanwhile, is tanking, and no magic fairy wand will resurrect it. The moment Musk buys in and shakes things up is the moment all the NPC's jump ship for whatever Mockingbird 2.0 service the CIA props up in its place.

63
Fignugent 63 points ago +71 / -8

gab can't win unless twitter is removed

the whole point is that A SECOND PLATFORM is basically useless

allowing them their echo chamber means they always have control of the public square

the only method that works is takeover, or complete annihilation of that leftist shithole

32
kissmyasthma100 32 points ago +33 / -1

Not even the almighty google could launch google+ as an alternative to facebook.

11
Shamb3 11 points ago +11 / -0

Yeah, the user base has been largely captured.

It would take anti-monopoly legislation that allowed users of social media sites from all platforms to interact in some way. Something like social media sites are just a host for a particular user and they can add feeds from other social media sites. That way you could pick a host that doesn't sensor you, but still read and catch up with friends / family.

This is like a old concept of news readers and news groups

4
GodEmperor2024 4 points ago +4 / -0

That sounds awesome!

It's like with torrent clients where they can all interact with each other so you can pick whichever you like best without worrying about user base.

1
AVeryNakedMan 1 point ago +1 / -0

Google+ actually had a chance to kill Facebook, but Google just fucked up the launch beyond belief.

I was in university when it launched. Everyone I knew wanted to sign up for it, but nobody could figure out how to get an invite. After about 2 weeks of nobody being able to sign up, the hype was dead and nobody gave a shit anymore.

Google 100% shot themselves in the foot, the dick, and the brain with that horrible launch strategy.

1
Harper42190 1 point ago +1 / -0

Kinda like truth social is doing.

14
schiff_for_brains 14 points ago +14 / -0

A second platform isn't useless. It's ESSENTIAL. We need an ecosystem of competitors, and not monopolies or walled gardens. Maybe something like Mastadon, where servers could have their own community or vibe and the servers combine into a Federation to share amongst the network.

3
WildStar 3 points ago +3 / -0

Very much this.

Putting everything into a single point of failure is the problem, not the solution.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
-3
Fignugent -3 points ago +4 / -7

nope. it's useless

4
covok48 4 points ago +4 / -0

No one platform should have a monopoly on free speech. The more, the better.

-8
Fignugent -8 points ago +2 / -10

free speech free speech

it's not spinach and rutabagas

if you want free speech on your platform, you can have it :P

there's no such thing as a monopoly. no one is stopping you from having it as well

3
Crapachino 3 points ago +3 / -0

Are you really that dumb?

-4
Fignugent -4 points ago +1 / -5

you are

1
AVeryNakedMan 1 point ago +1 / -0

A SECOND PLATFORM is basically useless The man says... on a Reddit clone.

0
Fignugent 0 points ago +3 / -3

yep. nothing we say here affects the normies in the slightest

hence. useless

52
GravityBounce1976 52 points ago +56 / -4

Gab is smoking crack, here.

17
databasedcentral 17 points ago +19 / -2

Gab knows if Musk buys Twitter they’re dead. So they’re making wildly false claims as if they’re special. It’s the moves of someone in survival mode

3
DefenderDad 3 points ago +3 / -0

Really? Why? Gab marketplace. Gabpay. Gab isn’t a twitter onyo competitor. It has options thay are giving people options against facebook.

1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
3
ReformedSJW 3 points ago +3 / -0

Allowing Jew hate but not porn doesn't make you appealing to that many people.

Torba can scream "free speech" and take the lord's name in vain all he wants, it doesn't entitle him to anyone's business.

0
patriot68 0 points ago +1 / -1

Free Speech platform. Free Speech platform. Free Speech platform.

They all promise it, but no one can deliver it because no one agrees what is Free Speech. It sounds like freedom. But it actually amounts to injecting profanity and bigotry into every conversation, ruining any good thoughts that might be presented.

This form of free speech is the best way to destroy free speech.

We need to stop crowing about free speech and figure out what kind of platform we're willing to fight for.

Is free trade actually free trade? No.

2
unclebobinator 2 points ago +2 / -0

Smoking more crack than Hunter ever laid eyes on

2
sordfysh 2 points ago +3 / -1

Yeah. Gab needs to remain with both feet in the parallel economy.

How are you going to do free speech and Christian values if the transhumanist false-prophet, Elon Musk, starts to run the show?

The money is tainted. Do not take it.

3
Floppyseconds 3 points ago +3 / -0

Wef = CIA

50
WeaponizedSmirk 50 points ago +51 / -1

There are more Twitter users in one Indian city than on all of Gab, Parler, Truth, and Gettr combined. That's just the sad, unfortunate truth.

32
BeefyBelisarius 32 points ago +32 / -0

Is that Indian city where they have one of their bot farms? Most social media users literally aren't even human.

17
Crappydatum 17 points ago +17 / -0

Remember the episode in Silicon Valley where they pump up their numbers by hiring the Indians? Pepe remembers

4
mty_green_go 4 points ago +4 / -0

Bangladeshis I thought but yeah same thing

44
KrellKrypto 44 points ago +47 / -3

I would prefer he takes Twitter private and fires every leftist at the company and brings in people the actually know how to code.

What has Silcon valley made in the last 10 years?

Time to get back to what crested google/ YouTube/ Twitter level innovation

11
Basedsliceofwinning 11 points ago +11 / -0

Yeah, I honestly feel like the tech companies are complacent. They're huge conglomerates operating in basically a monopoly, and have no reason to innovate.

2
NotMyGovernor 2 points ago +2 / -0

Banks shut down their competition

2
BastingFluge 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's annoyingly true. I'm trying to get back into startups for a few reasons but the chance to work on something innovative even if doomed to fail is one of them

3
WildStar 3 points ago +3 / -0

The biggest problem there is that these platforms are created by brilliant innovators, but then they move on. Then the platforms get taken over by parasites and activists who can't create anything. That's why you haven't seen anything good from them in years; all the innovators are gone. The same happened to paypal and wikipedia, the founders left and the parasites moved in.

1
patriot68 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's correct. The maladjusted leftist finds he has no natural ability to create anything useful, so he reverts to his natural state of stealing, wrecking and looting someone else's property.

It's what leftists do.

0
KrellKrypto 0 points ago +2 / -2

very accurate observation in my view.

just looking at all the innovation in the blockchain space its clear to me that more money rarely equals better products.

1
wethepepe 1 point ago +1 / -0

I just hope that lizard zuccc wastes all his money “innovating” his “metaverse” that’s going to be the most dull managed by board of directors garbage that no one except cat ladies will use

another tech bubble pop might be nice... Clear out the parasites that follow the power and money and exist only to suck the life out of peoples innovation and creativity

1
AnPrim 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, they sort of invented site reliability, that every SaaS is trying to implement, but yeah, that's hacienda, not shiny sexy

29
beansieman1911 29 points ago +30 / -1

This may be an unpopular opinion, but I'm not sure I trust Elon's intentions at this point.

11
IncredibleMrE1 11 points ago +11 / -0

You are not the only one.

9
PhilosoGuido 9 points ago +9 / -0

Can't be any worse than the current state of Twitter.

10
GodEmperor2024 10 points ago +10 / -0

At the very least Elon brought people's attention on the censorship problem.

4
beansieman1911 4 points ago +4 / -0

True, it does look like a step in the right direction but Elon will be the RINO of the tech world to me until proven otherwise.

2
Renegaden 2 points ago +2 / -0

Has he claimed to be republican? He’s just pro free speech

4
sordfysh 4 points ago +4 / -0

Gab needs to continue doing what they are doing and ignore big money.

Elon is big money just like Zuckerberg and Soros.

4
rossiFan 4 points ago +4 / -0

Either he's swooping in to save the day, or he's neutralizing every other social platform like Truth, Gab, etc...

I'd like to think he's somewhere in the middle.

4
IAmNotAnAutist 4 points ago +4 / -0

Who gives a shit about his 'intentions'?

Here, I'll tell you what his intentions are. To make money.

There, now you know.

4
beansieman1911 4 points ago +4 / -0

Perhaps an attempt to regain Twitter credibility with conservatives and undermine other free speech platforms like Gab and Truth social? Who knows - I suppose the truth remains to be seen. I agree that Elon's intentions are to make money. I'm more interested in the reasons behind the larger move here. Elon likes to brand himself a maverick, but not sure if he is really on the side of free speech or if he is simply playing the part prepared for him. Call me paranoid, but if there's one thing I have learned over the last several years is you shouldn't be too quick to trust anything you hear.

17
SIMULACRUM 17 points ago +19 / -2

I like Gab but they are LARPing if they think they will ever "take down Twitter" lol

5
Omicron 5 points ago +6 / -1

It's a nice tool and I admire what they built around Gab. But it will never be the public square like Twitter. You're never going to get sports organizations, actors, or "regular" people on Gab. It won't ever be the place where politically agnostic culture is discussed. I'm not saying that Twitter is necessary, only that Gab will never be the next Twitter.

10
Euphemism 10 points ago +10 / -0

You know they said the same thing about Reddit, when it was Digg that was all the rage. I can even recall when this young start up was just blowing smoke, because MySpace was already too large for Facebank or whatever that silly little thing was....

Just for a bit of context.

3
Omicron 3 points ago +3 / -0

That's a very good point. What you need is for it to be considered the next trendy or cool thing for lack of better terms. Is it impossible? No, but I don't see it happening for Gab. Of course I also thought the iPod was going to be a flop when it was first announced.

1
IAmNotAnAutist 1 point ago +3 / -2

Digg was never that.

6
Euphemism 6 points ago +6 / -0

It dwarfed Reddit by 3-5 times when it finally exploded after the Digg Patriot debacle.

If that doesn't count - then I am not sure what does.

3
magaandkag 3 points ago +3 / -0

I bet a lot of the people who support gab don't actually use social media so that is their main problem. Maybe if everyone like me actually made an account and forced themselves to participate at least once a day or whatever it would help them out. I just can't seem to force myself to do it.

1
SIMULACRUM 1 point ago +1 / -0

My thoughts exactly.

3
scarasyte 3 points ago +3 / -0

It shouldn't even be a focus point. Minds.com doesn't care. Gab shouldn't either. They found their niche audiences.

14
Lol_Garrus 14 points ago +14 / -0

at the end of the day, the goal is free speech.

1
patriot68 1 point ago +1 / -0

No, it's not, unless it's the pure form of sharing inspiring ideas that the founding fathers were willing to fight for. They weren't fighting for profanity, obscenity, disruption of concourse, and placing cow dung on the Virgin Mary. You've been tricked.

14
nozonozo 14 points ago +14 / -0

That sounds like Plan B.

8
Barbs 8 points ago +8 / -0

An abortion pill?

2
nozonozo 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nah, Twitter has already been born. The evil needs to be dealt with.

9
MetalRiddle 9 points ago +9 / -0

"Give me $2bn" is not really a counter offer

4
Redpillmachine 4 points ago +4 / -0

$2bn for just a board seat, I love Gab, but it's got some ways to go before it's anywhere near that valuation.

9
Ponzo 9 points ago +18 / -9

Even Gab isn't free speech, you can't post porn. The only REAL free speech platform i have seen is kiwifarms, they allow everything that is not against the law.

9
AmericanJawa 9 points ago +12 / -3

I question what about Pornography really falls under 'free speech' since it consists of watching people have sex and what exactly is the 'speech' in that?

5
Ponzo 5 points ago +11 / -6

You can't claim you are a free speech platform if you limit what people are allowed to talk about.

8
AmericanJawa 8 points ago +8 / -0

Are people prohibited from talking about Porn or just posting Porn?

4
Ponzo 4 points ago +10 / -6

Both, but its not limited to porn. If a million rainbow people decided to use gab and talk about their rainbow shit you can be sure that torba would be the first to ban that too.

1
GodEmperor2024 1 point ago +3 / -2

And he would be right.

I don't want freedom of speech. I want to ban all homos, feminists, anti-white, etc.

6
Crimalizeislam 6 points ago +8 / -2

If opposing the Judaeo Porn industry to market their sex trade means that I don't support "Free Speech" - then I guess I don't support free speech. Error shall have no rights.

6
Ponzo 6 points ago +9 / -3

Yikes

2
Crimalizeislam 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm fully aware, and I know what I'm saying. So far Freedom of speech allows the gays to dress young boys in make up and drag. It also allows Coke to tell me to be Less White. I believe my issues with matters is legit.

4
The_Nowhere_Man 4 points ago +4 / -0

I think we should be free to talk about all subjects. The key word is talk - not post pictures, not put up porn videos.

Any true free speech platform should welcome discussion. If - key word if as I don't use any social media sites save this one and am getting second hand info - Gab bans people for discussing porn and the degeracy of it, something is extremely wrong. If they ban people discussing the things they've seen, there is something wrong.

I'm always for an actual discussion of any topic.

1
patriot68 1 point ago +1 / -0

I support this. Today's idea of free speech is that one can bring a samurai sword into a wrestling match and disrupt and destroy everything.

2
GodEmperor2024 2 points ago +3 / -1

Yeah of course. Freedom of speech was used as a weapon against us. Liberalism is a trick. Read the Protocol of the Elders of Zion.

The Founding Fathers were absolutely right in writing the First Amendment, but they wrote it for a homogeneous White Christian nation. Lolbertarians need to understand that the Founding Fathers would not have allowed drag queen story hour.

1
Crimalizeislam 1 point ago +1 / -0

I've read it

1
patriot68 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lolbertarians need to understand that the Founding Fathers would not have allowed drag queen story hour.

Very well said. That's the crux of the problem, isn't it? The Liberals have redefined free speech to mean damn near anything. And that's the best way to destroy it. Get it?

0
AmericanJawa 0 points ago +2 / -2

The Founding Fathers were absolutely right in writing the First Amendment, but they wrote it for a homogeneous White Christian nation.

The Founding Fathers had every intention of slaves being freed but compromised so they could actually stick together long enough to form a genuine nation and figured future generations would figure it out.

America was never conceived as a racially pure nation.

2
GodEmperor2024 2 points ago +3 / -1

The Founding Fathers had every intention of slaves being freed

Then why didn't they free their own?

America was never conceived as a racially pure nation.

Only White people could become citizens.

And there are several quotes from the Founding Fathers about maintaining racial purity. I guess they may have envisioned an underclass of non-whites serving them.

0
AmericanJawa 0 points ago +1 / -1

Only White people could become citizens.

And originally only land owners could vote and that went out the window in quick order.

Even the Bill of Rights didn't exist until months after the Constitution was in place and the Government was already up and running.

4
TrannyClausSliceDice 4 points ago +4 / -0

Posting videos and pics of people having sex isn’t “talking” tho is it?

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
Ponzo 2 points ago +3 / -1

They are censoring fucks too, try Kiwifarms, they literally allow everything except things that are against the law.

1
patriot68 1 point ago +1 / -0

There should be a Kiwifarms. There is a need for it. But I doubt there can be any meaningful conversations there about rebuilding our country. You don't talk serious politics in a room where people are talking trash. It's the wrong environment.

1
covok48 1 point ago +1 / -0

Of course you can. How do you think America got along until the 1970s. That’s 200 years of porn prohibition and we still somehow survived as a free speech nation.

5
Whitespace 5 points ago +6 / -1

Yea, Gab made a decision. No illegal behavior, not porn. It's really quite simple and straightforward and Torba has been consistent from the beginning.

Having trouble finding porn, are we?

-1
Ponzo -1 points ago +7 / -8

"hey guiiise, our platform is free speech except this and this and this"

might as well stay on twitter then

If tomorrow 1 million rainbow people joined gab and talked about rainbow shit, torba would be the first to ban them because he doesn't want that on his platform.

2
AerialRush 2 points ago +2 / -0

And that's a good thing. Fuck outta here, degenerate.

1
Whitespace 1 point ago +2 / -1

Oh really? What a shame, child molesters are your uh, criterion.

-1
Ponzo -1 points ago +2 / -3

stop acting like a faggot

2
Whitespace 2 points ago +3 / -1

Ok, groomer.

1
ApexVeritas 1 point ago +3 / -2

You need to stop watching porn. You're addicted to it and it's clouding your judgment and negatively altering your behavior. Porn is bad for you. There's a reason why globalists push free porn on us. It's to weaken and control us. Also, porn isn't speech. Do you need me to explain why, in full?

1
Ponzo 1 point ago +2 / -1

Do you need me to explain to you that censoring something people talk about is not free speech? Even if you never watch porn, you can't call yourself a free speech platform if you censor it. end of discussion.

-1
ApexVeritas -1 points ago +1 / -2

If you're incapable of discernong why porn is so destructive, and why there are logical exceptions to unlimited free speech to maintain a healthy society, you're a fool. You're also arguing from a false premise. You're lying, and it's obvious from your other comments. You don't want to allow mere discussion of porn, you just want to allow porn. You're addicted and it's easy to spot. You're only hiding behind the excuse of "free speech". Furthermore, you're actively commenting on a forum that censors certain topics and doesn't allow porn. To be logically consistent, you should hate this place with the same coom addled brain fervor too.

1
Ponzo 1 point ago +2 / -1

PWin doesn't claim to be free speech and makes its rules clear. Gab both claims to be free speech but censors certain topics. Even if you don't share actual images of porn, simply linking it or a chick sharing her onlyfans is actively being censored by the so-called free speech bastion Gab. Why? Because torba is a bible-thumping faggot that think thats the way, just like they tried to censor music, movies, tv shows just a few decades ago. thats exactly how you push people away from your side. Message him and talk shit about his religion or promote gay shit and he nukes you from his platform.

1
ApexVeritas 1 point ago +1 / -0

but censors certain topics. Even if you don't share actual images of porn, simply linking it or a chick sharing her onlyfans is actively being censored

Oh no! The horror. Not the e-thots and simps for Onlyfans!

You see, I was right. You don't care about simply discussing porn, or its merits, or its dangers, you just want to share porn online. You were lying and being disingenuous. There are two options here.

1.) You're addicted to porn. This means the cognitive pathways of your brain are rewritten to pursue the next high, to blame and hate anyone that takes away your addiction or argues against it, that you excuse away your behavior and argue for your addiction and self destructive behavior using half truths, faulty reasoning, and outright lies. You're most likely also depressed and anxious, irritable, always fatigued, and overstimulated on dopamine so that you don't get the same joy out of other things in life that you normally do. Porn is addictive as hardcore drugs, even worse than some of them, and just as destructive. Why do you think globalists push free porn on us? It's not because they like us. It's because they want to weaken and control us. If you're truly genuine and a good person, you need to stop watching porn. You deserve better. If you want a complete breakdown of why porn is bad, watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vtp31feyTfM&t=1s

2.) You're a shill and one of the evil fucks that's pushing porn on western civilization to destroy it. If that's the case, you deserve to be burned alive in the town square. I say this as someone that's not a Christian, but that fully understands how bad, destructive, and evil porn is. To ascribe anyone that disagrees with porn and your disgusting habbit as a "bible-thumping faggot" is indicative of how warped you are.

1
FreddyThePatriot 1 point ago +2 / -1

I need you to define fully what porn is.

3
ApexVeritas 3 points ago +3 / -0

Point 1 (the purpose of speech):

Why did humans invent spoken languages? It was initially to communicate dangers (watch out for that snake/spider/lion/poisonous plant), and to convey helpful information (that plant is edible, that plant treats this ailment, it's better to build here, it's better to plant this now, it's better to hunt like this, it's better to make your spear point like this). Why did humans invent written languages? It was to teach our children this same information. The foremost priority of speech is to convey useful information. What useful information does porn convey? Nothing. People have been procreating long before porn.

What's the purpose of written languages, of teaching our children, and education in general? Is it not to improve over time? Is it not to enable our children to be better than we were, to know more than we knew, to reach farther than we did? Does porn help our children? No.

Point 2 (marriage, civilization, and porn):

What's the basis for civilization? It's the family, not the individual. While a strong individual is necessary for strong civilization, strong individuals almost universally come from strong families. Just look at the modern studies comparing intact households to single parent households. Every conceivable metric for success for the children is greater with the father present, with a 2 parent household.

To go back to the foundation: humans are sexually dimorphic. Men evolved to be bigger, stronger, more logical, and to do the laborious and dangerous tasks far from home/tribe. Men evolved physically and mentally to fulfill their role as protector and provider. Women evolved to be smaller, weaker, more empathetic and emotional, to bear and feed children, and to do the easier and less dangerous tasks within the safety of the home/tribe. Women evolved physically and mentally to fulfill their role as mother and homemaker. It's division of labor and specialization of the sexes, to increase species efficiency, to increase our likelihood of survival and success. That's why when one man and one woman come together to form a complete human that only then can they continue the species. That's why traditional marriage, between one man and one woman, has always been a staple of stable and successful civilization. It works within our evolution/creation to the very advantage it was designed to give, for everyone involved: men, women, children, and civilization.

Men's traditional role is protector and provider, and in marriage he gives exclusive protection and provision to his wife and future children. Women's traditional role is mother and homemaker, and in marriage she gives exclusive breeding rights to her man, takes care of the home, and rears the children. It's a mutually beneficial arrangement between a man and woman. The children are given the most efficient environment for staying healthy, reaching adulthood, and becoming strong members of society. Civilization gains by getting more and strong members, enabling it to continue in stability and success. It's the most basic bargain of civilization, and the species itself, and all parties gain from it.

Does porn damage this bargain? Yes. However, it goes further than porn. All sex outside of the bargain of marriage is destructive. It short circuits the brains of men to pursue images of women (porn), rather than women themselves, or pursue women that aren't his (prostitution), when none gain in the exchange beyond the sex act itself. It's tantamount to eating when you gain no nutrition from it. Eventually you starve to death. It's why prostitution is regarded as "the oldest profession". It's probably why porn will always exist in some fashion or another, because our sex drive is so strong, as it must be to continue the species. It's why "simps" exist, who pay and defend women online for nothing in return. It's why website like OnlyFans exists. On the other side of the coin, it's also why women have largely used their new found powers granted via feminism to give government and corporate globalism greater power, power expressed in terms of protection and provision, the very role men traditionally provide. Government provides protection and welfare, and what women can't attain from government they work a job to provision themselves, replacing their need of men. This is why women have become so ridiculously picky in the Western dating market. However, the illusion of protection and provision provided by government and globalism is blind, fickle, callous, and corrupt. In the end, women will suffer just as much as men under tyranny.

The modern world is a corruption and upending of the natural order, which maintains civilization and the species itself. What's happened to the marriage rates, divorce rates, and the number of children per capita with the wide availability of porn? It's dismal. We're not having enough kids to replace our dying population, much less expand. This means our civilization is dying. What happened to men's ability and willingness to fight? It's almost non existent. Apathy is everywhere. It's why we haven't yet revolted from the tyranny we live under. We have fewer things worth fighting for, and therefore we're less likely to fight. While it's not the only consideration, porn has a heavy hand in it, and it's that destructive.

Point 3 (Kant's categorical imperative):

Kant's categorical imperative states that we should act in such a way that we wish that act becomes universal law, meaning everyone acted that way. It provides a good indication if an action is logical and moral, and if the actor is a hypocrite or not. It shows why murder is wrong, and so too is rape, theft, lying, cowardice, greed, laziness, apathy, ignorance, gluttony, prostitution, LGBTQ, and porn. Through the direct effects of an action becoming universal law, we can determine if society would improve or degrade. If everyone murdered there could be no civilization. If everyone lied, no one could trust each other, and there could be no civilization. If everyone was LGBTQ, we wouldn't have enough kids, and civilization would collapse. If everyone watched porn, we wouldn't have the sex drive to pursue meaningful relationships, we wouldn't have enough children, and civilization would collapse. Kant's categorical imperative teaches us both what is sinful, wrong, evil, illogical, hurtful, and destructive, and what is good, righteous, virtuous, logical, helpful, and productive.

Point 4 (porn and art):

The purpose of art is to convey beauty, virtues, lessons, and betterment of humanity. This is so with everything man creates: drawings, paintings, sculptures, buildings, architecture, tools, furniture, homes, stories, games, even ideas. We build and create things that are beautiful, that add to civilization, to inspire people to better themselves and to protect not just the art itself, but ourselves, our family, our neighbors, civilization itself. This core intent of artistry builds on itself over time in good people, where the art becomes better and more beautiful, and so too does man and civilization improve. This is an extension of the role of men in society. Not only do we protect and provide for our women in the bargain of the sexes, we often extend that role to society itself, to build a better and more beautiful world for our children.

Ugly art demoralizes and destroys. If everything around you is ugly, you will be demoralized, unwilling to better yourself, or anything around you, or be unwilling to fight and defend things worthwhile and good. That's why the Soviet's invented brutalist architecture. It's ugly and menacing. It's a way to weaken people, as a means to control us. Notice also that brutalist architecture is repeated in Western cityscapes, and the intent of brutalist architecture is repeated elsewhere in all other modern "art". That's why modern "art" is so degenerate and ugly. It's a perversion of the reason for art in the first place. It's why globalists have infiltrated almost all spheres of art creation. It's why globalists are the main purveyors of porn. All of it is meant to weaken and control us.

How can porn be considered art? While some may be more artful, the intent behind it is evil. We can see the intent by who makes the porn, who disseminates it, who defends it, and what the effects of it are, on individuals and society. This is why things like old Greek and Roman statues that show nudity can be considered art, while modern porn isn't. The intent is different, the purpose is different, and the effects are different. The ancient sculptures are beautiful, convey virtues, a pursuit of perfection and betterment of man, something worth defending. Porn is the antithesis of that.

For the purpose of this discussion on this platform, it could be argued that all nudity could be banned, as a safety measure. Beautiful art that shows nudity can be seen elsewhere, so it doesn't necessarily have to be allowed here. However, as others have pointed out, degeneracy and ugliness can be conveyed even when there is no nudity. A pedophile could just as easily post a picture of a lone fully clothed child, and it would be just as degenerate and wrong. The intent, purpose, and effects matter. One could question the difficulty in ascertaining such things. However, it's usually quite easy to see and determine once properly educated and experienced on the differences.

Point 5 (porn as a means of control):

How is porn used in modern society? Who pushes porn? Globalists use porn as a controlling device. It weakens men, and thus weakens society as a whole. It gives a worthless (destructive) outlet for men to "pursue" images of women, rather than pursuing women themselves through logical, natural, productive endeavors. It lets men give into lust, abandoning wisdom.

As a prime example, look at when Israel took control of Palestinian television. The Israeli government immediately began blasting porn on the channels they controlled, aimed directly at the Palestinians. Whatever your views on the politics of Israel and Palestine, ask yourself: why would they do this? It's to control men, to weaken them, to make them less likely to fight back. Is this not the same reason why globalists push porn in the West? Bread and circuses, all of it. Everything the globalists do is meant to empower themselves, or to weaken and control us, in every avenue they control, in every media outlet, in every school, in every curriculum, in every social media platform, with everything censored and curated, in every website, in sports, in TV, in ads, in movies, in comics, in "art", in architecture, in government, in large corporations, in our diet, everything under their control they use to weaken and control us, including porn.

It's their intent, their purpose, and their effects. It makes globalists, and their machinations, incredibly easy to spot.

Conclusion

Porn should not be allowed. It's not speech, it doesn't convey useful information, it doesn't teach, it doesn't help men, women, or children, it doesn't help us improve, it destroys the institution and purpose of marriage, the very foundation of civilization and the species itself, it distracts men, it inhibits us from good and productive pursuits, it robs men of their labors since they get nothing in return, it reduces the number of children, it reduces the number of marriages, leading more women into the arms of government and globalism, it makes men more apathetic and less likely to fight back against tyranny and evil, it's not art, it doesn't convey beauty, virtues, morals, lessons, or betterment, it demoralizes and weakens men and society itself, and it's used as a control mechanism by globalists and evil people. In every conceivable way, porn is destructive and wrong.

2
patriot68 2 points ago +2 / -0

Massive post. But, good reading actually. Thank you.

2
ApexVeritas 2 points ago +2 / -0

What is porn? Anyone could tell you that. The more relevant question, the one I replied to: is porn speech? I'll post another comment I made on the subject to explain.

[edit] Also, you should check out the other reply by Ponzo. He just admitted to wanting to share porn online, and is pissed Gab won't allow it. He doesn't just want to discuss porn, he wants to share it. He's either a porn addicted degenerate, or a shill pushing it on us because he knows how bad it is.

4
covok48 4 points ago +4 / -0

Porn is decidedly not free speech. Porn is the direct result of censoring Christianity in public.

2
scarasyte 2 points ago +2 / -0

To be fair you can find porn on all big tech sites since it's not being censored anywhere else. It's not the reason people want to use alt tech. I've seen it on Twitter many times. From drawn furry porn, cartoon porn, or real stuff. Twitter doesn't care. I use gab and minds to talk about politics. Not porn. So banning porn on gab does not effect me. I kinda see it as a better place because of it.

3
Ponzo 3 points ago +5 / -2

if you don't look up porn or follow porn shit you pretty much never see porn on twitter.

1
patriot68 1 point ago +1 / -0

The harm is when people claim they're using their "free speech," and they post porn in every inappropriate place.

8
Barbs 8 points ago +15 / -7

Hey Elon, don’t buy that broken-down Porsche, what you really want is an overflowing toilet full of shit!

5
IncredibleMrE1 5 points ago +5 / -0

Team up with transhumanist Young Global Leader Elon Musk at your own peril, Andrew.

5
megaronald 5 points ago +7 / -2

has GAB fixed their search POSTS YET?? NOPE.. Not that hard to program (Especially if they are using SQL as a DataBase.. I deleted my account months ago on there after realizing GAB is a GHOST TOWN due to dysfunctional basic features

4
Strike08 4 points ago +4 / -0

The block button works less than the "not interested" button on youtube

1
IAmNotAnAutist 1 point ago +2 / -1

I got tired of seeing the same three idiots in my feed, no matter what I added or deleted from it.

Its was that guy who has a cat avatar, torba, and some other guy.

That was it.

I got tired of it. Well, that and the anti-Trump stuff.

1
TrannyClausSliceDice 1 point ago +2 / -1

I’m pretty sure engagement is horrendously low on gab.

1
TP4bunghole 1 point ago +2 / -1

And the gab phone "app" is horrible. It's not an app, more like a browser interface, very laggy, nonintuitive, etc.

5
ravioli_king 5 points ago +6 / -1

Great reply from Gab.

5
123breadman 5 points ago +5 / -0

That sounds horrible. I think Elon wants Twitter because of the brandname. He doesn't just want a company he has to build from the ground up.

4
SirEdward 4 points ago +4 / -0

What makes Gab great? It's a free speech platform. The infrastructure of Twitter is already there. Why not make that a free speech platform by buying it?

4
Whitespace 4 points ago +4 / -0

What makes gab great is that they've suffered the slings and arrows and Torba's team has tried to make do and expand features while being pitilessly attacked. Good for him. He has made no secret that he is competing other companies, but he is also very much aware about the larger corporate enterprise of crushing unauthorized thought.

Yea, they're competition and they try to compete and advocate for their platform.

1
KungFalco20XX 1 point ago +1 / -0

Being open source and being able to know how the code works? Twitter is a centralized, closed source platform, and will always be corrupt. Gab at least has open source code, right? That alone makes it better than shitter.

Not that Gab is that great of a place either. It's not decentralized from my understanding, unlike fediverse apps or whatever they're called. If the servers ever went down on Gab, or they were banned on an ISP level, that'd be it. Although anyone could theoretically take the code and spin up their own gab-esqe site.

1
SirEdward 1 point ago +1 / -0

So why not change the coding for Twitter? Is that an impossibility?

1
KungFalco20XX 1 point ago +1 / -0

Twitter is closed source. Only Twitter as a company can change it.

Gab, as an open source project, has it's code viewable by anyone, and can accept code contributions from anyone.

1
SirEdward 1 point ago +1 / -0

So if Elon buys it all, he can change it. Then we'll have both or what we're looking for

1
KungFalco20XX 1 point ago +1 / -0

Theoretically yeah he could. Whether or not he actually would is a different question. Even if he wanted to, there's a lot of licensing issues and red tape that comes with releasing your previously closed source code to the public.

That being said, I wish it would happen. It'd be interesting to see exactly how Twitter's algorithms are written to target enemies of the left.

4
ObviousStatementMan 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah, no... I mean no disrespect to Gab, Parler or Gettr, but, no. Sorry. The takeover of Twitter and removal of censorship is the crown jewel of speeding up this informational war. They tried to fight against the tyranny and made a valiant effort, but when too big to fail kicks in and someone is going to simply buy the issue to make it go away? Potentially setting a M&A w/ Truth via DWAC? That's a gamechanger.

4
im_out 4 points ago +4 / -0

Why not have both exist?

4
keepamericagreat102 4 points ago +4 / -0

gab is better imo, fuck twitter

3
Earloakridge 3 points ago +3 / -0

Someone needs to explain to Gab how counteroffers work.

3
scarasyte 3 points ago +3 / -0

I don't think gab has anything to worry about. People like me who use gab will still continue to use it.

3
Death2theElitePigs 3 points ago +3 / -0

YES! Twitter must die

3
Justaguy147 3 points ago +3 / -0

No, buy Twitter now and shut down the pipeline

3
least_counties_ever 3 points ago +3 / -0

Twitter is the establishment platform. That doesn't change easily. Twitter is the platform every journalist and every politician MUST have an account with, or else they don't have a career. That's the "moat" surrounding the business that protects it from competition, (Warren Buffet language). Elon Musk is brilliant. He's going to make a fortune on this. He's not doing it for free speech. That's just a side benefit. He's doing this for money, and he's going to make a lot of it. If gab, or parler, or truth social, nip at his heels, he can always buy them out at a huge discount.

2
AerialRush 2 points ago +2 / -0

Counter-counter offer: Hire Torba to run as COO. The more free-speech absolutists the better.

2
BizzLostHisPassword 2 points ago +3 / -1

Gab is trash and won't even last a year in it's current state

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
4
IAmNotAnAutist 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yup, money. And then if he can destroy twitter in the process, all the better.

2
D3PL0R4BL3 2 points ago +5 / -3

No investor is going anywhere near a site with swastikas on the frontpage. Torba doesn't understand free speech any better than Twitter.

-1
scarasyte -1 points ago +2 / -3

I've never seen swastikas on the front page. Stop buying the propaganda.

-1
D3PL0R4BL3 -1 points ago +2 / -3

I have

-2
IAmNotAnAutist -2 points ago +1 / -3

You probably put it there, leftist.

2
gustodog 2 points ago +2 / -0

whynotboth.gif

2
ReformedSJW 2 points ago +2 / -0

"free speech patriot" Wow so that's what you call him, huh?

I call him a two faced Trump hating scumbag who can't stand competition, and I love seeing him asshurt.

2
IAmNotAnAutist 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah he ain't going anywhere near that shithole.

2
TrumpChampBelt 2 points ago +6 / -4

Poor gab. It sucks lol

2
Emperorvoid 2 points ago +2 / -0

Doesn't Gab have its own censorship bias?

2
NotAnotherNPC 2 points ago +2 / -0

NO. Take over their shit. They wanted to deplatform us... and refuse to be part of free speech platforms. Let them choose to leave (they will) Twitter too.

2
TickleTh1sElmo 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nope. Leftists and normies will never join Gab. They're already on Twitter. By transforming the platform they're already on into a free speech platform, there is a much bigger chance that they see the truth.

2
Whitespace 2 points ago +2 / -0

hmm. Maybe. I hope so. I appreciate gab because of the massive risks, not underwritten risks, that Torba took on. I wish Elon the best of luck with twitter. That being said, the hopes vested in a WEF connected man are just that: Hopes.

I want to believe the best of Musk. The anti-gab attacks are classic punching right. A basic element of the way by which loser conservatism has remained in institutional and political power.

2
ApexVeritas 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, the amount of anti-Gab and anti-Torba comments I'm seeing in this thread is ridiculous. Either the people on this site are fucking retarded, or it's being shilled really hard.

John Doyle has commented on the normie tier right's ability to coopt the left's positions a few years after they initially hated it. Give it a few years and "conservatives" will probably be all for trannies and LGBTQ. Ive also noticed that every solution conservatives and Republicans put forth are either years or decades too late. The problems get worse, and these idiots can't seem to keep up with the times. As others have mentioned, Republicans are just Democrats going the speed limit.

I don't want to conserve, I don't want to "hold the line", I want to completely reverse what the left has done over the last 100 years. The globalists, the left, the Rinos, the uniparty, they're all trying to enslave and kill us, to implement the Kalergi plan. Fuck all of them. We're at war and we haven't even begun to actually fight back yet, and the normie idiots on the right seem just as likely to punch to the right as they are the left.

2
Susurro 2 points ago +2 / -0

Musk could by both and merge them into one big happy platform. Being the right and left together again.

Oh, Christmas would be so fun!

2
PhantomShield72 2 points ago +2 / -0

Elon won't touch Gab. Much like Joe Rogan, he likely accepts the narrative that Gab is a rAciSt platform...

2
scarasyte 2 points ago +2 / -0

Even though it isn't. Free speech has consequences. If you have it you will have a guy talking about how much he hates jews all the time. It's just a trade off you have to put up with. Same thing happens on BitChute and Odysee.

2
PhantomShield72 2 points ago +2 / -0

Exactly.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
bwritter 2 points ago +4 / -2

Every time I want to like Gab they do something like this, and their website won't load for me to talk about it there.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Latin_Patriot_MAGA 1 point ago +3 / -2

Even if Musk buys Twitter, President Trump won't go back to Twitter, and it's not because Musk doesn't want to but because President Trump supports his own creation TruthSocial, that's why President Trump hasn't reached out to Gab as well.

1
scarasyte 1 point ago +2 / -1

Trump isn't even using TruthSocial. I see that as a disappointment.

1
kilkidd 1 point ago +4 / -3

Fuck gab

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
2AMONKEY 1 point ago +2 / -1

Lame

1
Kelevra 1 point ago +1 / -0

I hopeful that Torba knows this is what the establishment is looking for. A way control every other unauthorized platform. Elon is just a pawn in all this calling it now.

1
SkyKasai 1 point ago +3 / -2

I don't think Elon Must could work with a religious zealot.

1
VonTyger 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hard to tell what Elon's plan is here, the right wing Twitter alternative sphere is already pretty saturated.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1