Carlos Maza / @gaywonk versus Steven Blake Crowder / @scrowder (#VoxAdpocalypse) - Twitter war between a Canadian in nationality and a Canadian in behavior

[Memology 101]

A couple issues with that. Carlos isn't trying to get rid advertisers, he's virute signaling for attention and to fuck with someone he doesn't like. Also, nothing he's lobbied for or done actually hurts Vox. He's not driving away advertisers, he's getting Youtube to clamp down harder. That keeps advertisers more than anything really.

I think you're mistaking Carlos leveraging advertiser optics against Youtube as a goal, when its just a means to an end.

I have a Tweet for every question you have. If you the whole thread, all makes sense. To answer your new question:

https://twitter.com/AntonioChavezSN/status/1136697372900298752

 

[Reverend]

I called it.

https://twitter.com/vox_union/status/1136657852985163776

MemeologyWuzRight.

 

[NiggerFaggot1488]

No he is still retarded. Advertisers are already woke and not friendly to any sort of right wing content.

 

[Angry Shoes]

I have a Tweet for every question you have. If you the whole thread, all makes sense. To answer your new question:

https://twitter.com/AntonioChavezSN/status/1136697372900298752

I get what you're getting at, but I think you're making a mistake in assuming this guy is playing 4-D underwater backgammon and not just being a self-centered bitch.

 

[ButterBar]

No he is still exceptional. Advertisers are already woke and not friendly to any sort of right wing content.

Alternatively it could be stoking a bunch of attention and new followers and media buzz so that way if Vox doesnt capitulate to demands, he can use this attention to throw back at Vox itself. He did just get like 50k new followers on twitter.

I get what you're getting at, but I think you're making a mistake in assuming this guy is playing 4-D underwater backgammon and not just being a self-centered bitch.

He waited until this year and the start of pride month to do his thing for something that has been happening for two years straight. The guy has to have some reason behind the scenes he chose now to start a bitch fit. His im doxxed, heres all the texts pic was for example a screenshot saved awhile ago only now posted.

 

[NiggerFaggot1488]

Youtube is able to maintain a monopoly because it is not competing in a market; loss-leaders are enabled when the government doesn't break up shit companies like google.

Youtube is able to maintain a monopoly because of the Network Effect and because in the 70s and 80s, US enforcement of antitrust laws was changed so that only companies who increased prices would be charged. This is also why Walmart and Amazon haven't been hit with antitrust, because pro-corporate dicksuckers decided to reinterpret the law. You can be a monopoly all you want as long as you keep prices low.

 

[Memology 101]

I get what you're getting at, but I think you're making a mistake in assuming this guy is playing 4-D underwater backgammon and not just being a self-centered bitch.

Thats the thing. He is just the face. The Vox Media Union of employees is the party behind this. Of course Carlos is to stupid to think about all this himself.

 

[scotts_3101]

Never have I seen so many absolute galaxy brains come out at once.

I keep hearing this exceptional argument that calling people names online is the same thing as harassment.

As well as the notion that milkshaking people is good when they have bad politics.

https://twitter.com/cubehaver/status/1136660717870944256?s=19

https://twitter.com/1_Nancy_Huang/status/1136662600484294658?s=19

https://twitter.com/VerlandJ/status/1136675436036014085?s=19

And this beautifully spicy take:

https://twitter.com/adamndsmith/status/1136661204590612480?s=19

Try this argument on for size.
“It’s okay when WE do it because the people we’re attacking are bad!”.
It’s so mind bogglingly irrational I don’t even know how someone would combat this sort of justification. It’s tyrannical.

 

[NiggerFaggot1488]

Ben Shapiro now thinks that corporations don't have a right to ban whoever they like when it's someone he's buddy buddy with.

 

[mindlessobserver]

This thread confirms my suspicions that tortious interference is the new autistic power word du jour

It works because Cancel Culture has been the go to weapon for online activists to try and get their way. In fact its the most powerful weapon they have because if they can take out someones money they take them out completely. Money makes the world go round after all. Civil Action for Tortious Interference is the best counter to that. it also doesn't hurt that they can't help but to lie about the people they target as well.

 

[Man of the Sea]

Try this argument on for size.
“It’s okay when WE do it because the people we’re attacking are bad!”.
It’s so mind bogglingly irrational I don’t even know how someone would combat this sort of justification. It’s tyrannical. View attachment 788513

The irony being that Crowder making videos on Maza is absolutely punching up in every way possible unless you pretend Carlos Maza is not part of Vox and is a lone creator of his videos, and not backed by a publication that is also backed by NBC Universal who has more views and subscribers than Crowder. Now, faggot Cuban taint smelling fuck, explain to me how Crowder is punching down?

 

[Empty Donation Box]

Which is why government intervention is necessary IMO. American society is conditioned to assume that its rights are inalienable and to be defended. People often ignore just what that means. It doesn't just mean protesting, writing angry letters or giving money to political causes. Defending your rights is an implicit threat of violence. The thing is we live in a society where we all agree its a bad idea for people to go around shooting other people so we give the Government a near total monopoly on violence. The give in that take however is that we expect the Government to defend our rights on our behalf. And for the most part it has done a pretty good job of it. Been bumps along the road, no system is perfect, but when it comes to your right to speak freely you are allowed to say your piece on a public sidewalk and if anyone beats you over the head with a bike lock for it they will usually get arrested.

The corrolary to that however is if the Government sits by and lets a right get trampled on violence is not simply a possibility, its an inevitability. Hell, one crazy lady shot up Youtube because her shitty dance videos got demonetized. And that was not big bucks. Youtube is fucking with peoples money and are doing it in a morally reprehensible way. When combines with all the other shenanigans silicon valley is doing and far left activists are demanding its a recipe for disaster.

I 100% agree with you dude. Left or Right, polite political thought refuses to accept the truth. The Law and the State are, at their core, tools for the codification of violence. We decide what behavior warrants a violent response (the Law), then charge the State with the duty to carry out that violence. Generally the system works fine, the exceptions tend to be quite memorable though.

When there was no State in the Montana Territories we had the Vigilance Committee (3-7-77).
When the State refused to protect the integrity of elections we had the Battle of Athens.
When the State refused to protect the rights of black families we had the Deacons for Defense and Justice.

Americans have a long history of taking up arms against oppressors, be they state actors or private individuals.

 

[scotts_3101]

Now, faggot Cuban taint smelling fuck, explain to me how Crowder is punching down?

It seems to me that their argument is that by virtue of being white, he is punching down. Which kind of makes them white supremacists doesn’t it? Hmmmm

 

[TerribleIdeas™]

Because there isn't a solution from those areas. Nobody is going to make competition for Youtube, and nobody CAN make competition for Visa and Mastercard.

Youtube is able to maintain a monopoly because it is not competing in a market; loss-leaders are enabled when the government doesn't break up shit companies like google.

@AlexJonesGotMePregnant is right - Google can lose money on Youtube because they're still profiting on the data-mining, which makes the ad revenue functionally irrelevant, and they'll keep doing it so long as they have a functionally monopoly on the market. If I were more of a conspiracy theorist, I'd think it were likely that payment processors approached the smaller upstart video hosting sites and warned them not to expect too much, and what the repercussions of making waves were likely to be.

 

[Man of the Sea]

Ben Shapiro now thinks that corporations don't have a right to ban whoever they like when it's someone he's buddy buddy with.

Shapiro would be ok with businesses banning whoever they want if there was a competitive alternative. That's the whole baker argument. Unfortunately, there aren't anything even close to YouTube to go to.

 

[mindlessobserver]

I 100% agree with you dude. Left or Right, polite political thought refuses to accept the truth. The Law and the State are, at their core, tools for the codification of violence. We decide what behavior warrants a violent response (the Law), then charge the State with the duty to carry out that violence. Generally the system works fine, the exceptions tend to be quite memorable though.

When there was no State in the Montana Territories we had the Vigilance Committee (3-7-77).
When the State refused to protect the integrity of elections we had the Battle of Athens.
When the State refused to protect the rights of black families we had the Deacons for Defense and Justice.

Americans have a long history of taking up arms against oppressors, be they state actors or private individuals.

Lets also not forget the Miners revolt in 1920.

West Virginia coal wars - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

its actually a very good cautionary tale with serious lessons that are relevant. Before the revolt, the Coal Mining companies owned everything around their mines. Including the nearby towns where all the coal miners lived. Every business in the town would be owned by the mining company. Nobody was allowed to set up a competing business, and the mining company used the combination of debt, rents and its monopoly on the sale of things like food to keep the miners in a state of peonage. When people complained they said tough tits. They are a private company, and if you don't like it well you shouldn't have signed the employment contract.

Of course the people who lived in those towns didn't really see it that way and they rebelled. Eventually the Federal Army had to be called in and it was only time in US history that military aircraft conducted combat air strikes on US soil. After they were done cracking skulls though the Feds made the mining company knock that shit off. They didn't want to have to do it again.

 

[thismanlies]

Try this argument on for size.
“It’s okay when WE do it because the people we’re attacking are bad!”.
It’s so mind bogglingly irrational I don’t even know how someone would combat this sort of justification. It’s tyrannical. View attachment 788513

>you would have to be intentionally stupid or evil not to get this.

You could put Moviebob's picture on that tweet and I'd believe it was him 100%.

 

[Bogdandoff]

Guys... i think Carlos is gay.

 

[GrungyLawnChlorinate]

Try this argument on for size.
“It’s okay when WE do it because the people we’re attacking are bad!”.
It’s so mind bogglingly irrational I don’t even know how someone would combat this sort of justification. It’s tyrannical. View attachment 788513

So Crowder punching up was cool then, is that what he's trying to say?

 

[ButterBar]

Ben Shapiro now thinks that corporations don't have a right to ban whoever they like when it's someone he's buddy buddy with.

Now thinks? he said Farrakhan shouldnt be deplatformed. I dont think those two have much in line.