[QUOTE=J!NX;51178068]Who is this guy anyways[/QUOTE]
he's just a cool dude who just wants to have a good time roughhousing with other likeminded Übermensch in the jacuzzi nothing gay tho just charging each others jo crystals and rubbing oil into each others tired muscles after a long day of horsing around you know what i mean? txt me
[QUOTE=Van-man;51178180]You've already mentioned the general problem with him, except he's [B]REALLY [/B]extreme about them (well maybe not the British part).[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=gokiyono;51178211]He's a fabulous gay really far right winger that likes to insert himself into drama, or make it. A terrible person who would only make 4chan worse[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;51178246]Attention whoring right wing pedophile defending homosexual who's only purpose in life is validate any stereotypes the alt-right has about gays.
- [URL="http://www.breitbart.com/author/milo-yiannopoulos/"]He works for Breitbart and pretends he's the voice of gays everywhere, usually writing right wing garbage.[/URL]
- [URL="https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-america-divided/milo-yiannopoulos/"]Claims that he sells his body for money, usually bragging about way more than his clients payed for.[/URL]
- [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJhHwspZGcg"]Defends pedophiles that actually molested him, brags/jokes about it too![/URL]
- [URL="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/19/breitbart-editor-milo-yiannopoulos-takes-100-000-for-charity-gives-0.html"]Scam artist who tricked people into giving him $100,000 for the promise of giving out scholarships to white men only.[/URL]
- [URL="https://twitter.com/account/suspended"]Currently active on twitter.[/URL]
[editline]3[/editline]
Really just read the entirety of the bloomberg article, it's a pretty good read.
[url]https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-america-divided/milo-yiannopoulos/[/url][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=glitchvid;51178988]Skip to 10 seconds and on.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvkMmsd3Vzc[/media]
The entrance basically sums him up.[/QUOTE]
ok all those things i said in that thread about hanging that guy that was accused of that thing, I'm officially 100% backpedaling on all of them and going full hypocrite
lets publically hang this dude ASAP please
fucking
i want to die right now
WHYYYY
[QUOTE=Ruski v2.0;51177281]In fairness, this is one instance in which that reaction is justified. In a WWII setting the 'Harlem Hellfighters' would be acceptable, but in WWI the black regiments were only used for latrine digging and were VERY segregated from the white soldiers. They didn't see much action and no-one had even really heard of the 'Hellfighters' until the EA media machine starting shouting about them.
That said, /pol/ is cancer and it annoys me that on /his/ /pol/tards constantly come in and disrupt every topic.[/QUOTE]
Very false. Have you even googled the Harlem Hellfighters?
[QUOTE=esk0;51176989]What do you think a modern 4chan would look like?[/QUOTE]
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvrVHSnK8Sc[/media]
?
They were going to move 8ch to Infinity Next, but the migration of existing data failed so they scrapped it
4chan still works on IE6 which is great
google did not to put it into perspective
don't ask why I was using winxp, because I can't remember
[QUOTE=Ruski v2.0;51177281]In fairness, this is one instance in which that reaction is justified. In a WWII setting the 'Harlem Hellfighters' would be acceptable, but in WWI the black regiments were only used for latrine digging and were VERY segregated from the white soldiers. They didn't see much action and no-one had even really heard of the 'Hellfighters' until the EA media machine starting shouting about them.
That said, /pol/ is cancer and it annoys me that on /his/ /pol/tards constantly come in and disrupt every topic.[/QUOTE]
WW1 black regiments were mostly used for support (digging latrines in addition to a variety of other purposes essential to the war effort) and were segregated but the Harlem Hell Fighters of the 369th Infantry Regiment did make up the 11% of black soldiers who saw combat, and stories regarding their service at key battles existed long before Battlefield 1 was a thing.
Tbh milo should be seen as a comedian that fights for freedom of speech... Anything more has been impossible to tie him down on an opinion he keeps once its no longer socially taboo to think it.
I know a lot hate him but he did a lot of good in general for that movement, even if he also did some not so cool stuff.
The man self describes as a provocateur though... Its literally on the tin.
I, Fucking hate this year
[QUOTE=Ruski v2.0;51177281]In fairness, this is one instance in which that reaction is justified. In a WWII setting the 'Harlem Hellfighters' would be acceptable, but in WWI the black regiments were only used for latrine digging and were VERY segregated from the white soldiers. They didn't see much action and no-one had even really heard of the 'Hellfighters' until the EA media machine starting shouting about them.
That said, /pol/ is cancer and it annoys me that on /his/ /pol/tards constantly come in and disrupt every topic.[/QUOTE]
you have it confused, the hellfighters were formed and saw action during the first world war, not second
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51181370]Tbh milo should be seen as a comedian that fights for freedom of speech... Anything more has been impossible to tie him down on an opinion he keeps once its no longer socially taboo to think it.
I know a lot hate him but he did a lot of good in general for that movement, even if he also did some not so cool stuff.
The man self describes as a provocateur though... Its literally on the tin.[/QUOTE]
The dude's a narcissistic asshole not some sort of revolutionary freedom fighter.
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51181370]Tbh milo should be seen as a comedian that fights for freedom of speech... Anything more has been impossible to tie him down on an opinion he keeps once its no longer socially taboo to think it.
I know a lot hate him but he did a lot of good in general for that movement, even if he also did some not so cool stuff.
The man self describes as a provocateur though... Its literally on the tin.[/QUOTE]
Being a comedian involves being funny, though. Milo is just a clickbait writer who presses peoples buttons to get ad revenue. He's literally no different than Gawker writers who repeatedly pen articles on how video games are sexist - both of them do it [i]because it pisses people off[/i] and gets them page views and money.
Remember that before GamerGate exploded, [URL="https://storify.com/x_glitch/the-gamergate-supporting-journalist-who-hates-game"]Milo wrote [i]several[/i] articles and tweets[/URL] portraying gamers as "overweight, awkward, and lazy" and called them "pungent beta male bollocks-scratchers."
He's an opportunistic asshole. Literally nothing more. He is an outrage journalist. The moment something stops being a major source of pageviews and profit for him - see GamerGate - he stops giving a shit about it. You're right that he's a provocateur, but he's a [I]self-interested[/I] provocateur and [I]absolutely fucking not[/I] one interested in protecting freedom of speech.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;51181784]Being a comedian involves being funny, though. Milo is just a clickbait writer who presses peoples buttons to get ad revenue. He's literally no different than Gawker writers who repeatedly pen articles on how video games are sexist - both of them do it [i]because it pisses people off[/i] and gets them page views and money.
Remember that before GamerGate exploded, [URL="https://storify.com/x_glitch/the-gamergate-supporting-journalist-who-hates-game"]Milo wrote [i]several[/i] articles and tweets[/URL] portraying gamers as "overweight, awkward, and lazy" and called them "pungent beta male bollocks-scratchers."
He's an opportunistic asshole. Literally nothing more. He is an outrage journalist. The moment something stops being a major source of pageviews and profit for him - see GamerGate - he stops giving a shit about it. You're right that he's a provocateur, but he's a [I]self-interested[/I] provocateur and [I]absolutely fucking not[/I] one interested in protecting freedom of speech.[/QUOTE]
If you think milo is not perceived as funny then i don’t think we are talking about the same person... his whole shtick is laughing at insulting people and its super effective.
[QUOTE]He's an opportunistic asshole. Literally nothing more. He is an outrage journalist. The moment something stops being a major source of pageviews and profit for him - see GamerGate - he stops giving a shit about it. You're right that he's a provocateur, but he's a self-interested provocateur and absolutely fucking not one interested in protecting freedom of speech. [/QUOTE]
Yes, and this is why people like him and why he has helped the free speech movement.
not only is he a self interested provocateur, he is a self described one...
People like you being butt hurt about it is the behaviour that made him popular, the fact that what he does works is only thanks to people who behave like you... the people that actually like him a lot dont even bat an eye at half the stuff he does...
[editline]10th October 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=greasemunky;51181521]The dude's a narcissistic asshole not some sort of revolutionary freedom fighter.[/QUOTE]
correct, but even pieces of human filth can further a movement.
Just by saying offensive but harmless shit and defending his right to say it he is furthering the freedom of speech movement.
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51181806]If you think milo is not perceived as funny then i don’t think we are talking about the same person... his whole shtick is laughing at insulting people and its super effective.
Yes, and this is why people like him and why he has helped the free speech movement.
not only is he a self interested provocateur, he is a self described one...
People like you being butt hurt about it is the behaviour that made him popular, the fact that what he does works is only thanks to people who behave like you... the people that actually like him a lot dont even bat an eye at half the stuff he does...
[editline]10th October 2016[/editline]
correct, but even pieces of human filth can further a movement.
Just by saying offensive but harmless shit and defending his right to say it he is furthering the freedom of speech movement.[/QUOTE]
oh my god, one post on a relatvely small forum means we're all butthurt and contributing into his GRAND SCHEME!!!
I honestly didn't even know who he was, and after reading up on some of his shit I sincerely doubt he's being inflammatory for the sake of free speech - or anything constructive for that matter
Just FYI - freedom of speech is not me insulting you just because I feel like it, it's more about being able to share viewpoints / opinions in a constructive manner without being hunted down because of it
Regardless of who bids for it, I doubt 4chan will be sold. The dude who now owns 4chan is well known for his schemes to try to make it seem like his sites are dying, so that people give up their money and information.
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51181806]If you think milo is not perceived as funny then i don’t think we are talking about the same person... his whole shtick is laughing at insulting people and its super effective.
Yes, and this is why people like him and why he has helped the free speech movement.
not only is he a self interested provocateur, he is a self described one...
People like you being butt hurt about it is the behaviour that made him popular, the fact that what he does works is only thanks to people who behave like you... the people that actually like him a lot dont even bat an eye at half the stuff he does...
[editline]10th October 2016[/editline]
correct, but even pieces of human filth can further a movement.
Just by saying offensive but harmless shit and defending his right to say it he is furthering the freedom of speech movement.[/QUOTE]
First point: Sure, maybe he's perceived as funny by some people, but I don't think he's funny [I]at all[/I]. We just share different senses of humor. I don't think pissing off random strangers is funny - that's why I don't watch YouTube "prank" channels where "famous" people harass and piss off random strangers to be "funny." Because that's all Milo is - the SoFloAntonio of internet garbage outrage journalism. But if you think that's funny, great - I disagree, and that's just where we're going to have to disagree on personal taste.
Second: how again has he helped the "free speech movement?" You're right that he's a self-described provocateur - I even admitted that in my post. But being provocative isn't somehow "helping free speech." If someone calls somebody a cunt to exercise their free speech, and then that person responds and says "no, you're a cunt, buddy," they're not [i]censoring[/i] you, they're [i]also exercising their right to free speech[/i].
I'm not butt-hurt about him. I just think he's a lazy, opportunistic, cheap provocateur and nothing more. He's not a good journalist. He's not a talented investigator. He hasn't revealed any groundbreaking news. Nothing he does is journalism. All he does is provoke people - and I don't think that provoking people to get a reaction to post on your news site to get money is an admirable job. It isn't. He's his own paparazzi. I don't have respect for people who incite outrage in order to make money - whether it's Gawker, Breitbart, or anybody else.
I've [i]personally seen you[/i] get outraged at people using the [i]exact same fucking garbage clickbait tactic[/i] from the other side of the political aisle. Every time Gawker or Polygon post articles ripping into certain demographics, they're doing the [i]absolute exact same thing[/i] that Milo does. Racists, nazis, sexists, SJWs, liberals, republicans, democrats, conservatives, the alt-right, neoliberals, globalists, whatever pejorative identifier you want to pick - people who [i]intentionally target[/i] those demographics in order to rile them up and get page views for cents of ad money aren't journalists, they're professional provocateurs and trolls, and Milo is no better than the ones employed at Gawker and HuffPost and whatever other internet tabloid news site you hate.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;51181871]First point: Sure, maybe he's perceived as funny by some people, but I don't think he's funny [I]at all[/I]. We just share different senses of humor. I don't think pissing off random strangers is funny - that's why I don't watch YouTube "prank" channels where "famous" people harass and piss off random strangers to be "funny." Because that's all Milo is - the SoFloAntonio of internet garbage outrage journalism. But if you think that's funny, great - I disagree, and that's just where we're going to have to disagree on personal taste.[/QUOTE]
Yes, i dont think he is funny, he can be very witty at times, but hes not for me... but i appreciate others do find him funny and that is his business model.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;51181871]Second: how again has he helped the "free speech movement?" You're right that he's a self-described provocateur - I even admitted that in my post. But being provocative isn't somehow "helping free speech." If someone calls somebody a cunt to exercise their free speech, and then that person responds and says "no, you're a cunt, buddy," they're not [I]censoring[/I] you, they're [I]also exercising their right to free speech[/I].[/QUOTE]
Ah, but he does not just attack any weak sheep... he attacks the ones that want to censor or shame their opposition into submission... His deal is that he is uncensurable and unshameable because he has no shame... he goes after feminists, social justice warriors, big actors, etc BECAUSE they were either caught trying to preform a Streisand or just outright censor their opposition.
That ghostbusters deal for example... all hate they were getting was supposedly because 'they are women and misogyny...' so he jumped straight onto that.
I dont think he is a hero or freedom fighter like some try to claim, he is just an asshole that for some reason has taken up a worthy goal and be an asshole about... but its working. These people who do stuff that others just do not get away with (a game dev currently suing valve comes to mind) just because they use social themes and shaming tactics efficiently should not get away with it...
Therefore it can be said that just as 4chan serves a purpose and does do in my opinion more good then evil, so does this guy...
[QUOTE=.Isak.;51181871]
I'm not butt-hurt about him. I just think he's a lazy, opportunistic, cheap provocateur and nothing more. He's not a good journalist. He's not a talented investigator. He hasn't revealed any groundbreaking news. Nothing he does is journalism. All he does is provoke people - and I don't think that provoking people to get a reaction to post on your news site to get money is an admirable job. It isn't. He's his own paparazzi. I don't have respect for people who incite outrage in order to make money - whether it's Gawker, Breitbart, or anybody else.[/QUOTE]
then dont spend attention to him, hes not talking about you or people like you. people he opposes are using partially ignorant people (possibly) like you to bandwagon shame him like they always do when they feel people are saying things that should be illegal to say... just ignore it, its like a mail not addressed to you.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;51181871]
I've [I]personally seen you[/I] get outraged at people using the [I]exact same fucking garbage clickbait tactic[/I] from the other side of the political aisle. Every time Gawker or Polygon post articles ripping into certain demographics, they're doing the [I]absolute exact same thing[/I] that Milo does. Racists, nazis, sexists, SJWs, liberals, republicans, democrats, conservatives, the alt-right, neoliberals, globalists, whatever pejorative identifier you want to pick - people who [I]intentionally target[/I] those demographics in order to rile them up and get page views for cents of ad money aren't journalists, they're professional provocateurs and trolls, and Milo is no better than the ones employed at Gawker and HuffPost and whatever other internet tabloid news site you hate.[/QUOTE]
Freedom of speech is freedom of speech, i can think gawker is shit, but still respect their right to freedom of speech and their right to burn their own credibility on the stake of mass clicks.
But they are actually not the same... Milo does not want to rile up the masses... he does not try to rile up random people... he riles up individuals and groups that he thinks are trying to censor or bully others out of free speech (there are other causes, but these are the main ones he focusses on, he is also known for a bit of mens rights activism and so forth). And he KNOWS people will click his articles because they agree with this very popular 'alt right' stance on free speech. Again, i dont think he is a freedom fighter or something like that, i actually think he has on several occasions proven to have bad judgement but his goals are his goals... he uses his targets social justice 'fake outrage' against them, creating the buzz around his points for him without any need for putting in his own effort. and that is his method, and its super effective. Its using gawkers bullshit against them.
It might get him banned on occasion, and deemed public outcast nr1 on another... but overall ive seen him do at least more good then bad on the internet. The reason 'freedom of speech versus feminism' is talked about is because of the combination of actual serious cases happening and people like him pissing those particular people off to a point that they bring their own dodgy case into the media and are judged to be in the wrong by public opinion once they can no longer hide behind 'but he attacks women' or 'cyber bullying gamers, u guyz'
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;51177363]They already have. /pol/ failed to contain the alt-right a long time ago.[/QUOTE]What happened was some people got offended by it and fucked with it, and like a giggling, meth-addled redneck punting a fallen hive of angry wasps at a church picnic it ended up with everyone in sight suffering the consequences.
This is why containment boards/sites are best left alone. Yeah it's funny to troll, but it causes problems. There was a point where "go back to /pol/" could banish most of the ones who escaped containment and the ones who stayed either got abused or were assimilated (or banned) but that time is gone now. I don't even think /pol/ or "the alt-right" is the issue here, I think it's a normalization of those behaviors in places where that was never acceptable. I don't mean using words like nigger and faggot either, that's [U]always[/U] been a thing on 4chan, but instead the "you degenerate cucks deserve to get raped by packs of niggers" type of posts in a thread about gardening of all things. Now when people say ">>>/pol/" it kicks off an argument about that particular poster's supposed hurt feelings and how the Jews and SJWs have turned everyone into "beta nu-males."
What's really frustrating is we can't really ever go back to the way things were before, this is our reality now and we just have to either accept it or wait it out until there's another cultural shift.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;51185916] stuff[/QUOTE]
Its better out in the open, so a dialogue can be made and minds can be changed...
Free speech means publicly displaying shit... its one of the downsides.
~snip~
[editline]12th October 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Joshii;51176779]Hiroyuki has already said to Shkreli or however you spell it that the websites not for sale so don't expect Milo to get anywhere closer either.
I just wish /pol/ would be rid of or split it off into its own website and sell it off to someone who cares cause it's awful when you can't talk about a game on /v/ who has a black character like Battlefield 1 without it derailing to "WE WUZ" posting that seriously needs to go.[/QUOTE]
Who goes on /v/
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
