apparently the twitter alternative gab.ai which doesn't ban people for their views, is a safe space and twitter, which does do that, is not a safe space.
Edited 12/19/2017 05:15:56
Low IQ journalist calls Gab.ai a "safe space": 2017-12-19 21:42:57
Had a glance at the website, but it seems to be a functional safe space. First eight posts were on: Antifa, Comey-Russia, Boots on the ground in Chicago, Polish PM saying "Make Europe Christian Again" (with positive response), "Migrants" later called "asylum seekers" in France, a pro-Trump post, Rape in Sweden, and Twitter purging alt-righters. Regardless of how valid each of these posts were, it's hard to deny that the website is clearly attracting a certain group of people, so it functions as a safe space, whether it fits the exact definition or not. Reminds me a lot of Minds, which similarly attracts a narrow group of people, despite de jure being open.
Low IQ journalist calls Gab.ai a "safe space": 2017-12-19 22:33:53
Understand my argument and enlighten yourself before posting.
Something is a safe space or it isn't. A safe space has to be enforced otherwise it is simply a space in which organic discourse reaches it's own conclusions.
Low IQ journalist calls Gab.ai a "safe space": 2017-12-19 23:06:45
Oops, forgot that yous both have Aspergers which makes you completely unable to understand anything beyond the letter of the law, and anything that isn't official must not exist. You lot must be the life of the party.
Low IQ journalist calls Gab.ai a "safe space": 2017-12-20 04:21:06
