4 ms·

Mobbing on social media seems to be a real problem. Many articles have be written about it and we need solutions. I think it sucks that Wil can’t function on s

Mobbing on social media seems to be a real problem. Many articles have be written about it and we need solutions. I think it sucks that Wil can’t function on social media because of it. As for the essay, it is philosophically a huge contradiction. He’s upset that twitter allows Alex Jones to post, while being upset he is being essentially blocked on social media? But then he calls the sitting president of the United States juvenile and hateful nicknames? So which is it? The essay writes from the assumption he has the moral high ground and is being victimized. The mobbing stuff is a legit problem and attack and makes me sympathetic. The rest completely undermines his point.

extra88 8y ago
Alex Jones's speech is not equivalent to Wil's. Jones is accused of inciting harassment and violence, and defaming private citizens. Objecting to Jones's presence and to harassment is not hypocrisy. There are two arguments against Twitter; one is they're not equally applying their own standards, ignoring the behaviors of people like Jones and Trump while punishing people who are seen as victims. The other is Twitter's standards and tools for dealing with harassment are insufficient. I don't know if the former is true or not but the latter seems to be proven by people finding it impossible to use the platform, as-is. I don't really understand the thinking behind leaving a large platform because people you don't like also use it. The vast majority of people using Twitter, Reddit, etc. are not objectionable. To act like the presence of a few bad ones A) will harm your reputation if you also use it and/or B) your use constitutes an endorsement of them or even of the platform, seems silly. Leaving because you're personally harassed or have a hard time finding the content or conversation you're looking for is not silly.

extra88 8y ago

Alex Jones's speech is not equivalent to Wil's. Jones is accused of inciting harassment and violence, and defaming private citizens. Objecting to Jones's presence and to harassment is not hypocrisy. There are two arguments against Twitter; one is they're not equally applying their own standards, ignoring the behaviors of people like Jones and Trump while punishing people who are seen as victims. The other is Twitter's standards and tools for dealing with harassment are insufficient. I don't know if the former is true or not but the latter seems to be proven by people finding it impossible to use the platform, as-is. I don't really understand the thinking behind leaving a large platform because people you don't like also use it. The vast majority of people using Twitter, Reddit, etc. are not objectionable. To act like the presence of a few bad ones A) will harm your reputation if you also use it and/or B) your use constitutes an endorsement of them or even of the platform, seems silly. Leaving because you're personally harassed or have a hard time finding the content or conversation you're looking for is not silly.