4 ms·

This does seem like something of a hostage to fortune, I can't imagine how they intend to moderate it. Obviously people are going to poll their echo-chamber in

This does seem like something of a hostage to fortune, I can't imagine how they intend to moderate it. Obviously people are going to poll their echo-chamber in support of toxic ideas. Even more alarming for Facebook, what if their polls come to be seen as having legitimate democratic force - what Government is going to be comfortable with that? I suspect a dogmatic belief in the goodness of Facebook triumphed over reasoned reflection on the likely uses of this feature.

fwn 8y ago
People are going to poll their connections in support of all kinds of ideas. Some of those ideas will be perceived as toxic by some while some others will be perceived as toxic by others. I think that it's a strange idea to argue against collaboration with the argument that everyone can do it. As if there were something immoral in providing unmoderated collaboration. I'm sharing your second criticism though. The feature is probably designed to gain legitimacy by being the petition platform people actually use. Would be very unwise for a bueraucracy to allow anything like that provided by a private company.
- jimmytidey 8y ago
  You are correct, 'toxic' is a value judgement, I should have said extremist. One problem is that it will be impossible to know if a Facebook poll is representative; most likely it will not be, and will instead be taken mostly by people who already have similar views to the author of the poll. However, the polls may help convince users their views are actually mainstream (even if the "mainstream media" is ignoring them). Such users may feel free to take an even more extreme position if they believe their current views are actually about average. This is one mechanism Cass Sunstein has identified for driving extremism is groups. Voting isn't intrinsically democratic or empowering for voters - North Korea has elections. Presenting informed people with meaningful choices is what matters.
trinkwallopy 8y ago
At this point fb doesnt care about losing small authoritarian regimes. Heck it doesn’t and will never be allowed to have China. I think it’s attempting to fight for legitimacy in the US.. ie trying to raise its brand. Without holding the American cultural ground and inherent approval of Americans, a company based mostly on brand (I’m sure a small shop of extra talented engineers can hack a fb clone together using distributed cloud machines on awe and google), will suffer from user attrition both in the USA and worldwide, as anything not inherently “endeared by Americans themselves” will be seen by the world as the black sheep of America.

fwn 8y ago

People are going to poll their connections in support of all kinds of ideas. Some of those ideas will be perceived as toxic by some while some others will be perceived as toxic by others. I think that it's a strange idea to argue against collaboration with the argument that everyone can do it. As if there were something immoral in providing unmoderated collaboration. I'm sharing your second criticism though. The feature is probably designed to gain legitimacy by being the petition platform people actually use. Would be very unwise for a bueraucracy to allow anything like that provided by a private company.

jimmytidey 8y ago
You are correct, 'toxic' is a value judgement, I should have said extremist. One problem is that it will be impossible to know if a Facebook poll is representative; most likely it will not be, and will instead be taken mostly by people who already have similar views to the author of the poll. However, the polls may help convince users their views are actually mainstream (even if the "mainstream media" is ignoring them). Such users may feel free to take an even more extreme position if they believe their current views are actually about average. This is one mechanism Cass Sunstein has identified for driving extremism is groups. Voting isn't intrinsically democratic or empowering for voters - North Korea has elections. Presenting informed people with meaningful choices is what matters.

trinkwallopy 8y ago

At this point fb doesnt care about losing small authoritarian regimes. Heck it doesn’t and will never be allowed to have China. I think it’s attempting to fight for legitimacy in the US.. ie trying to raise its brand. Without holding the American cultural ground and inherent approval of Americans, a company based mostly on brand (I’m sure a small shop of extra talented engineers can hack a fb clone together using distributed cloud machines on awe and google), will suffer from user attrition both in the USA and worldwide, as anything not inherently “endeared by Americans themselves” will be seen by the world as the black sheep of America.