3 ms·

it's a tough problem to solve or reason about. i personally don't have any answers around this, but do you allow hate to spread and then be reactive about it an

by volkk 6y ago

it's a tough problem to solve or reason about. i personally don't have any answers around this, but do you allow hate to spread and then be reactive about it and deal with the consequences? or do you nip it at the bud proactively allowing for potentially something that you wrote? some sort of censorship. how do you deal with it?

pc86 6y ago
Is it wrong to think that people elected to lead should be treated differently during their tenure in office? Regardless of better/worse, harder/softer, etc, I don't necessarily think that's immediately an indictment of Twitter to have POTUS say something outlandish and have nothing done, and have a bot account say the same thing and get banned. For all we know at noon on Jan. 20th Twitter will ban Trump's entire family.
s_y_n_t_a_x 6y ago
How about don't remove anyone or anyone's post unless it's illegal? Certainly don't target certain politicians while leaving others alone. When you can't win your argument on merit, you censor. It's up to the politicians and constituents to call out lies, why should some Ministry of Truth decide what's a lie?
- volkk 6y ago
  i don't necessarily disagree, but what happens when other politicians/constituents aren't doing their jobs?
  - s_y_n_t_a_x 6y ago
    That's a hypothetical I disagree with. Politicians will always address their counterparts and should always try to inform their constituents. It's up to the constituents to stay educated. Censoring politicians because people might be too stupid is a really bad reason.
    - volkk 6y ago
      sure, but realistically this is exactly what has been happening if you just look at the last few years. many people are extremely misinformed and there are tons of propaganda campaigns. finding the real truth is borderline impossible. what is the solution? continue as is until someone more and more radical comes along bending truth to their will? there's gotta be some middle ground between a ministry of truth and just completely lawlessness.
      - s_y_n_t_a_x 6y ago
        > if you just look at the last few years No, you've been told that because people aren't happy with the current status quo. There has always been propaganda and the truth is always possible to find. Unless you have something specific I feel like you're using hyperboles (think of the children!!!) to win your way. It's not lawlessness, people aren't extremely misinformed (if they are that's on them), the truth isn't borderline impossible. This truth hunt will die out when the people seeking it are back in charge. Yes remove threats, but don't remove lies. Having lies on your platform is not lawlessness, it's the internet. If you don't want lies then take 230 away from them and make them take down libel/slander/lies that EVERYONE says, not just the people they choose to target.

by volkk 6y ago

pc86 6y ago

Is it wrong to think that people elected to lead should be treated differently during their tenure in office? Regardless of better/worse, harder/softer, etc, I don't necessarily think that's immediately an indictment of Twitter to have POTUS say something outlandish and have nothing done, and have a bot account say the same thing and get banned. For all we know at noon on Jan. 20th Twitter will ban Trump's entire family.

s_y_n_t_a_x 6y ago

How about don't remove anyone or anyone's post unless it's illegal? Certainly don't target certain politicians while leaving others alone. When you can't win your argument on merit, you censor. It's up to the politicians and constituents to call out lies, why should some Ministry of Truth decide what's a lie?

volkk 6y ago
i don't necessarily disagree, but what happens when other politicians/constituents aren't doing their jobs?
- s_y_n_t_a_x 6y ago
  That's a hypothetical I disagree with. Politicians will always address their counterparts and should always try to inform their constituents. It's up to the constituents to stay educated. Censoring politicians because people might be too stupid is a really bad reason.
  - volkk 6y ago
    sure, but realistically this is exactly what has been happening if you just look at the last few years. many people are extremely misinformed and there are tons of propaganda campaigns. finding the real truth is borderline impossible. what is the solution? continue as is until someone more and more radical comes along bending truth to their will? there's gotta be some middle ground between a ministry of truth and just completely lawlessness.
    - s_y_n_t_a_x 6y ago
      > if you just look at the last few years No, you've been told that because people aren't happy with the current status quo. There has always been propaganda and the truth is always possible to find. Unless you have something specific I feel like you're using hyperboles (think of the children!!!) to win your way. It's not lawlessness, people aren't extremely misinformed (if they are that's on them), the truth isn't borderline impossible. This truth hunt will die out when the people seeking it are back in charge. Yes remove threats, but don't remove lies. Having lies on your platform is not lawlessness, it's the internet. If you don't want lies then take 230 away from them and make them take down libel/slander/lies that EVERYONE says, not just the people they choose to target.