4 ms·
I loathe Facebook, but I don't see how this is going to help. It might help a bit in the short term, but will it really help long term? Even if it does, how man
by akudha 6y ago
I loathe Facebook, but I don't see how this is going to help. It might help a bit in the short term, but will it really help long term? Even if it does, how many social networks are they going to ban? Surely someone else will take Facebook's place?
Personally I will be happy if Facebook goes away, but I don't know if this is the right way to do it.
- Darmody 6y agoI agree. Will Twitter be available? Because in some cases is even worse. Will they ban every social network? If so, what criteria will they use to flag a website as social network? I think their premise is correct. Facebook is bad. But their solution doesn't make sense.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoBetter than waiting for Facebook to regulate itself or a national government to regulate it away, which might never happen. Incremental progress with the tools available to you.
- conductr 6y agoIgnoring likely political motivations. I’d say you’re correct, technically, but if you have a bias for action this is what is available to you.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y agoThe overton window is the range of acceptable topics of discussion in society, and is largely determined by a social network's size and diversity. The larger and more diverse a network is, the more likely a statement is to offend someone. Many of the social issues we see are caused by the overton window narrowing so quickly and fiercely that it's causing backlash. I'd bet that by slowing this restriction, we'd reduce the chance of social and governmental conflicts arising from swift social change. Banning facebook would do this.
- bmelton 6y agoI agree with this completely, with one small addendum. A large and diverse network is likely to offend more as more people come into contact with people they don't already have familiarity with, and less as they are less likely to come into contact with people they do. Rephrased: I'm better able to tell sincerity from my dear friend Eliza when she says something, whereas those same words phrased the exact same way may cause offense when heard from a stranger at a bar.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y agoWhile you are right, the growing cancel culture changes this dynamic and makes it potentially risky to offend someone else. If I say the wrong thing that would have been acceptable to say two decades ago, I could have my career ruined and my family put at risk of doxxing. This makes my personal (in)sensitivity irrelevant, the overton window is still restricted and causes social pressures.
- pjc50 6y agoThis is another "I can't get away with saying the N word in public without being fired" post, isn't it.
- SuoDuanDao 6y agoHow about an "I just learned it's insulting to call some people articulate and now I'm hesitant to compliment any minority co-worker in any way so who are you really helping?" post?
- kevinmchugh 6y agoI think I'm missing something here . Is cancel culture a big problem in the Solomon Islands?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- jiofih 6y agoFacebook may have played a special part here with their real name policy. Before, it was normal to have a relatively anonymous persona online, which drastically reduces the bullying and reputation risks.
- jedimastert 6y agoReputation, maybe, but in my experience people are FAR more likely to bully others online when it can't splash back on to the real world
- SuoDuanDao 6y agoFar more likely to try perhaps, but it's harder to bully someone in an all-anonymouse space. Still happens of course, but I find it easier to stick up for oneself.
- InitialLastName 6y agoWhen things are anonymous, there are fewer real-world consequences on the line, so bullying is less impactful. Malicious actors can threaten whatever they like, anonymous or no, but as soon as names are public we've seen that there's a much higher risk (even just perceiving it makes it so) that threats online can turn into threats in the real world.