hey, thanks for your well articulated noninflammatory comment. I agree with you on some points but as always there is a lot of nuance to things. > But what if

hey, thanks for your well articulated noninflammatory comment. I agree with you on some points but as always there is a lot of nuance to things. > But what if it’s not as simple as “this side is making everything up, and the other side is 100% honest”. I don't think there are many absolute truths. Even in science, things that we thought were true change - all the time. It's not about being 100% correct. As far as honesty goes there is always an agenda. > You could easily turn that argument around and say that the right is going to great lengths to have their evidence investigated, while the left is just trying to make it go away. Surely “energy expended” is not a great metric for judging bullshit. I disagree. I don't see this as a right or a left issue. I see it as working with each other for an outcome that makes everyone's lives better. Energy expended is a great metric. Can you explain why all Americans had to pay attention all day, every day, to what I would describe as at best a clown? Why not put the American people ahead and do the right thing? Why did we turn an institution that is supposed to be one of the foundations of this country into a reality show? There is a time and a place to investigate and ask questions and a time and a place to just, you know, accept reality. There was ample time to do this before the elections. Before judging if youtube could of, should of, let's ask ourselves what are the possible outcomes here? You either damage out democracy and freedom or you damage our democracy and freedom. Great choices. > Don’t get me wrong, though. I’m not making a “free speech” argument. Of course YouTube is free to curate whatever they want to, and competitors are free to provide alternatives for users that want that. THAT is free speech. My argument was not “YouTube can’t legally do this”, it was more trying to appeal to this notion some folks have that a topic of discussion merely existing is dangerous, and that somehow removing all of that discussion will eliminate that danger. You are free to discuss whatever you want. We are all free to talk about what we think happened, what should have happened, what is wrong with x and y. The fundamental problem is that when you come into my house and start arguing with me I have the right to kick you out. My house, my rules. Swap my house with youtube. That's all. I didn't attach any moral value of good or wrong to what they did. Content is moderated and "censored" all day, every day and nobody bats an eyelid. But because it's Google (ie BigTech) w/ youtube let's climb on our moral high horse and talk principles. > Hello tribalism. You know this but I'll point it out anyway. If you think that all people have the same experience when they google for something or when they watch youtube you're in for a shock. The same machines that censor you, learn what you like and surface content that is similar. We are all already in a bubble.