3 ms·
Ultimately it comes down to the sensitivity of the moderators. And we're having this debate because the content moderators at these bay-area big tech companies
by BitwiseFool 6y ago
Ultimately it comes down to the sensitivity of the moderators. And we're having this debate because the content moderators at these bay-area big tech companies are hyper sensitive to content from the right and charitable to content from the left. So they can take a threat from the right seriously, but think that a threat from the left is just hot air.
So someone saying something like "Get rid of traitors!" can be interpreted as a call for war or it could be interpreted as 'take these people out of office by voting!' It all depends on the moderator's worldview and biases.
- sosuke 6y agoOh interpretation. How I loathe thee. It was the bane of my English class experience. You're absolutely right that moderators bias is part of the equation. I was trying to make a delineation between actionable and desirable. Afaik the FBI only looks into and responds to direct actionable threats. My personal stance is that these comments are ugly but I'd only remove them if they fell into that category in which the FBI would take notice.
- BitwiseFool 6y agoIt's funny you mention English class. I've often wondered if people reading too much into things, seeing patterns where there aren't any, or thinking there's some grand design happening is in-part caused by all the reaching and looking for hidden meaning we've been taught to do from English classes. Don't take this hunch too seriously. I have no way to prove it and it's only food for thought.
- benlivengood 6y agoThe fact that there are scholarly critical analysis approaches other than authorial intent means that there will be some misinterpretation of tweets.