6 ms·
>“The powerful want to say that we are entering a dangerous new era where ‘people disliking things en masse’ has coalesced into some kind of crowdsourced [weapo
by Jiro 5y ago
>“The powerful want to say that we are entering a dangerous new era where ‘people disliking things en masse’ has coalesced into some kind of crowdsourced [weapon], firing on arbitrary targets from orbit and vaporizing their reputations,” she wrote to me in an email. “The use of mass social sanction gives the less powerful a weapon against the more powerful, so long as they can mobilize loudly and persistently. This is not new. Shame and laughter are vital tools for freedom.”
>She cautions, however, that “like all weapons, it will do the most damage when aimed at the least defended, the isolated, those with no one to stand up for them, publicly or privately. And we must be careful with the temptation to use it inside our own houses to destroy shapes we think are intruders.”
Repeating what I said elsewhere: If you support mobs, and the mob makes a mistake and attacks you or a friendly target, that's your own fault. Stop supporting mobs. Don't say "mobs are great, as long as they attack the powerful and avoid 'our own houses'".
We know that mobs don't use nuance in picking their targets. Mobs hardly ever read what they're complaining about, and mobs freely ignore mitigating circumstances. So it really isn't surprising when the mob doesn't read your story and ignores that you're using the meme sarcastically.
- jgon 5y ago“I didn’t think the leopards would eat my face!” says person who supports leopards eating people’s faces as an effective weapon for the less powerful against the more powerful.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- MomoXenosaga 5y agoThe revolution turns on itself. Predictable.
- busterarm 5y agoRoar! is a pretty great movie!
- Wowfunhappy 5y agoI think the situation is considerably more nuanced. Firstly, I haven't seen anything to suggest that Isabel Fall supported "mobs." In the quoted paragraphs, she was speaking about social media more generally. Secondly, communities do need immune systems. If you don't enforce some set of norms, everything goes downhill quickly. I don't know about you, but I don't like it when trolls come onto Hacker News and post incendiary nonsense for the sole purpose of starting flamewars; I imagine queer fiction communities don't appreciate that either.
- Dracophoenix 5y ago>>Secondly, communities do need immune systems. If you don't enforce some set of norms, everything goes downhill quickly. I don't know about you, but I don't like it when trolls come onto Hacker News and post incendiary nonsense for the sole purpose of starting flamewars, and I imagine queer fiction communities don't appreciate it either. Where do communities come from and when does something become a community? All I've observed is that individuals, for whatever reason, build a group around a shared liking or a shared hatred, not a formal vote. In a mob, verbally attacking a person of interest is normal. In fiction communities verbally attacking a subject of interest is normal, (even if the subject is happens to be what should be considered normal). While it's important for individuals to learn not to feed the trolls, there has to be room for disagreement. Even if it's vociferous disagreement.
- Wowfunhappy 5y agoThe trouble is of course that communities form organically, and so they frequently need to be policed organically. And I'm not convinced the line between a "mob" and a "grass roots movement" actually exists. Just for the purposes of illustration: Were the protests in Egypt a decade ago, or in Hong Kong more recently, "mobs"? Why, and who decides?
- Dracophoenix 5y ago>>The trouble is of course that communities form organically, and so they frequently need to be policed organically. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? >>And I'm not convinced the line between a "mob" and a "grass roots movement" actually exists. To which I agree. In their mechanics there is little difference between one group and other. Just like there's little difference between soldiers and mercenaires. >>Just for the purposes of illustration: Were the protests in Egypt a decade ago, or in Hong Kong more recently, "mobs"? Why, and who decides? They are mobs to people who, rightly or wrongly, wanted to discredit them (respectively the Mubarek regime and the Chinese government). A stronger set of examples you could have compared are how the American news organizations reported the more violent elements of the George Floyd protests (statue topplings, burglary, arson, etc.) and the January 6 riots. But if you mean in an objective sense, I'm asking the same questions as you are. Those two questions are the determining factors to what a community will be immune from and what "norms" to consider appropriate. But they have to assessed on an individual level lest one creates a cult or a dictatorship.