5 ms·

I disagree with you about Covid. That said we don't need to get into it. Just saying that arguments like: > ..."COVID19 will go away as soon as the election is

I disagree with you about Covid. That said we don't need to get into it. Just saying that arguments like: > ..."COVID19 will go away as soon as the election is over", etc. etc. Tons of terrible takes on the subject... are not terribly likely to sway me. In the same nature as you thinking people like that are crazy, I personally find your views to be wild. But it's nice we can both voice them and remain civil. > Musk was just part of that, and I daresay that falls into fall on conspiracy nut now that we can look back upon the pandemic with 2+ years of hindsight. Particularly: > falls into fall on conspiracy nut now Conspiracy is when a group of people conspire. To have a bad opinion is not to be a conspiracy theorist. If you want to call him a nut for a bad opinion, fine, but I just don't think conspiracy theorist makes sense when it has nothing to do with groups of people conspiring. > But if the COVID19 issue is a bad example / too political for your tastes, then I pivot to the Thailand Pedo guy tweets instead, which hopefully you can agree with me are uncalled for? Maybe I'll check out the Pedo guy tweets. I'm not on twitter, and don't know to which you refer. Frankly I couldn't care much less about Musk. I care a great deal about free speech and throwing conspiracy theorist around as a pejorative. The use of conspiracy theorist as a pejorative is an echo chamber way of attacking the message deliverer and dismissing what they have to say out of hand without consideration of their message. We do that too much in today's society, and considering the corruption present, we really shouldn't. > All-in-all, Elon Musk is NOT a good poster on Twitter, and if he takes over Twitter, I don't think I have much confidence in the long-term benefits of the platform. Its as if other online-trolls decided to take over various media outlets. Sure, maybe fair. I don't know. I feel that if he removes moderation and adds free speech, then it will be a net positive. If any billionaire puts their slant on content moderation, I think its a net negative whether I agree with them or not. So, if he somehow does _just_ bring free speech back, then good. If not, then twitter will just be another biased platform as it has been, but with a new bias.

dragontamer 4y ago
> Sure, maybe fair. I don't know. I feel that if he removes moderation and adds free speech, then it will be a net positive. Do you even Jan 6th insurrection? Donald Trump was removed from the platform because he has, and continues, to be a Jan6th conspiracy theorist. Donald Trump still believes he won the 2020 election. ----- There's also a severe amount of Russian propaganda going around the internet right now. Do you support letting the Russian bots reign free on Twitter? Russia / Moscow are clearly trying to use the internet to spread false information on Ukraine. ------ In any case, having a "jackass" as the leader of Twitter (Pedo Tweet, Elon Musk "funding secured $420", and other such lies) is definitely a reason to leave the platform IMO. Elon Musk will attract other high-profile jackasses at a minimum. The dumbass celebrity shitposting is the worst part of Twitter. I like Twitter mostly as an RSS-like replacement (since RSS itself is not as popular these days), with well-intentioned bloggers sharing information on a "push to serve" basis. But the long-back-and-forth of 2-sentence long debates is... not useful for any form of discussion. It generates traffic and ad-revenue for sure, but its not useful to me. Good debates need longer-form formats, blogposts with multiple paragraphs and data to discuss. I think "thread-reader" and 1/x and 2/x style long-form posts help a lot, but Twitter really isn't designed for medium-form discussion.
- reedjosh 4y ago
  > Do you even Jan 6th insurrection? This is gross language. I assume apparently implying something so obvious as to make my points absurd? Regardless free speech should be welcomed in this case too. People can then just ridicule his opinions and tear them down directly. It's not like he can't reach his audience on Gab or some other network. For background, I'm not pro-Trump. I'm libertarian and think both sides of the spectrum are just legs of the same body that stomps on our freedoms and makes us poor. > Do you support letting the Russian bots reign free on Twitter? With regards to propaganda I think I have an operating brain. As such, I can make up my own mind. As for bots, I do think it would be nice if we could come up with a technical solution guaranteeing a human is posting the tweet. > In any case, having a "jackass" as the leader of Twitter (Pedo Tweet, Elon Musk "funding secured $420", and other such lies) is definitely a reason to leave the platform IMO. Elon Musk will attract other high-profile jackasses at a minimum. Sure. > since RSS itself is not as popular these days Which is really too bad. I really love RSS based podcasting though! > 2-sentence long debates is... not useful for any form of discussion I completely agree.
  - dragontamer 4y ago
    > This is gross language. I assume apparently implying something so obvious as to make my points absurd? Jan 6th insurrection is what started this "Twitter moderation debate" when Donald Trump was banned from the platform. This is absolutely central to the entire discussion, and I'm trying to remind you of it. What should we, as an internet / online society do, to bad actors and/or trolls? I think the solution chosen is obvious. We ban bad actors from online platforms of note. Russia (particularly Russian propaganda sources like RT) are another group, like Trump, who likely deserve the axe. Once you and I agree that some actors deserve to be banned from online platforms, there's not much else to discuss. Its simply a matter of moderation, who truly deserves it or not. I think that moderation is a difficult and thankless job (I've done it myself on occasion). But I absolutely see value in moderating forums / discussions. Twitter banning some bad actors is just a continuation of the online moderation model that we've used for so many years (since USENET at least). ------- The #1 thing going all across conservative media right now, is how Elon Musk (might) bring Trump back to Twitter and reverse the Trump ban. Is this hypothetical something you'd support? There's "free speech", and then there's "inciting rebellion against our entire system of government". And alas, I don't think that supporting the Jan 6th insurrection falls under the "free speech" camp, and that Donald Trump's ban should remain firm. If a group of people want to spread conspiracy theories about the inadequacy of our election systems, then they no longer fall under "free speech" and are instead well within the category of "high treason" and/or "enemy of the state". That's the kind of talk that almost took down our entire country, and still threatens to do so in the next election cycle.

dragontamer 4y ago

> Sure, maybe fair. I don't know. I feel that if he removes moderation and adds free speech, then it will be a net positive. Do you even Jan 6th insurrection? Donald Trump was removed from the platform because he has, and continues, to be a Jan6th conspiracy theorist. Donald Trump still believes he won the 2020 election. ----- There's also a severe amount of Russian propaganda going around the internet right now. Do you support letting the Russian bots reign free on Twitter? Russia / Moscow are clearly trying to use the internet to spread false information on Ukraine. ------ In any case, having a "jackass" as the leader of Twitter (Pedo Tweet, Elon Musk "funding secured $420", and other such lies) is definitely a reason to leave the platform IMO. Elon Musk will attract other high-profile jackasses at a minimum. The dumbass celebrity shitposting is the worst part of Twitter. I like Twitter mostly as an RSS-like replacement (since RSS itself is not as popular these days), with well-intentioned bloggers sharing information on a "push to serve" basis. But the long-back-and-forth of 2-sentence long debates is... not useful for any form of discussion. It generates traffic and ad-revenue for sure, but its not useful to me. Good debates need longer-form formats, blogposts with multiple paragraphs and data to discuss. I think "thread-reader" and 1/x and 2/x style long-form posts help a lot, but Twitter really isn't designed for medium-form discussion.

reedjosh 4y ago
> Do you even Jan 6th insurrection? This is gross language. I assume apparently implying something so obvious as to make my points absurd? Regardless free speech should be welcomed in this case too. People can then just ridicule his opinions and tear them down directly. It's not like he can't reach his audience on Gab or some other network. For background, I'm not pro-Trump. I'm libertarian and think both sides of the spectrum are just legs of the same body that stomps on our freedoms and makes us poor. > Do you support letting the Russian bots reign free on Twitter? With regards to propaganda I think I have an operating brain. As such, I can make up my own mind. As for bots, I do think it would be nice if we could come up with a technical solution guaranteeing a human is posting the tweet. > In any case, having a "jackass" as the leader of Twitter (Pedo Tweet, Elon Musk "funding secured $420", and other such lies) is definitely a reason to leave the platform IMO. Elon Musk will attract other high-profile jackasses at a minimum. Sure. > since RSS itself is not as popular these days Which is really too bad. I really love RSS based podcasting though! > 2-sentence long debates is... not useful for any form of discussion I completely agree.
- dragontamer 4y ago
  > This is gross language. I assume apparently implying something so obvious as to make my points absurd? Jan 6th insurrection is what started this "Twitter moderation debate" when Donald Trump was banned from the platform. This is absolutely central to the entire discussion, and I'm trying to remind you of it. What should we, as an internet / online society do, to bad actors and/or trolls? I think the solution chosen is obvious. We ban bad actors from online platforms of note. Russia (particularly Russian propaganda sources like RT) are another group, like Trump, who likely deserve the axe. Once you and I agree that some actors deserve to be banned from online platforms, there's not much else to discuss. Its simply a matter of moderation, who truly deserves it or not. I think that moderation is a difficult and thankless job (I've done it myself on occasion). But I absolutely see value in moderating forums / discussions. Twitter banning some bad actors is just a continuation of the online moderation model that we've used for so many years (since USENET at least). ------- The #1 thing going all across conservative media right now, is how Elon Musk (might) bring Trump back to Twitter and reverse the Trump ban. Is this hypothetical something you'd support? There's "free speech", and then there's "inciting rebellion against our entire system of government". And alas, I don't think that supporting the Jan 6th insurrection falls under the "free speech" camp, and that Donald Trump's ban should remain firm. If a group of people want to spread conspiracy theories about the inadequacy of our election systems, then they no longer fall under "free speech" and are instead well within the category of "high treason" and/or "enemy of the state". That's the kind of talk that almost took down our entire country, and still threatens to do so in the next election cycle.