4 ms·

> This is absolutely central to the entire discussion, and I'm trying to remind you of it. I don't think there's much to remind me of. I'm not on twitter and n

> This is absolutely central to the entire discussion, and I'm trying to remind you of it. I don't think there's much to remind me of. I'm not on twitter and never really had the debate until now. > What should we, as an internet / online society do, to bad actors and/or trolls? Point out where they're factually incorrect. Ignore them. Ridicule them. > I think the solution chosen is obvious. This doesn't make it right. > Once you and I agree that some actors deserve to be banned from online platforms, there's not much else to discuss. I don't agree. And frankly, you just pointed out a a slippery slope that is exactly why I think you shouldn't ban anyone. > But I absolutely see value in moderating forums / discussions. I'm on the fence. Moderation is probably fine, but I don't like when megacorps do it. Centralization of power is my biggest concern. > The #1 thing going all across conservative media right now, is... I don't care. In my mind conservative and liberal media, cable news networks, and NPR, Etc... are just mouthpeices for the government and or corporatocracy. So long as the funding comes from a government or advertising, it's junk media in my mind. > There's "free speech", and then there's "inciting rebellion against our entire system of government". I would like you and me to peacefully rebel against our current system of government. Stop voting and stop paying taxes. Stop registering your vehicle, and stop getting government involved in marriage licensing. Let the whole dirtly system dissolve so we can be free individuals. There, I openly incited rebellion. I'm sure you disagree, but that's not the point. > I don't think that supporting the Jan 6th insurrection falls under the "free speech" camp I disagree. But I think we're running in circles now. > 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". Wow, that's pretty dogmatic. Who watches the watchers? At some point a hammer like that will be used against perfectly peaceful people. Your statement sounds like it belongs in 1984 bequeathed by the Ministry of Truth. What if there at some point is an issue with the voting systems? > particularly Russian propaganda sources like RT One man's propaganda is another's BBC. BBC and NPR are both sponsored by governments that have bad track records of abuse of human rights. Why is Voice of America still allowed to operate on Twitter?

dragontamer 4y ago
> Point out where they're factually incorrect. Ignore them. Ridicule them. Good luck with that. Trump, and his followers, today still believe the election was stolen. I don't believe there's any way to convince them otherwise. The only thing that can happen is to mitigate the damage. You're welcome to try to convince them. I've done what I can from my side. > Ridicule them. That doesn't work for state-sponsored propaganda sites like RT. These groups have access to huge amounts of state-sponsored money and hire troll-farms from 3rd world countries to gaslight the discussion. The opposite occurs, I'm ridiculed more often than not with these ridiculous discussion points. Its a losing battle because I fight fair, while they fight by buying up troll farms. Unless I myself use a ton of fake accounts to build up a fake-following and build up a fake discussion, there's pretty much no hope at actually reaching critical mass and making discussion points move. ------- The same occurs with billionare-level supporters like Elon Musk and/or Trump. They have the money to buy up false support and astroturf their supporters. You're up against literal professionals, who are paid per tweet to make the discussion look like their sponsored billionare is winning the discussions. Its not quite as bad as state-sponsored propaganda like RT, but still bad. You are naive. You aren't aware of the tactics being used in the modern social networks or how poisoned the discussion has become. -------- > Why is Voice of America still allowed to operate on Twitter? Are you seriously comparing BBC and Voice of America to RT? What side of the Ukrainian war are you on? > I disagree. But I think we're running in circles now. You're free to disagree, and I'm free to think of you as naive fool for doing so. At best, you're unaware of the tactics. At worst, you're in tacit support of them and are trying to convince me that the pro-Trump Jan6th insurrection crowd is a reasonable group that can hold a discussion with. Alas, my experience says otherwise, and there's nothing you can say to convince me otherwise. Because I have actually talked to many Jan6th truthers and alt-right people on my own time. I've also discussed the Russian/Ukraine issue with pro-Russian / RT-supporters. Its not like their "free speech" has disappeared off the face of the internet. I still seek them out for debate and they're readily available to discuss the issues with me.
- reedjosh 4y ago
  > Good luck with that. > You're welcome to try to convince them. I've done what I can from my side. Bit defeatist, but fair enough. > Its a losing battle because I fight fair, while they fight by buying up troll farms. Now who's the conspiracy theorist? Who's they!? Just ribbin' you. : ) > You are naive. You aren't aware of the tactics being used in the modern social networks or how poisoned the discussion has become. I've read some articles and have found most of this to be unconvincing. I think you're probably right that Twitter lends itself to bad conversation. But, just because a bunch of bots show up with false information or call me a dork, doesn't mean I have to believe them. I can verify sources, and quantity != quality when it comes to shitposts. > Are you seriously comparing BBC and Voice of America to RT? What side of the Ukrainian war are you on I'm on the side that understands without governments there aren't wars. > You're free to disagree, and I'm free to think of you as naive fool for doing so. Yup. > Because I have actually talked to many Jan6th truthers and alt-right people on my own time. Not unique to your experience. Many of that view run in my circles. > Alas, my experience says otherwise, and there's nothing you can say to convince me otherwise. Okay. Well talking to an immovable wall isn't a good look, so I'll drop it. > Its not like their "free speech" has disappeared off the face of the internet. Yup, which is why I don't care too much about Twitter either way. I'm just an advocate for free speech. @dragontamer, Thank you for the extended discussion. I'm going to try to get some work done. Hope you have a great evening (assuming it's near night wherever you are) Cheers, - reedjosh

dragontamer 4y ago

> Point out where they're factually incorrect. Ignore them. Ridicule them. Good luck with that. Trump, and his followers, today still believe the election was stolen. I don't believe there's any way to convince them otherwise. The only thing that can happen is to mitigate the damage. You're welcome to try to convince them. I've done what I can from my side. > Ridicule them. That doesn't work for state-sponsored propaganda sites like RT. These groups have access to huge amounts of state-sponsored money and hire troll-farms from 3rd world countries to gaslight the discussion. The opposite occurs, I'm ridiculed more often than not with these ridiculous discussion points. Its a losing battle because I fight fair, while they fight by buying up troll farms. Unless I myself use a ton of fake accounts to build up a fake-following and build up a fake discussion, there's pretty much no hope at actually reaching critical mass and making discussion points move. ------- The same occurs with billionare-level supporters like Elon Musk and/or Trump. They have the money to buy up false support and astroturf their supporters. You're up against literal professionals, who are paid per tweet to make the discussion look like their sponsored billionare is winning the discussions. Its not quite as bad as state-sponsored propaganda like RT, but still bad. You are naive. You aren't aware of the tactics being used in the modern social networks or how poisoned the discussion has become. -------- > Why is Voice of America still allowed to operate on Twitter? Are you seriously comparing BBC and Voice of America to RT? What side of the Ukrainian war are you on? > I disagree. But I think we're running in circles now. You're free to disagree, and I'm free to think of you as naive fool for doing so. At best, you're unaware of the tactics. At worst, you're in tacit support of them and are trying to convince me that the pro-Trump Jan6th insurrection crowd is a reasonable group that can hold a discussion with. Alas, my experience says otherwise, and there's nothing you can say to convince me otherwise. Because I have actually talked to many Jan6th truthers and alt-right people on my own time. I've also discussed the Russian/Ukraine issue with pro-Russian / RT-supporters. Its not like their "free speech" has disappeared off the face of the internet. I still seek them out for debate and they're readily available to discuss the issues with me.

reedjosh 4y ago
> Good luck with that. > You're welcome to try to convince them. I've done what I can from my side. Bit defeatist, but fair enough. > Its a losing battle because I fight fair, while they fight by buying up troll farms. Now who's the conspiracy theorist? Who's they!? Just ribbin' you. : ) > You are naive. You aren't aware of the tactics being used in the modern social networks or how poisoned the discussion has become. I've read some articles and have found most of this to be unconvincing. I think you're probably right that Twitter lends itself to bad conversation. But, just because a bunch of bots show up with false information or call me a dork, doesn't mean I have to believe them. I can verify sources, and quantity != quality when it comes to shitposts. > Are you seriously comparing BBC and Voice of America to RT? What side of the Ukrainian war are you on I'm on the side that understands without governments there aren't wars. > You're free to disagree, and I'm free to think of you as naive fool for doing so. Yup. > Because I have actually talked to many Jan6th truthers and alt-right people on my own time. Not unique to your experience. Many of that view run in my circles. > Alas, my experience says otherwise, and there's nothing you can say to convince me otherwise. Okay. Well talking to an immovable wall isn't a good look, so I'll drop it. > Its not like their "free speech" has disappeared off the face of the internet. Yup, which is why I don't care too much about Twitter either way. I'm just an advocate for free speech. @dragontamer, Thank you for the extended discussion. I'm going to try to get some work done. Hope you have a great evening (assuming it's near night wherever you are) Cheers, - reedjosh