6 ms·

I imagine this will do a speed run of unbanning -> turning into a cesspit of toxicity because ‘free speech’ -> lots of people leave because it’s so unpleasant.

by Nursie 4y ago

I imagine this will do a speed run of unbanning -> turning into a cesspit of toxicity because ‘free speech’ -> lots of people leave because it’s so unpleasant. It’ll be fun to watch though, as someone that’s never valued the site.

socialismisok 4y ago
Not sure why you are being downvoted, it's a very reasonable hypothesis.
- Nursie 4y ago
  I ended up with 0 points, so balanced reactions overall :) I think it’s a valid hypothesis. I’ve been on the internet long enough to know that places with no rules end up toxic. Heck, I participated in kuro5hin long after it turned into whatever the hell it turned into after the initial honeymoon period grew stale. And the tail end of people using usenet for actual discussion, rather than piracy… I’ve seen the chans too. It’s a repeating pattern; toxicity takes over, attracts more toxicity and drives out any attempts at normal discourse, this accelerates until you’re left with either a toxic trollfest or the whole thing just dies or both. Musk is either going to turn Twitter into one of those, or he’s going to have to moderate effectively. I find all the “but free speech!” stuff very naive. Fine principle, but it kills online communities.
bakugo 4y ago
> turning into a cesspit of toxicity because ‘free speech’ Twitter is already a cesspit of toxicity because of the lack of free speech. This won't make it any worse.
- socialismisok 4y ago
  I mean, you don't have free speech here either. Mods will absolutely come in and remove content and ban you for many of the same things Twitter will.
  - bakugo 4y ago
    Not entirely untrue, but the difference is that here, if someone posts "I really hate [group of people] and I wish they'd die" it's generally considered breaking the rules, but on twitter whether or not this statement breaks the rules depends on what group of people you targeted.
    - socialismisok 4y ago
      Citation needed. Can you find a tweet that says that, report it and tell if me it's found to have violated the rules? I see leftists in my communities getting banned all the time.
      - bakugo 4y ago
        Here's a compilation from verified accounts only: https://i.imgur.com/nkN539Q.png https://i.imgur.com/nkN539Q.png Vast majority of these accounts were never banned and many of the tweets are still up today.
        socialismisok 4y ago
        I'll take a look when I'm not on mobile. My guess is that I'll say many of these should be deleted.
        socialismisok 4y ago
        Took a look at these. Some should be deleted. "End white people" is arguably a call to violence akin to what gets the right banned. Some lack context. The first one, for instance, still exists but it's a reply to a tweet that doesn't. It's possible this is sarcasm. Some are clearly in bounds, like, what's Jack May's tweet saying that should be against the rules? (Third column). Or Lena Dunham arguing that we're not causing the extinction of white men? Or someone saying, "can you cite a recent example of a figure expressing racism against white people?" And then there are all the "I hate white people" comments. Personally we're likely to disagree about them. I think it's important to contextualize history and who has power when you moderate. Punching up is different than punching down, in my opinion. It's different to say "I hate the wealthy" and "I hate the poor". "I hate a minority" is different than "I hate the majority [who have a history of being oppressors]". I think it's really tacky for these folks to tweet this, and it's not something I'd tweet, so for me it falls into a grey area. I can reasonably see your argument that these are the same as, e.g., "I hate gay people" because it's expressing hate based on identity. If Twitter went the way of saying "expressing hate towards an group based on traits they cannot control is against the rules" I'd say that I don't think that's nuanced enough, but I could live with it. Thanks for sharing a source, it was interesting to dive in here.
- takoid 4y ago
  It will only become worse for those who benefited from Twitter’s censorship.
  - bediger4000 4y ago
    I had to think a minute, but I agree with you. Lots of unmoderated free speech will make Twitter worse for ordinary folks, who don't want to be spammed with ads, but also an assortment of porn, aggressive politics bot and weirdos.
    - bakugo 4y ago
      > who don't want to be spammed with ads, but also an assortment of porn, aggressive politics bot and weirdos. Are we talking about the same website here? Because twitter has been full of this for many years. Maybe you just don't notice it because the content in question is politically agreeable to you.
    - pessimizer 4y ago
      There has never been a point on twitter where you couldn't repeatedly accuse a person of sucking Putin's cock after every single tweet they made, and no point when you had to attempt at all to conceal your association with organized, named groups who coordinate this outside of twitter. That being said, Musk relies on government contracts and subsidy for almost every aspect of his empire, so I don't see any changes coming.
      - bediger4000 4y ago
        The "ergonomics" and incentives of Twitter do seem to encourage all-or-nothing, ignoring or dogpiling, on something. See the "Main Character of the Day" phenomenon.
- Sohcahtoa82 4y ago
  I guess it depends on which side you believe is more toxic. It's strange you would take the side that limiting bigotry, racism, homophobia, and transphobia is what creates toxicity.
  - bakugo 4y ago
    Stopping people from stating facts and forcing them to respect the emperor's new clothes by force creates toxicity, yes.
    - socialismisok 4y ago
      Which facts, specifically. Please go on the record.
      - bakugo 4y ago
        Nice try! I assume you're a distraught twitter user because this feels like an exchange that would happen there.
        socialismisok 4y ago
        So you are unwilling to say what, specifically, you believe in and instead prefer to gesture vaguely. And nope, I'm not a Twitter user. I was, until about 4 years ago. Not a Facebook user either. I was, until about a decade ago. I don't think either are particularly healthy places.
      - Nicksil 4y ago
        >Which facts, specifically. Please go on the record. This is incitement.
        socialismisok 4y ago
        LOL. Incitement of "to have a discussion we need concrete opinions".
- thedorkknight 4y ago
  I agree with your first sentence but completely disagree with the second one
- electrondood 4y ago
  I don't understand how people keep conflating First Amendment Constitutional rights with the additional layer of "this is a private platform, we prefer not to have it overrun with assholes that make it really unpleasant for everyone else." 1A rights apply to GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE in your expression. There is no "lack of free speech on Twitter," nor do they owe anyone unrestricted freedom to spread disinfo and hate speech.
  - bakugo 4y ago
    And yet many Twitter users are acting like they are entitled to being provided a safe space away from what they consider to be "disinfo" and "hate speech" by Elon. Why is this?
  - gremlinsinc 4y ago
    This! So much... No body is owed a platform. I grew up in the 80s you had to be a news personality or famous to reach people. Echo chambers weren't a thing because the chamber was your neighbors and some of them would probably laugh in your face at crazy things or slap you if it's offensive. When you can join groups where you know it's safe to say whatever, you will, and you'll be emboldened and think that's how everyone thinks she it's dangerous to operate in the world with that level of group think, especially if the group values ignorance and conformity(fascism) over free thought, expression, and diversity.
    - xigoi 4y ago
      Most people would also laugh at you if you said you're demiromantic bunnygender.
  - 5560675260 4y ago
    You confusion stems from conflating 1A and freedom of speech. It's reasonable to expect a corporation of Twitter's influence and size to recognise this particular human right.
- wayeq 4y ago
  ever been to 4chan?
hirundo 4y ago
You know what would be sweeter than shadenfreud? For Elon to find a way to make it a bit easier for people to understand each other. Maybe it's unlikely but it doesn't seem impossible, and I'd rather root for that success.
- Sohcahtoa82 4y ago
  Eliminating the character limit would help. It allows people to include nuance and encourages more in-depth discussion, rather than trying to fit an "own" in 280 characters or less. I'm convinced that the collapse of sensible political discussion happened for two reasons: The Internet gave every dumbass a megaphone, and the rise of Twitter removing all nuance from the discussions.
bediger4000 4y ago
I think you're correct. The example of the Heat Death of Usenet seems relevant. If you don't trim spam and annoyances, people leave. I think Musk's Twitter will be an interesting test, if Musk allows enough unfettered speech.
- fallingknife 4y ago
  Both Reddit and Twitter were basically free for alls until 2015 or so. Their user numbers were growing strongly. So I don't buy the whole offensive speech is going to drive off users angle. Spam is a different story, but Elon Musk has never said he is going to allow that.
  - socialismisok 4y ago
    Why not allow spam? Surely the marketplace of ideas should be as free and open as possible?
    - PubliusMI 4y ago
      Holy shit ban this troll
      - socialismisok 4y ago
        Hardly. The point I'm making is that any platform with user supplied content must have moderation of some speech. No platform can exist totally unmoderated at Twitter's scale. So then the discussion is about where you draw the line, what speech you permit and what speech you prohibit. Apparently, there is a community of folks who believe Twitter should allow racism on the platform, despite it currently being disallowed. I think it's more than fair to say, "if you are allowing speech most people would find offensive and was previously banned, how far are you willing to push that needle?" Bigotry is one thing, but what else is on the table? Elon Musk has repeatedly indicated he believes in free speech and the marketplace of ideas. I think it's more than fair to ask what his limits are.
  - bediger4000 4y ago
pessimizer 4y ago
> I imagine this will do a speed run of unbanning -> turning into a cesspit of toxicity because ‘free speech’ -> lots of people leave because it’s so unpleasant. I imagine this is a repetition of what every single article in a mainstream outlet has insisted will happen for months, rather than an insight.
electrondood 4y ago
Twitter will inevitably return to its current state. Gettr, Parler, and Truth Social all quietly discovered this lesson and had to figure out moderation and started banning users. Welcome to hell, Elon: https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/28/23428132/elon-musk-twitter-acquisition-problems-speech-moderation https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/28/23428132/elon-musk-twitt...

by Nursie 4y ago

socialismisok 4y ago

Not sure why you are being downvoted, it's a very reasonable hypothesis.

Nursie 4y ago
I ended up with 0 points, so balanced reactions overall :) I think it’s a valid hypothesis. I’ve been on the internet long enough to know that places with no rules end up toxic. Heck, I participated in kuro5hin long after it turned into whatever the hell it turned into after the initial honeymoon period grew stale. And the tail end of people using usenet for actual discussion, rather than piracy… I’ve seen the chans too. It’s a repeating pattern; toxicity takes over, attracts more toxicity and drives out any attempts at normal discourse, this accelerates until you’re left with either a toxic trollfest or the whole thing just dies or both. Musk is either going to turn Twitter into one of those, or he’s going to have to moderate effectively. I find all the “but free speech!” stuff very naive. Fine principle, but it kills online communities.

bakugo 4y ago

> turning into a cesspit of toxicity because ‘free speech’ Twitter is already a cesspit of toxicity because of the lack of free speech. This won't make it any worse.

socialismisok 4y ago
I mean, you don't have free speech here either. Mods will absolutely come in and remove content and ban you for many of the same things Twitter will.
- bakugo 4y ago
  Not entirely untrue, but the difference is that here, if someone posts "I really hate [group of people] and I wish they'd die" it's generally considered breaking the rules, but on twitter whether or not this statement breaks the rules depends on what group of people you targeted.
  - socialismisok 4y ago
    Citation needed. Can you find a tweet that says that, report it and tell if me it's found to have violated the rules? I see leftists in my communities getting banned all the time.
    - bakugo 4y ago
      Here's a compilation from verified accounts only: https://i.imgur.com/nkN539Q.png https://i.imgur.com/nkN539Q.png Vast majority of these accounts were never banned and many of the tweets are still up today.
      - socialismisok 4y ago
        I'll take a look when I'm not on mobile. My guess is that I'll say many of these should be deleted.
        socialismisok 4y ago
        Took a look at these. Some should be deleted. "End white people" is arguably a call to violence akin to what gets the right banned. Some lack context. The first one, for instance, still exists but it's a reply to a tweet that doesn't. It's possible this is sarcasm. Some are clearly in bounds, like, what's Jack May's tweet saying that should be against the rules? (Third column). Or Lena Dunham arguing that we're not causing the extinction of white men? Or someone saying, "can you cite a recent example of a figure expressing racism against white people?" And then there are all the "I hate white people" comments. Personally we're likely to disagree about them. I think it's important to contextualize history and who has power when you moderate. Punching up is different than punching down, in my opinion. It's different to say "I hate the wealthy" and "I hate the poor". "I hate a minority" is different than "I hate the majority [who have a history of being oppressors]". I think it's really tacky for these folks to tweet this, and it's not something I'd tweet, so for me it falls into a grey area. I can reasonably see your argument that these are the same as, e.g., "I hate gay people" because it's expressing hate based on identity. If Twitter went the way of saying "expressing hate towards an group based on traits they cannot control is against the rules" I'd say that I don't think that's nuanced enough, but I could live with it. Thanks for sharing a source, it was interesting to dive in here.
takoid 4y ago
It will only become worse for those who benefited from Twitter’s censorship.
- bediger4000 4y ago
  I had to think a minute, but I agree with you. Lots of unmoderated free speech will make Twitter worse for ordinary folks, who don't want to be spammed with ads, but also an assortment of porn, aggressive politics bot and weirdos.
  - bakugo 4y ago
    > who don't want to be spammed with ads, but also an assortment of porn, aggressive politics bot and weirdos. Are we talking about the same website here? Because twitter has been full of this for many years. Maybe you just don't notice it because the content in question is politically agreeable to you.
  - pessimizer 4y ago
    There has never been a point on twitter where you couldn't repeatedly accuse a person of sucking Putin's cock after every single tweet they made, and no point when you had to attempt at all to conceal your association with organized, named groups who coordinate this outside of twitter. That being said, Musk relies on government contracts and subsidy for almost every aspect of his empire, so I don't see any changes coming.
    - bediger4000 4y ago
      The "ergonomics" and incentives of Twitter do seem to encourage all-or-nothing, ignoring or dogpiling, on something. See the "Main Character of the Day" phenomenon.
Sohcahtoa82 4y ago
I guess it depends on which side you believe is more toxic. It's strange you would take the side that limiting bigotry, racism, homophobia, and transphobia is what creates toxicity.
- bakugo 4y ago
  Stopping people from stating facts and forcing them to respect the emperor's new clothes by force creates toxicity, yes.
  - socialismisok 4y ago
    Which facts, specifically. Please go on the record.
    - bakugo 4y ago
      Nice try! I assume you're a distraught twitter user because this feels like an exchange that would happen there.
      - socialismisok 4y ago
        So you are unwilling to say what, specifically, you believe in and instead prefer to gesture vaguely. And nope, I'm not a Twitter user. I was, until about 4 years ago. Not a Facebook user either. I was, until about a decade ago. I don't think either are particularly healthy places.
    - Nicksil 4y ago
      >Which facts, specifically. Please go on the record. This is incitement.
      - socialismisok 4y ago
        LOL. Incitement of "to have a discussion we need concrete opinions".
thedorkknight 4y ago
I agree with your first sentence but completely disagree with the second one
electrondood 4y ago
I don't understand how people keep conflating First Amendment Constitutional rights with the additional layer of "this is a private platform, we prefer not to have it overrun with assholes that make it really unpleasant for everyone else." 1A rights apply to GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE in your expression. There is no "lack of free speech on Twitter," nor do they owe anyone unrestricted freedom to spread disinfo and hate speech.
- bakugo 4y ago
  And yet many Twitter users are acting like they are entitled to being provided a safe space away from what they consider to be "disinfo" and "hate speech" by Elon. Why is this?
- gremlinsinc 4y ago
  This! So much... No body is owed a platform. I grew up in the 80s you had to be a news personality or famous to reach people. Echo chambers weren't a thing because the chamber was your neighbors and some of them would probably laugh in your face at crazy things or slap you if it's offensive. When you can join groups where you know it's safe to say whatever, you will, and you'll be emboldened and think that's how everyone thinks she it's dangerous to operate in the world with that level of group think, especially if the group values ignorance and conformity(fascism) over free thought, expression, and diversity.
  - xigoi 4y ago
    Most people would also laugh at you if you said you're demiromantic bunnygender.
- 5560675260 4y ago
  You confusion stems from conflating 1A and freedom of speech. It's reasonable to expect a corporation of Twitter's influence and size to recognise this particular human right.
wayeq 4y ago
ever been to 4chan?

hirundo 4y ago

You know what would be sweeter than shadenfreud? For Elon to find a way to make it a bit easier for people to understand each other. Maybe it's unlikely but it doesn't seem impossible, and I'd rather root for that success.

Sohcahtoa82 4y ago
Eliminating the character limit would help. It allows people to include nuance and encourages more in-depth discussion, rather than trying to fit an "own" in 280 characters or less. I'm convinced that the collapse of sensible political discussion happened for two reasons: The Internet gave every dumbass a megaphone, and the rise of Twitter removing all nuance from the discussions.

bediger4000 4y ago

I think you're correct. The example of the Heat Death of Usenet seems relevant. If you don't trim spam and annoyances, people leave. I think Musk's Twitter will be an interesting test, if Musk allows enough unfettered speech.

fallingknife 4y ago
Both Reddit and Twitter were basically free for alls until 2015 or so. Their user numbers were growing strongly. So I don't buy the whole offensive speech is going to drive off users angle. Spam is a different story, but Elon Musk has never said he is going to allow that.
- socialismisok 4y ago
  Why not allow spam? Surely the marketplace of ideas should be as free and open as possible?
  - PubliusMI 4y ago
    Holy shit ban this troll
    - socialismisok 4y ago
      Hardly. The point I'm making is that any platform with user supplied content must have moderation of some speech. No platform can exist totally unmoderated at Twitter's scale. So then the discussion is about where you draw the line, what speech you permit and what speech you prohibit. Apparently, there is a community of folks who believe Twitter should allow racism on the platform, despite it currently being disallowed. I think it's more than fair to say, "if you are allowing speech most people would find offensive and was previously banned, how far are you willing to push that needle?" Bigotry is one thing, but what else is on the table? Elon Musk has repeatedly indicated he believes in free speech and the marketplace of ideas. I think it's more than fair to ask what his limits are.
- bediger4000 4y ago

pessimizer 4y ago

> I imagine this will do a speed run of unbanning -> turning into a cesspit of toxicity because ‘free speech’ -> lots of people leave because it’s so unpleasant. I imagine this is a repetition of what every single article in a mainstream outlet has insisted will happen for months, rather than an insight.

electrondood 4y ago

Twitter will inevitably return to its current state. Gettr, Parler, and Truth Social all quietly discovered this lesson and had to figure out moderation and started banning users. Welcome to hell, Elon: https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/28/23428132/elon-musk-twitter-acquisition-problems-speech-moderation https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/28/23428132/elon-musk-twitt...