3 ms·

You sound like someone that hasn't used Twitter or has a short memory span, because they did direct fact checks. This was also an official government account vs

• bena 4y ago
  Yes. But now it's something different. The "context" notes are user submitted/voted by a selection of users. The previous system was more of a group at twitter who verified statements. The claim is that the new "context" process is more transparent and/or egalitarian. When the truth of the matter is that it's just going to devolve into being abused by the "well ackshually" crowd. It's also interesting to note that the same sort of context disappeared from one of Musk's tweets. So, I guess, what's good for the goose is not good for the gander.
  • jandrese 4y ago
    > The "context" notes are user submitted/voted by a selection of users. Oh, so you are saying they can be gamed for political benefit? Whomever has the biggest botnet gets to control the narrative?
    • nightski 4y ago
      Alternative viewpoints is not controlling a narrative.
      • jandrese 4y ago
        If every comment you make gets appended with "Actually: vaccines cause autism" then that's narrative control.
        • partiallypro 4y ago
          Of course, that's not remotely how the system works or has been used. This goes into what I've said elsewhere today regarding Twitter. I've seen SO much hyperbole on what's going on, when almost nothing at all is going on in terms of moderation changes. It's so very hyper-partisan at the moment.