7 ms·

So we have a company headquartered in SF, and I think something like 98% of twitter's political donations went to democrats, and the employees acted as constant

• qlm 4y ago
  • treeman79 4y ago
    What absolute garbage. Basically anything that you don’t like is now considered terrorism. Free speech is completely dead under this logic.
  • PortiaBerries 4y ago
    Surely you need to provide some details to justify such an accusation.
  • colordrops 4y ago
    > stochastic terrorism This is an interesting term that is worth exploring. A problem with it is that it could apply to huge swaths of people and organizations, e.g. Fox News, the Republican Party, CNN, Democratic Socialists, etc
  • pseudo0 4y ago
    If stochastic terrorism is speech that makes violent acts against an individual or group more likely, isn't ElonJet engaging in stochastic terrorism by making it easier for a radicalized crazy person to find Elon and harm him in real life? I personally think the concept of stochastic terrorism is a rhetorical trick to associate legal speech with terrorism, but I think the argument applies just as well to ElonJet.
    • kelseyfrog 4y ago
      This would be a believable argument iff Elon had to deal with legitimated threats on his life in direct connection to ElonJet's operation. Since there's no evidence to back this up, it's a false equivalence.
      • pseudo0 4y ago
        He is alleging that is exactly what happened: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603190155107794944 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603190155107794944
        • kelseyfrog 4y ago
          Sorry, but I only see cars in this clip. I'm not sure how jet tracking relates so you're going to have to explain that part to me. Until then I'm going to continue to justifiably assert that the two are unrelated.
  • wyoh 4y ago
    Stochastic terrorism is a such bullshit concept, only designed to prevent examination of some political ideologies.
  • zoklet-enjoyer 4y ago
    Hahahaha is this a joke?
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• joshuamorton 4y ago
  You should look carefully at what Bari Weiss misquotes. Twitter's statement is about Libsoftiktok not doing something suspendable was limited to a short time period, not a blanket statement. But "they got suspended 6 times for legitimate reasons and then the continued to behave badly while staying just inside the written bounds of the rules" isn't really a story.
  • overgard 4y ago
    I've yet to hear a legitimate reason. As far as I can tell, they just angered liberals by reposting their own (ridiculous) content. I'm liberal and even I think that's funny!
    • joshuamorton 4y ago
      Perhaps you should take in information from sources more diverse than Weiss and Taibbi. Like the Wikipedia page does a good job of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libs_of_TikTok#:~:text=terrorism%20and%20extremism.-,Other%20platforms,the%20account%20suspension%20was%20reversed https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libs_of_TikTok#:~:text=terro.... Summarizing the suspensions, which were for misgendering and harassing trans people, primarily. That's the majority of what LTT produces, banal anti-trans propaganda. If you think that's funny, well, that's on you.
      • NaturalPhallacy 4y ago
        Wikipedia has the same bias as Twitter did. It's become worthless for anything political: "Wikipedia Is Badly Biased" by founder Larry Sanger: https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/ https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/
        • joshuamorton 4y ago
          Ah yes, the idea that remaining objective is biased, and that instead one must simply uncritically reiterate what both sides say, with no regard for independent verification.
• jimbob45 4y ago
  You're going to mislead a lot of non-Americans here with the bit about political donations. In America, you can donate to one party to benefit the other party by virtue of candidate selection during primary elections. Who one donates to does not necessarily match their preferred party.
  • freedomben 4y ago
    Yes that happens, but how common is it really? I've never heard of anyone actually doing that.
    • reaperducer 4y ago
      Yes that happens, but how common is it really? I've never heard of anyone actually doing that. It's becoming more common. I wouldn't say it's fully "common" yet. I think the most public example was the recent gubernatorial election in Illinois. Incumbent Governor Pritzker donated money to a very far-right candidate, Darrin Baley, so that he would get the Republican nomination, and push moderate voters toward Pritzker in the general election. It was all very well documented in Illinois newspapers during the election, and the New York Times did at least one piece about it, too. The Times also noted that after the election, Biden gave a speech where he made a statement that this was not an acceptable practice. He didn't call out Pritzker by name, but if you were following the Illinois election, you know who he was talking about.
    • Eisenstein 4y ago
      How many major campaign donors do you know? Is your anecdotal knowledge particularly meaningful in this context?
      • freedomben 4y ago
        I know quite a few donors, though none major. But why the "major" qualifier? The conversation context here seems to be normal employees, not major donors, so I would challenge that knowledge must be of "major" donors to be relevant. We're talking about "98%" of employees, not just a few high ranking execs that donate to both parties (which, btw, absolutely is common).
• trap_goes_hot 4y ago
  It's ironic to observe flawed humans being angry at other human(s) who are also flawed.
  • overgard 4y ago
    If you're suggesting I'm angry, I'm not, I'm just pointing out something that I think should be fairly obvious: twitter has a very specific political bent and their actions reflect that.
    • trap_goes_hot 4y ago
      I was agreeing with your comment. I wasn’t clear enough.
• trap_goes_hot 4y ago
  Flawed humans being angry at other human(s) who are also flawed. So ironic :)
• khuey 4y ago
  > (I'll leave aside whether that action was justified or not) Seems like an important detail to consider!
  • overgard 4y ago
    The reason it's unimportant is that these same activist employees never bothered to protest other heads of state/terrible people in other countries doing worse things. It was very specifically about US politics and guys they personally disliked, not the application of a fair policy.
    • khuey 4y ago
      Yes shockingly people are more concerned about what's going on in the place they live in than another country on the other side of the world. How many people who work at Twitter could even name the former PM of Malaysia that you mention?
      • overgard 4y ago
        It's not shocking at all, my only point is that twitter has a very specific political bent and their actions obviously reflect this. Why is this controversial at all?
        • joshuamorton 4y ago
          Because if those actions are justified, what's the problem?
          • dijit 4y ago
            It becomes a problem if you do not apply the letter of the law universally. If you turn a blind eye to the behaviour of someone you agree with, even if they're doing something that is against the rules (or the spirit of the rules) but you come down hard on someone else for actions that are the same (or lesser); then it's a problem for me.
• thefreeman 4y ago
  > And when that account got doxxed -- which is dangerous and malicious -- the company did nothing. you know Elon was running the company when this happened, right? which makes it completely orthogonal to your point.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • overgard 4y ago
    That is factually untrue, the doxxing happened in april.
• s5300 4y ago
  >> They just didn't like the "intent". She was instigating acts of extreme violence. Surely you’re joking. Or tell us how you really feel about certain extremely vulnerable & marginalized members of our society more, I guess.
  • jki275 4y ago
    Can you link to one of these instigations?
    • s5300 4y ago
      No, I’m not going to take the 10 seconds of time in which the search engine of your choice will suffice for this. If you’re trying to insinuate the Charles Manson defense, which has been a common theme regarding one side of the political spectrums views on LibsofTikTok, I do not particularly wish to engage in any further discussion.
      • jki275 4y ago
        So there aren't any. I follow that account and have never seen any instigation of any violence of any kind. More likely, a certain "side of the political spectrum" has decided that redefining language is a good idea, and making anything they disagree with "violence" seems to be a defining characteristic of that group. You added "extreme violence" to double down on it, but faking outrage doesn't help the discussion any. It isn't true, it's sophistry.
• dijit 4y ago
  Twitter (in my experience, everyone seems to have a different one) was very left-leaning.. Not the kind of left that the rest of the world see's as left, but that weird US-coastal left leaning that sometimes depicts some races as inhuman and other races as infantalised. So believe me when I say: What Elon is doing is not better, it's more of the same, but towards the right wing and his interests. The answer to bias is not bias in another direction, the answer is neutrality, and he has proven he can't be neutral.
• NaturalPhallacy 4y ago
  It wasn't fairly lopsided, it was extremely lopsided. Glenn Greenwald: "This thread proves 3 things: 1) Twitter execs were regularly meeting with FBI over what to censor. 2) Twitter's censorship was almost 100% aligned with the Dem Party. 3) Twitter's chief censors were deranged ideologues abusing their power over our discourse to silence dissent." https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1601591994165256192 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1601591994165256192 If Greenwald isn't credible enough, I don't know what to say.
  • datagram 4y ago
    Every time I read one of these threads I wonder if I'm somehow seeing different screenshots that what the author is talking about, because they're always full of some of the most uncharitable interpretations possible. The tweet linked reads like a biased summary of a biased summary. I don't know people expect moderation to work, but it's inherently messy and imperfect because humans are messy and imperfect, and past a certain point you always end up having to trust the instincts and judgement of moderators. As someone who has moderated large group before, my main reaction is "this stuff is surprising to people?"
    • NaturalPhallacy 4y ago
      >the most uncharitable interpretations possible The bias and hand wringing about censoring people whom they even admitted hadn't actually broken any rules disclosed in by Taibbi and Weiss deserved no charity. It was worse than people had imagined. And you're just going to ignore this part? >2) Twitter's censorship was almost 100% aligned with the Dem Party. That's not "moderation". That's "partisan censorship".
• justbored123 4y ago
• BryantD 4y ago
  I think it’s worth digging into that LibsOfTikTok issue, because even the limited information we’ve got is being misinterpreted. It is a real shame that Elon decided to do a selective release. The text shared was this: ===== Site Policy Recommendation Site Policy recommends placing @LibsOfTiktok ([LTT] 1.3M followers, not verified) in a 7-day timeout at the account level meaning, not for a specific Tweet] based on the account's continued pattern of indirectly violating Twitter's Hateful Conduct Policy by tweeting content that either leads to or intends to incite harassment against individuals and institutions that support LGBTQ communities. At this time, Site Policy has not found explicitly violative Tweets, which would result in a permanent suspension of the account. This type of enforcement action [repeated 7-day timeouts at the account-level] will not lead to permanent suspension, however: should LTT engage in any other direct Tweet-level violations of any of Site Policy's policies, we will move forward with permanent suspension. Assessment Since its most recent timeout, while LTT has not directly engaged in behavior violative of the Hateful Conduct policy, the user has continued targeting individuals/allies/supporters of the LGBTQIA+ community for alleged misconduct. The targeting of at least one of these institutions ===== It’s inaccurate to say that LoTT didn’t violate the rules. LoTT didn’t directly violate the rules. Weiss chose to cut the text off before getting to the description of what happened as a result of LoTT’s tweets. So at this point you can ask a more nuanced question: what do you do about indirect violations which you believe in good faith have potentially harmful results? Such as, say, bomb threats? I’m not going to try and answer that here because it’s a really difficult question and I don’t think we’d reach an answer. I will say that I think it’s important to acknowledge that the question itself is reasonable. The Twitter Files fail to acknowledge that. I will also note that Weiss selectively quoted the text in her screenshot. “Since its most recent timeout, while LTT has not directly engaged in behavior violative of the Hateful Conduct policy…” became “LTT has not directly engaged in behavior violative of the Hateful Conduct policy.” That changes the meaning of the sentence and obscures the question I raised above. I would also like to know if Twitter determined that LoTT directly engaged in such behavior before the most recent timeout; it seems very relevant. Finally, we have no idea how lopsided the enforcement was because we don’t have the complete dataset. Showing us a handful of cases selected by unclear means is hardly enough data to form conclusions!
  • d23 4y ago
• Faark 4y ago
  > twitter files Was there much interesting in there? I mostly remember it opening with the Dems having a direct line for reporting, with the examples shown of it being used being mostly nudes of Hunter&company, that i assume won't surprise anyone when being acted upon. Now there shouldn't be direct lines, but a fair report&enforcement system instead. But i somehow doubt that will get any better under musk...