3 ms·

You're essentially asserting that some openly-biased political operatives in Washington DC are more "credible" than Twitter's moderation chief or an investigati

You're essentially asserting that some openly-biased political operatives in Washington DC are more "credible" than Twitter's moderation chief or an investigative journalist (both with access to internal Twitter documents), based on some unrelated amateur OSINT. That's ridiculous.

karp773 4y ago
How can you be sure the new owners/management of Twitter and the hired "investigative journalist" are not compromised? I was very symathetic and enthusiastic about their recent pivot toward free speech. But now it's clear to me it was not about free speech but rather a certain agenda which is suspiciously aligned with Russian interests.
- pphysch 4y ago
  The truth doesn't matter. What matters is how closely your speech patterns mirror "Putin talking points". Even if those "taking points" happen to be true.
pryce 4y ago
1. I described Taibbi as failing to meet a threshold of credible reporting for reasons I've explicitly stated in a fair amount of detail and further linking to a 3000 word artcle on it by someone who analyses disinformation professionally. You've characterised this as "essentially asserting". I am forced to conclude you are not a serious person. 2. Either you don't know or don't care that Dr. Caroline Orr Bueno is postdoc "at UMD’s Applied Research Laboratory for Intelligence and Security (ARLIS)." studying how disinformation works and propagates for a living. You are free to disagree with her analysis and mine if you like (how? where?) but to dismiss her work as "some unrelated amateur OSINT" tells me you're not genuine. Further discussion with you is clearly pointless.
- waych 4y ago
  Most people claiming to be experts in disinformation are really just experts in disinformation. Beware.
  - pphysch 4y ago
    One of the clearest examples of this is Peter Pomerantsev
- pphysch 4y ago
  Russiagate truthers like Orr are analogous to Qanon truthers. They should not be taken seriously. They have a preconceived conclusion and cherry-pick evidence to support it. Both are deranged, baseless conspiracy theories designed to advance partisan interests. Full stop.

karp773 4y ago

How can you be sure the new owners/management of Twitter and the hired "investigative journalist" are not compromised? I was very symathetic and enthusiastic about their recent pivot toward free speech. But now it's clear to me it was not about free speech but rather a certain agenda which is suspiciously aligned with Russian interests.

pphysch 4y ago
The truth doesn't matter. What matters is how closely your speech patterns mirror "Putin talking points". Even if those "taking points" happen to be true.

pryce 4y ago

1. I described Taibbi as failing to meet a threshold of credible reporting for reasons I've explicitly stated in a fair amount of detail and further linking to a 3000 word artcle on it by someone who analyses disinformation professionally. You've characterised this as "essentially asserting". I am forced to conclude you are not a serious person. 2. Either you don't know or don't care that Dr. Caroline Orr Bueno is postdoc "at UMD’s Applied Research Laboratory for Intelligence and Security (ARLIS)." studying how disinformation works and propagates for a living. You are free to disagree with her analysis and mine if you like (how? where?) but to dismiss her work as "some unrelated amateur OSINT" tells me you're not genuine. Further discussion with you is clearly pointless.

waych 4y ago
Most people claiming to be experts in disinformation are really just experts in disinformation. Beware.
- pphysch 4y ago
  One of the clearest examples of this is Peter Pomerantsev
pphysch 4y ago
Russiagate truthers like Orr are analogous to Qanon truthers. They should not be taken seriously. They have a preconceived conclusion and cherry-pick evidence to support it. Both are deranged, baseless conspiracy theories designed to advance partisan interests. Full stop.