4 ms·

I don't think its just moderation - but also that fact that most people don't have opinions worth listening too. When you think about the town square, anyone c

I don't think its just moderation - but also that fact that most people don't have opinions worth listening too. When you think about the town square, anyone could set up a soap box, say anything and be heard by anyone... anyone within a 50m radius depending on background noise. Standing in the town square didn't give you the ability (or right) to be heard by anyone in any town square. But nowdays, you can (and sometimes are obligated to) have an opinion on anything. Local politics in a country on the otherside of the planet - go right ahead. Opinions on the mid-east that most people are not qualified to provide, sure thing! And worse, if the echo chamber deems that "silence is violence" not only can you not refrain from expressing your opinion, silence means you have out-group-think, so either agree or be removed. Twitter was fun... for a bit. But its quite obvious that this idea that anyone can have an idea, and everyone can hear it is just plain bad for society. In most of the world you have free speech - go outside and use it. But online for the world to hear... maybe thats just overrated.

ChocolateGod 2y ago
> But nowdays, you can (and sometimes are obligated to) have an opinion on anything Seen in many of these echo chambers people state that if people don't actively campaign for something, they're scum of the earth, as bad as X Y Z and people with the polar opposite view of them and not welcome on the platform these echo chambers use. I find platforms like Mastodon have had an effect of strengthening these echo chambers and the extremity of peoples views, emboldening the division of society and ultimately being self-harming.
squigz 2y ago
> In most of the world you have free speech - go outside and use it. But online for the world to hear... maybe thats just overrated. Can't have both. You can either have a free Internet where everyone, including yourself, are free to say what they want, or you don't.
embeng4096 2y ago
Agreed. I find it interesting that "silence is violence" people are assuming that silence means you agree with the opinions being expressed around you. So if you're in an echo chamber with those same people, while they chant slogans or pat each other on the back about whatever their issue du jour is -- if you're silent, by their logic, theoretically you're agreeing with them. But in practice, they think you being silent is disagreement, not silent support as is assumed for everything else except their views.

ChocolateGod 2y ago

> But nowdays, you can (and sometimes are obligated to) have an opinion on anything Seen in many of these echo chambers people state that if people don't actively campaign for something, they're scum of the earth, as bad as X Y Z and people with the polar opposite view of them and not welcome on the platform these echo chambers use. I find platforms like Mastodon have had an effect of strengthening these echo chambers and the extremity of peoples views, emboldening the division of society and ultimately being self-harming.

squigz 2y ago

> In most of the world you have free speech - go outside and use it. But online for the world to hear... maybe thats just overrated. Can't have both. You can either have a free Internet where everyone, including yourself, are free to say what they want, or you don't.

embeng4096 2y ago

Agreed. I find it interesting that "silence is violence" people are assuming that silence means you agree with the opinions being expressed around you. So if you're in an echo chamber with those same people, while they chant slogans or pat each other on the back about whatever their issue du jour is -- if you're silent, by their logic, theoretically you're agreeing with them. But in practice, they think you being silent is disagreement, not silent support as is assumed for everything else except their views.