3 ms·

In the context of a boycott, using/promoting Nitter is at best neutral - you’re not directly engaging with the most hostile parts of the site, but still engagin

In the context of a boycott, using/promoting Nitter is at best neutral - you’re not directly engaging with the most hostile parts of the site, but still engaging with it and making it easier for others to do so, unnecessarily promoting the idea of X being a good platform to post on. I suggest not making any effort to use the site - rather just ask people to primarily share content from X by copying rather than linking. This removes the need to interact with it both for yourself and (more importantly) for others.

anonym29 2y ago
To be clear, I don't mean to boycott the site entirely. There is a lot of good content from good people mixed in with the bad. You cannot judge an entire cohort of people by what the worst among them do. Assuming all Xitter users are evil just because there are some genuinely evil Xitter users is no different from a bigot assuming all <insert group here> are <insert bad property here> just because there are some members of that group that genuinely are <insert bad property here>. Being exclusionary and prejudiced against all in response to the actions of a few isn't morally justified just because your tribe agrees that the entire cohort of people you're excluding are bad. The issue I take with it is that the site is effectively paywalled, just one where you pay with your privacy and personal data by signing up for an account. Without an account, Xitter will not show Xomments on a Xeet, nor will it even allow you to view Xeets in chronological order.
brailsafe 2y ago
> In the context of a boycott, using/promoting Nitter is at best neutral I don't think that context was established, at least not in my comment, but I do agree with your second suggestion.