4 ms·

What strategies could FSF employ to "fix things from the inside" on Twitter?

by n4r9 11mo ago

scottyah 11mo ago
Talk openly and transparently with whomever is not aligning with their ideals. They used to call it discussion.
- catapart 11mo ago
  lol imagine thinking you can discuss a hopped up ket-head into "aligning with your ideals".
  - scottyah 11mo ago
    it's the town square- it's not about the two people talking but for everyone reading what they said instead of controlling the narrative by only speaking to people you want in places you want. They don't even have to answer to everyone, so the only benefit of losing access to thousands/millions of people is to make an article like this for Pride.
    - n4r9 11mo ago
      It's hard to tell whether it's still really a town square, since the only information we have about X's usage is tweets from Musk.
      - scottyah 11mo ago
        I just mean that in the way that this site is a town square, or all of the rfc's, in that anyone can (for free) see all of the discussions and participate. Just like a town square, not every comment has to be addressed or promoted equally, but I don't know of a better way to release information and allow for anyone to discuss it with others.
        n4r9 11mo ago
        I'm not really sure I see your point, then. An organisation like the FSF is going to be pretty resource-strapped, so it makes sense that they're selective about where to maintain a public presence. Why should they stay on Twitter when it's highly dubious that they're getting any value from it or vice versa?
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 11mo ago
  What if the problem they were facing on Twitter was that others weren't doing their part in the open and transparent discussion?
  - scottyah 11mo ago
    How would it not be open and transparent on twitter? It's a site where everyone can see what they are talking about. It's only when they try to limit to whom and where they talk to people that they are not open and transparent.
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 11mo ago
      > How would it not be open and transparent on twitter? Lying. Trolling. Bullshitting. Stonewalling. > It's only when they try to limit to whom and where they talk to people that they are not open and transparent. I don't need to talk to you or use your favored public platform for my published material to be open and transparent on some other public platform.
      - scottyah 11mo ago
        > Lying. Trolling. Bullshitting. Stonewalling. What do these have to do with open and transparent communication? > I don't need to talk to you or use your favored public platform for my published material to be open and transparent on some other public platform. Very true, but limiting the platforms limits the openness and transparency. With some simple software you can post to all with almost no effort. Seems weird to disclude one just to write a blog post about it for attention.
        lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 11mo ago
        > What do these have to do with open and transparent communication? If I'm lying to you, I'm being neither open nor transparent, by definition. > Very true, but limiting the platforms limits the openness and transparency. It only limits the audience who will see it incidentally. Anyone who's looking for it can still find it. > With some simple software you can post to all with almost no effort. I rather suspect that they are avoiding the platform for reasons other than the effort it takes to simply create a post. This seems moot in context.

What strategies could FSF employ to "fix things from the inside" on Twitter?

by n4r9 11mo ago

What strategies could FSF employ to "fix things from the inside" on Twitter?

scottyah 11mo ago

Talk openly and transparently with whomever is not aligning with their ideals. They used to call it discussion.

catapart 11mo ago
lol imagine thinking you can discuss a hopped up ket-head into "aligning with your ideals".
- scottyah 11mo ago
  it's the town square- it's not about the two people talking but for everyone reading what they said instead of controlling the narrative by only speaking to people you want in places you want. They don't even have to answer to everyone, so the only benefit of losing access to thousands/millions of people is to make an article like this for Pride.
  - n4r9 11mo ago
    It's hard to tell whether it's still really a town square, since the only information we have about X's usage is tweets from Musk.
    - scottyah 11mo ago
      I just mean that in the way that this site is a town square, or all of the rfc's, in that anyone can (for free) see all of the discussions and participate. Just like a town square, not every comment has to be addressed or promoted equally, but I don't know of a better way to release information and allow for anyone to discuss it with others.
      - n4r9 11mo ago
        I'm not really sure I see your point, then. An organisation like the FSF is going to be pretty resource-strapped, so it makes sense that they're selective about where to maintain a public presence. Why should they stay on Twitter when it's highly dubious that they're getting any value from it or vice versa?
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 11mo ago
What if the problem they were facing on Twitter was that others weren't doing their part in the open and transparent discussion?
- scottyah 11mo ago
  How would it not be open and transparent on twitter? It's a site where everyone can see what they are talking about. It's only when they try to limit to whom and where they talk to people that they are not open and transparent.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 11mo ago
    > How would it not be open and transparent on twitter? Lying. Trolling. Bullshitting. Stonewalling. > It's only when they try to limit to whom and where they talk to people that they are not open and transparent. I don't need to talk to you or use your favored public platform for my published material to be open and transparent on some other public platform.
    - scottyah 11mo ago
      > Lying. Trolling. Bullshitting. Stonewalling. What do these have to do with open and transparent communication? > I don't need to talk to you or use your favored public platform for my published material to be open and transparent on some other public platform. Very true, but limiting the platforms limits the openness and transparency. With some simple software you can post to all with almost no effort. Seems weird to disclude one just to write a blog post about it for attention.
      - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 11mo ago
        > What do these have to do with open and transparent communication? If I'm lying to you, I'm being neither open nor transparent, by definition. > Very true, but limiting the platforms limits the openness and transparency. It only limits the audience who will see it incidentally. Anyone who's looking for it can still find it. > With some simple software you can post to all with almost no effort. I rather suspect that they are avoiding the platform for reasons other than the effort it takes to simply create a post. This seems moot in context.