Resistance Twitter 2.0

[d4m10n]

And you're siding with the platform that forces everyone, whether they follow Musk or not, to view his tweets?

Muted Musk the same week this started happening, haven't heard from him since. Maybe get your facts straight before putting fingertips to keys. Also, I'm not "siding" with either platform, just telling you what I've seen while using both of them.

 

[plague311]

Muted Musk the same week this started happening, haven't heard from him since. Maybe get your facts straight before putting fingertips to keys. Also, I'm not "siding" with either platform, just telling you what I've seen while using both of them.

Right, you had to take action to mute someone you weren't even following. It's like you're trying to prove my point for me.

I have my facts perfectly straight and your reply doesn't change anything I've said. You asked me to do some random experiment you made up as if it's evidence of something. Your experience on both of those apps, I promise you, is different from mine. Why? Because you've designed your own echo chamber through use. That's how the apps work.

Glad I could help.

 

[d4m10n]

You asked me to do some random experiment you made up as if it's evidence of something.

Feel free to make up your own. If we're going to say one of them is more of an echo chamber than the other, we'll need some way to test that out. So far I've seen much more left/liberal content on X than I've seen right/illiberal content on Bluesky.

Because you've designed your own echo chamber through use.

Funny how it doesn't even occur to you that someone might deliberately follow people with diverse perspectives.

 

[Thermal]

Funny how it doesn't even occur to you that someone might deliberately follow people with diverse perspectives.

@HitlerWasKindOfInteresting

 

[plague311]

Feel free to make up your own. If we're going to say one of them is more of an echo chamber than the other, we'll need some way to test that out. So far I've seen much more left/liberal content on X than I've seen right/illiberal content on Bluesky.

Which, again, isn't really evidence of anything considering content can be based on cookies from other sites, words you speak, google searches, etc.

My entire point is that there isn't any evidence to support your implication, and "making up" a nonsensical experiment doesn't do anything to help prove either way.

Funny how it doesn't even occur to you that someone might deliberately follow people with diverse perspectives.

We have different definitions of "funny" but ok. I follow all sorts of people I don't agree with for their perspective, but that would be another case of me not having evidence for it. I followed Trump throughout his entire presidency. I follow family who are Trump supporters to see what they're talking about and I come here and read posts from both sides all of the time.

So maybe "funny" wasn't the word you were looking for?

 

[Samson]

And what did you come up with? What is your point here?


Same questions apply to this as to the previous.


You want evidence that Bluesky has as much free speech as Twitter?

Ok, I can do that. In what way would you like it proven? What would you accept as evidence in this case? I just told you how Twitter flags even the term "cisgendered", shadowbans and tags the post. Journalists have been banned from Twitter, it tagged NPR as government funded, and the list goes on. Is that evidence?

Set the terms of what's evidence because I'm saying both platforms are on the same "free speech" level. Why do you think that's not the case? I'm seriously not interested in this petty back and forth bickering. If you have a point to make, just ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ say it. If you want a gotcha moment, feel free to engage someone else. I'm all out of ◊◊◊◊◊ to give.

I think you know why the term cisgendered is objected to by the owner of X.
Does he flag lots of terms or are you generalizing from the particular?
You can bet your boots Bluesky wallows in cisgender as a means to gently stigmatise the overwhelming majority of humans including same sex attracted.
Now I will check this theory.

 

[plague311]

I think you know why the term cisgendered is objected to by the owner of X.

You might not know but I don't give a ◊◊◊◊ what he objects to it. The literal subject is that Twitter isn't an echo chamber and Bluesky is and the argument is that people don't want to see information that offends them and that's why they go to Bluesky. Now you're literally saying that Musk is banning or regulating the term because it offends him. That's the mother ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ literal ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ opposite of ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ free ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ speech. Thank you, Samson, for finally saying the quiet part out loud. I was trying to get someone else to admit it, but you finally did it. Much appreciated.

Does he flag lots of terms or are you generalizing from the particular?

I don't give a rat's ass. I don't go on Twitter because it's a cesspool.

You can bet your boots Bluesky wallows in cisgender as a means to gently stigmatise the overwhelming majority of humans including same sex attracted.
Now I will check this theory.

Here, take my hanky to cry in. Throw it away when you're done.

 

[Samson]

You might not know but I don't give a ◊◊◊◊ what he objects to it. The literal subject is that Twitter isn't an echo chamber and Bluesky is and the argument is that people don't want to see information that offends them and that's why they go to Bluesky. Now you're literally saying that Musk is banning or regulating the term because it offends him. That's the mother ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ literal ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ opposite of ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ free ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ speech. Thank you, Samson, for finally saying the quiet part out loud. I was trying to get someone else to admit it, but you finally did it. Much appreciated.


I don't give a rat's ass. I don't go on Twitter because it's a cesspool.


Here, take my hanky to cry in. Throw it away when you're done.

There is a point to be made.
Where do you go to research a subject and have confidence that you can find the truth?
I find X is that place, even if the version of truth I settle on is wrong.
I also posit this forum is better for the purpose than Bluesky so far.

 

[d4m10n]

My entire point is that there isn't any evidence to support your implication, and "making up" a nonsensical experiment doesn't do anything to help prove either way.

I do not think it is at all nonsensical to search social media sites (any of them) for what kind of public posts are gaining traction on the kinds of issues which might indicate the direction of ideological skew in the content of the site. If the results lean heavily one way or another, that should tell you something about the content of the site itself and perhaps also the search algorithm.

 

[plague311]

There is a point to be made.
Where do you go to research a subject and have confidence that you can find the truth?

The day I use social media as a research tool is the day I have a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ tag on my toe.

I find X is that place, even if the version of truth I settle on is wrong.

This is the dumbest thing I've ever read.

I also posit this forum is better for the purpose than Bluesky so far.

Duly noted and dismissed.

 

[plague311]

I do not think it is at all nonsensical to search social media sites (any of them) for what kind of public posts are gaining traction on the kinds of issues which might indicate the direction of ideological skew in the content of the site. If the results lean heavily one way or another, that should tell you something about the content of the site itself and perhaps also the search algorithm.

Neat, we'll never agree and I'm done with this conversation with you. Have a good one.

 

[d4m10n]

@HitlerWasKindOfInteresting

Hard to tell whether Godwin's Law applies here.

 

[Samson]

The day I use social media as a research tool is the day I have a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ tag on my toe.

This is the dumbest thing I've ever read.

Duly noted and dismissed.

I should make clear it is the opinion pieces and news links etc, not the 140 character essays that I read for information leading to the cave high up in the mountain where sits the guru.

 

[d4m10n]

...the question arises, where will these folks post their resistance this time around?

Turns out if you google the site name, you get this list in the top results.

/thread

 

[arthwollipot]

You know what? I'm actually coming around on the "echo chamber" meme. I still think it's false, but it's fooling the dumbest people. So if you think it's true, then don't let me get in the way of your conclusion. Yup, it's an echo chamber. It's just the worst. Stay away. You would hate it.

It is, in fact, a dystopian woke-hole.

 

[jimbob]

Threads devoted to trans issues are tedious but that's not sufficient reason to bring the discussion into other threads.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jimbob

 

[Stout]

So, how's the resistance coming? Are we going to get any good riot footage? Lots of good tips here

 

[LiteBright]

Yeah I take back everything I said about Bluesky being better. The toxic nonsense is increasing daily. The fact that it comes from a different side of the political spectrum doesn't make it any more palatable.

A few days ago I replied to an article about macro-economics with a minor disagreement about its conclusion. It was respectfully worded and I didn't think my take was controversial in any way but I guess it fell slightly outside of the current extreme left-wing orthodoxy on the subject. Within an hour I had dozens of replies telling me I'm stupid, to die, kill myself and every other type of toxic sludge. Not a single disagreement with what I had said, just pure, unadulterated hatred.

Then this morning I noticed I have been blocked by hundreds of accounts out of the blue. I thought this was strange because I don't post much and when I do its usually about economics or sports. Digging into it, I found out why. Apparently the Economist had published an article about a patient suing a well known doctor after transitioning. Even though I have no interest in the subject and hadn't engaged with it whatsoever, I've been put on multiple block lists simply for following the Economist. Bluesky's moderation had also labelled the article and its author an "intolerant". So I went and read the article...there was nothing even slightly intolerant about it. It was a pretty straightforward accounting of the lawsuit in question. I mean seriously...the Economist? Intolerant? You have to be kidding me.

Its sad. It seems there is no space for open, respectful discussion anywhere anymore.

 

[Thermal]

The social media community slowly begins to discover that people are basically ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊.

 

[alfaniner]

Wouldn't it be ironic if everybody leaving had run to TikTok instead? (TikTok is very close to being banned in the US.)