A search for Threads content on Twitter currently brings up zero results, despite plenty of links to Meta’s microblogging rival being posted on the platform.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    301 year ago

    Logic doesn’t matter. Literally do anything at all and say “it’s because free speech” or “it’s to stop cancel culture” and the fan boys will cheer it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -71 year ago

      I won’t, and I really am against cancel culture (I’m for developing reputation systems to help you automatically ignore those you don’t want to read, but to be able to read what they say in case you suddenly want that).

      Now, this whole Twitter-Threads dynamic seems like an exemplary “toad vs viper” case.

      • FlashMobOfOne
        link
        fedilink
        English
        231 year ago

        I didn’t think cancel culture was a great tactic until I saw its effect on Alex Jones and Milo Yieanowetpahppolis.

        Deplatforming fascists works, and we have observed it. We should do more of it.

        • 🐱TheCat
          link
          fedilink
          English
          271 year ago

          lol ‘cancel culture’ used to be called ‘boycotting’ / ‘speaking with your wallet’ used to be called ‘having an opinion’

          its not new, obviously we should punch nazis, and you can be certain anyone who says the words ‘cancel culture’ unironically is a tool with less than a 10 year memory span, max.

          • FlashMobOfOne
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            ‘boycotting’ / ‘speaking with your wallet’ used to be called ‘having an opinion’

            Cancel Culture is none of those things. Cancel Culture is very specifically taking a platform away from someone who has misused it to do harm in our society.

            Should you choose to vote with your wallet and boycott destructive people, though? Yes, absolutely. But deplatforming is observably effective, because we’ve seen that many of these loud, awful people simply aren’t able to rebuild their following without the convenience of major social media platforms and interviews on major networks.

            And without that following, they aren’t shit. Alex Jones literally went bankrupt.

            • 🐱TheCat
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              so first, we generally agree and I don’t want to get into an argument with you.

              If cancel culture means ‘deplatforming’ to you, thats great. I agree deplatforming works. But the term ‘cancel culture’ is deliberately vague, does include boycotting, and is just one of the many terms made up by the right to create a ‘boogey man’. I tend to throw these terms back in their faces as laughable (‘woke’, ‘CRT’ - all the same badly defined bullshit that just means ‘things I don’t like’). If your strategy is to embrace, rehab, and legitimize the terms thats fine too.

            • matlag
              link
              fedilink
              English
              21 year ago

              And without that following, they aren’t shit. Alex Jones literally went bankrupt.

              Alex Jones declared bankruptcy in an attempt to avoid paying the families who sued him and won. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64644080

              But I overall agree: had he been deplatformed earlier, he could probably not have had so much influence and caused so much damage.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -31 year ago

              Deplatforming requires a centralized platform from which to deplatform. Ability to sometimes deplatform real Nazis (but usually not) is not worth centralizing crucial systems, end of story.

              • FlashMobOfOne
                link
                fedilink
                English
                81 year ago

                Not necessarily. It just requires that admins do their job and be good stewards of their users and instances.

                Mastodon, for instance, has a tag used exclusively for dogpiling fascists and their instances, so even though it’s decentralized, people are vigilant and keep the destructive elements disconnected. (Or, at least, make a great effort of it, which is more than we can say for Twitter.)

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  21 year ago

                  I’m not a 140 characters person, so never got on the Twitter/Mastodon train.

                  However, I think this is a wrong approach. It would be better if they were connected, but easily filtered. Just like NSFW.

                  • FlashMobOfOne
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    6
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Mastodon gives you 500 characters.

                    Also it has filters. :) I use those too, but I don’t have Nazi or Fascist speech filtered because I think it’s of the utmost importance that it be reported when it slips through. The upside is that in nine months of being on Mastodon, I can count on one hand the number of extremist toots I’ve seen. I’m glad filters exist for people who are emotionally upset by it, though.

                    It’s a great platform and I love it.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            No, that’s what I described in parentheses. Not really existent yet in the Web.

            While “cancel culture” (in its narrow meaning in the Web, again) is when you have serious problems talking even to those who are willing to listen to you or undecided. Say, you won’t ever read something, because the decision has been made for you by somebody else, and you don’t even choose whether to delegate that decision.

            The difference is in the architecture of systems used, actually. Because with both things every person involved acts voluntarily, it’s just that in my variant that power to decide is spread more evenly.

            What I mean is similar to the reputation system in Locutus, only it doesn’t work yet.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          No, we can’t say that. I am able to decide for myself who is a fascist and who is not. However, the systems allowing for this work with the assumption that I can’t and shouldn’t decide for myself.

          I’d rather share a bunk with a Nazi (won’t happen, I’m part Armenian, part Jewish, but) than accept something like this.

          • FlashMobOfOne
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 year ago

            To each their own.

            I like my mods doing their job and keeping the fascists out, and I love that when we report that, it’s investigated and a reasonable decision is made. That doesn’t happen anywhere else but in the fediverse.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              31 year ago

              Well, we are at least back to the 00s state of things from the degeneracy centralized social media were. Which is good. I just think with modern means and experience one can go further.

              • FlashMobOfOne
                link
                fedilink
                English
                31 year ago

                We’re certainly disentangling ourselves from it, and yeah, I love that too. :)