Social media censorship roundup

[Luce]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Exactly: I offend against the state, not the business.

When I'm tried, and found guilty, the fine I pay is to the state: I pay no compensation to the business.

And, the final nail: if I have no car, then I don't have to buy insurance.

I get your point, but you're wrong.

Well, yes, I suppose if you have the picture of corporations being good guys, as opposed to mindless beasts, and the government being bad guys (as opposed to a different kind of mindless beast) you'd interpret things that way.

[henry quirk]

Originally Posted by Luce

Well, yes, I suppose if you have the picture of corporations being good guys, as opposed to mindless beasts, and the government being bad guys (as opposed to a different kind of mindless beast) you'd interpret things that way.

The above ain't got nuthin' to do with my point.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Hey you guys, what's with the civil discourse? You're out of step with the internet, the nation, the world.

[Luce]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Hey you guys, what's with the civil discourse? You're out of step with the internet, the nation, the world.

I am banned from Facebook and all but two forums, this being one of them.

So I'm on my absolute best behavior.

[henry quirk]

Originally Posted by Luce

I am banned from Facebook and all but two forums, this being one of them.

So I'm on my absolute best behavior.

And me: I don't give enough of a shit about the subject to get riled.

We can conclude: fear & apathy can make for a good simulation of civility.

[Luce]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

And me: I don't give enough of a shit about the subject to get riled.

We can conclude: fear & apathy can make for a good simulation of civility.

Well, not so much fear as "if I get banned from the last two places, I might have to go outside," and nobody wants that.

Aversion. That's the word I'm looking for.

[henry quirk]

Originally Posted by Luce

Well, not so much fear as "if I get banned from the last two places, I might have to go outside," and nobody wants that.

Aversion. That's the word I'm looking for.

😆

I stand corrected: 👍🏻

[Luce]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

😆

I stand corrected: 👍🏻

It's all about branding.

[henry quirk]

Originally Posted by Luce

It's all about branding.

Aversion plays better than fear.

[Luce]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Aversion plays better than fear.

Well, yes. You can have an aversion without having fear, but not the other way around.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Luce

It's all about branding.

Wouldn't a tattoo be less painful?

[Griff]

That would show a lack of commitment.

[Undertoad]

Reddit "quarantined" /r/Wuhan_Flu, which means you can read it but the "official word" is that it's ungood. (The irony that they call it "quarantining" is not lost.) Please overlook the $150,000,000 investment a Chinese tech firm made in Reddit months ago. Surely that would not affect how they manage the site. LOL.

(Also, aside from the crappy management and moderation, Reddit is slowly turning into shit as teens invade it. That is just my opinion)

Zero Hedge was banned from Twitter for Wuhan-related journalism. It has been noticed that many social media bans come shortly after Buzzfeed calls a PR department, and says they are going to run a story on a user, and "would you like to comment"? In this case it came after Buzzfeed wrote a story alleging that Zero Hedge doxxed a Chinese researcher. Zero Hedge disagrees.

[Clodfobble]

I read the whole Zero Hedge article. IMHO, they are engaged in incitement that doesn't help the situation and deserved a temporary ban.

First, knowing where the virus came from--specifically, whether it was a natural species-jump or an accidental/intentional leak from a biological weapons lab as Zero Hedge alleges--is necessary in the long-term, but it doesn't make a difference right now when it comes to containing and treating it. Righteous anger and due punishment can only prevent future problems, not deal with current ones.

Second, let's say this one scientist did have "answers" to give. Those answers would have to be legitimately received/extracted by people with power to have any meaning. If I, an angry American citizen, call his personal number a thousand times a day until he relents and says, "You're right! I totally developed this virus and it escaped!"... then what? I call my Senator? I fly over and punch him as he so richly deserves? I post his confession to the internet so other people can go over and punch him, too? I create an outcry so big that the Chinese government is shamed into publicly scapegoating him--which they may have done anyway, and may actually be a tiny part of the truth that they are happy to concede, and in any case can spin a thousand ways to their own purposes?

Third, it's completely disingenuous to claim "the contact information was public so it isn't doxxing." The word fire is just a word, too, until it's shouted in a crowded theater. Context matters. Zero Hedge told their hordes of followers that this one person needed interrogating, and posted his name, picture, address, and phone number precisely because they know the response would be much lower if their readers were expected to seek out that information on their own. The main feature of doxxing is that it bypasses the natural selection of lethargy--and that's precisely what Zero Hedge intended to happen here.

General rule of thumb: if it's a "call to action" of any kind, it's not news, it's incitement. The only judgment call to be made is whether that incitement is beneficial to the individual, society, or neither.

[Flint]

I didn't read the article and I'm not going to. Doxxing is bad. People who do it should be drawn and quartered. If you support it you're an asshole.