Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 784 posts

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#61

Post by zelphirkalt »

I disagree with the wording of the article or its title's wording.

Not being on Twitter is being called "silent"? Is that the yardstick for not being silent?

I'd rather communicate outside of giant echo chambers and text length limitations and engagement optimized (a)social spying media, with real people and speak out there. With family, friends, the neighbors or the neighborhood, for example. Outrage about whatever on Twitter will not help anyone much, except Twitter.

I would also guess, that more than 25% of people in the US vote in elections. Surely that is not "being silent".

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#62

Post by vasco »

jamesfe wrote: post #26
typeofhuman wrote: post #6

I don't engage on Twitter out of fear. I sometimes see posts that I like and want to retweet but I don't because it means I'm endorsing everything the author has ever said or ever will say. It's not worth the risk. People in my demographic face significant exposure to "cancelling" or ambushing for wrongthink. So it's best for me to avoid it entirely.

This exactly. I once tried the twitter game, I thought it was important to have a big following or say clever things, whatever. I was lightly burned by a tweet (of my own authoring) once, and I thought "I make $XYZ per year, twitter pays me nothing, this joke tweet caused me a lot of stress, the odds that being on twitter will get me cancelled will cost me $XYZ are non-zero and I don't control them" Then I deleted al…

Exact same story except recently I created an empty account with private lists that I follow (so not even the people I "follow" is public), and I can still keep up with some topics from a source of information that generally is on the bleeding edge. Usually I find things in twitter / discord first, then they hit Reddit, then mainstream media. If you only follow reddit you have a slight delay currently, and for some of my interests, fresh information is helpful.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#63

Post by blowski »

bob1029 wrote: post #42
typeofhuman wrote: post #6

I don't engage on Twitter out of fear. I sometimes see posts that I like and want to retweet but I don't because it means I'm endorsing everything the author has ever said or ever will say. It's not worth the risk. People in my demographic face significant exposure to "cancelling" or ambushing for wrongthink. So it's best for me to avoid it entirely.

I don't think this is a healthy way to live. There was another conversation thread started about an hour ago that dives into this really well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30602611 I would reiterate my comment on that thread, verbatim: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30603008

On the contrary, this seems to me a very healthy way to live. Until the last 15 years, very few people had their views expressed beyond a narrow circle. Standing on a public stage and shouting your every thought would have seemed crazy.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#64

Post by Ekaros »

tenebrisalietum wrote: post #23
RobertRoberts wrote: post #16

Can someone explain why they would ever put something on Twitter that is not marketing related? (I get it for business, but why for personal use?)

Many artists use it as a platform to show their art. I'm betting it's more popular than DeviantArt for this purpose, for example.

Wouldn't that be marketing? Private, but marketing still. At least if those artist also provide commercial services.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#65

Post by alphabetting »

jamesfe wrote: post #26
typeofhuman wrote: post #6

I don't engage on Twitter out of fear. I sometimes see posts that I like and want to retweet but I don't because it means I'm endorsing everything the author has ever said or ever will say. It's not worth the risk. People in my demographic face significant exposure to "cancelling" or ambushing for wrongthink. So it's best for me to avoid it entirely.

This exactly. I once tried the twitter game, I thought it was important to have a big following or say clever things, whatever. I was lightly burned by a tweet (of my own authoring) once, and I thought "I make $XYZ per year, twitter pays me nothing, this joke tweet caused me a lot of stress, the odds that being on twitter will get me cancelled will cost me $XYZ are non-zero and I don't control them" Then I deleted al…

This is the way

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#69

Post by blockmarker »

tayo42 wrote: post #34
typeofhuman wrote: post #6

I don't engage on Twitter out of fear. I sometimes see posts that I like and want to retweet but I don't because it means I'm endorsing everything the author has ever said or ever will say. It's not worth the risk. People in my demographic face significant exposure to "cancelling" or ambushing for wrongthink. So it's best for me to avoid it entirely.

It's really easy to not be "canceled", just be a good person. What genuinely OK opinion are people being canceled for?

It's really easy to not be burned at the stake, just don't be a witch.

Re: The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

#70

Post by aksss »

tayo42 wrote: post #34
typeofhuman wrote: post #6

I don't engage on Twitter out of fear. I sometimes see posts that I like and want to retweet but I don't because it means I'm endorsing everything the author has ever said or ever will say. It's not worth the risk. People in my demographic face significant exposure to "cancelling" or ambushing for wrongthink. So it's best for me to avoid it entirely.

It's really easy to not be "canceled", just be a good person. What genuinely OK opinion are people being canceled for?

just believe in our gods and you won't get burned at the stake, how hard is that, people? I mean really? /s
Post reply on HN