Live data from Hacker News

The new silent majority: People who don't tweet

axios.com

351–360 of 784 posts

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

#351
So glad my toxic/addictive social network experiences were years ago on old style forums. It’s been wild watching the rest of the world go through the same thing but completely public not on some niche forum nobody reads.

If these networks are here to stay we very clearly need to at least train people from a young age how to mentally handle social networks.

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

#352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree in general, there are plenty of circumstances where people don't get to not have an opinion about things. For example, you can't "agree to disagree" on LGBTQ rights if you belong to one of those categories. See also pregnant people and abortion rights.

Within LGBTQ communities there are mass disagreements. Should women-only spaces include trans people? Is the word "transsexual" a valid identity even when self chosen? There are even Ls and Gs who think Bs are "faking it". The trick is that it's not a boolean question. Someone can be gay and anti-trans and this is trivially true.

> There are even Ls and Gs who think Bs are "faking it".

I've seen a shirt that says "Bi now, gay later"

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

#353
post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a European, comments of this nature confuse me a little. This comments suggests an equivalency. But from this side of the pond I haven't seen the Democrats you describe actually in power and implementing policy. Can't say that about the other side. So why would any Democrats who are liberal but not "woke" be frustrated since those elements of their party wield little if any influence.

As an American, I'll try to explain how our two parties (and their voters) work in practice. The Left (voters) have two main platforms: economic and cultural. The Right (voters) have two main platforms: economic and cultural. The Left votes for the Democratic Party. The Right votes for the Republican Party. Independents mostly vote one way or another, and a small percentage vote for whoever seems most moderate that p…

Thanks for taking the time to reply. Interesting points. I'm still confused about what cultural policies the "woke" left implemented that would encourage other dems to vote for a third middle way part should one exist. I can see the other side easily.

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

#354

I tried being a Twitter user for a bit last year, mostly because a lot of engineers I admire use it to communicate about interesting topics and also their work. But after a while, I realized even they will pollute my feed with politically divisive topics, whether it be from them retweeting something, or liking a tweet, or even entering into the fray themselves -- Twitter will find a way to get me to see it. For a whi…

One of my pet theories for why social media is such a cesspool is that it exposes us to the whole of someone else. If I play boardgames with Sue, that's enough. We meet, enjoy a beer and play some Catan and go our separate ways. That's a fine relationship. If I follow Sue on social media, now I know her politics, religion, sex life, drug usage, opinions on every little thing.. and frankly, I don't care or want to. I'…

Excellent theory. I think it's more than that - you now have tidbits of her opinion on every little thing without the benefit of nonverbal communication, empathy and nuance that you would if you actually talked to her for the same amount of time.

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

#355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you clarify your point? Not sure I follow.

If given a topic like "lgbtq" issues, the debate is not "Do gay people get basic rights?". Nobody is actually having that debate anymore and you're fighting straw men. Ie, these debates are not between "pro-lgbtq" and "anti-lgbtq". Instead most of these debates are more nuanced and complicated. I picked the "trap" debate because it's hotly contested, with both sides swearing up and down they are pro-lgbtq and both si…

Thanks for the clarification.

I think mutual respect also plays a part here. My respect, demeanor towards, and willingness to play Settlers with someone who believes LGBTQIA+ people are sinners depends a lot on whether or not that person engages in honest, consensual debate and respects the human on the other side. That is how we form good relationships and strengthen our collective understanding. I wish to underscore the importance of consensual debate, especially when there's a power gradient.

I will say though, "Do gay people get basic rights" is _very much_ still a subject of debate. Sadly.

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

#356
post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My favorite theory comes from an HN comment describing it as the "toaster fucker problem." I'd attempt to re-explain it, but the original comment is great (and easy to search for. Not many mentions of the phrase "toaster fucker" on HN.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25667362

Ironically enough, that thread devolved into an irrelevant political argument.

The original thread is literally about the the riots from Jan 6.

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

#357

I tried being a Twitter user for a bit last year, mostly because a lot of engineers I admire use it to communicate about interesting topics and also their work. But after a while, I realized even they will pollute my feed with politically divisive topics, whether it be from them retweeting something, or liking a tweet, or even entering into the fray themselves -- Twitter will find a way to get me to see it. For a whi…

Excellent points and completely agreed. Social media has turned the private into the public. The old adage, don’t talk politics and don’t throw stones has been completely abandoned. We used to discuss these divisive topics within the contexts in which it was appropriate to do so. Now, it’s literally everywhere.

I am not sure what the solution is. It’s a societal pandora’s box and it’s open.

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

#358
post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was one of the ideas behind Google+ - "circles". You could put other people in different broadcast "circles" and then you wouldn't end up announcing your weird fetish preferences or drug use to your grandma or your coworkers - at least not intentionally.

Wouldn't work in practice - no one is going to pass an opportunity to broadcast their political views to as many people as possible.

Presumably people are losing a lot of followers on Twitter broadcasting their political views when they are mostly followed for some other reason. These people might be motivated to correctly categorise their Tweets.

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

#359
post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every time, I would respond with the Navy Seal Copypasta, broken into eight twitter sized parts. Eventually they banned me for this. yeah, people like you should be banned

Is this sarcasm? If not, I'd love to hear the rationale behind this, as to me this seems far less objectionable than lots of things which happen on mainstream Twitter.

Consider that so many people do not care to preserve the environments of online public spaces. While the pollution of digital environments with semiotic trash is less tangible and persistent than the beer cans, cigarette butts, and used needles on the streets of our cities, can you really defend its production? What kinds of cultures, mindsets, and personalities would this breed?

Yes, there are far worse things. But let us hold ourselves to our own high standards and be proud.

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

#360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my pet theories for why social media is such a cesspool is that it exposes us to the whole of someone else. If I play boardgames with Sue, that's enough. We meet, enjoy a beer and play some Catan and go our separate ways. That's a fine relationship. If I follow Sue on social media, now I know her politics, religion, sex life, drug usage, opinions on every little thing.. and frankly, I don't care or want to. I'…

> If I play boardgames with Sue, that's enough. We meet, enjoy a beer and play some Catan and go our separate ways. That's a fine relationship. > If I follow Sue on social media, now I know her politics, religion, sex life, drug usage, opinions on every little thing.. and frankly, I don't care or want to. I'm happy just playing some Catan once in a while. > Historically you didn't need to know everything about everyo…

I will say in this case Catan is cool and feels natural, like what people would call it if they're still playing the game a hundred years from now. So maybe it was politically sparked but the rebrand feels solid.
Post reply on HN