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

411–420 of 784 posts

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

#411

Post by kyrra »

toastercat wrote: post #71

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…

100%, great take. I tried following some tech people I admire and hit the same issue and just unfollowed them. I now only use twitter for the sole-purpose of getting political/world news when I want it. But using it for anything technically interesting is dead to me.

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

#412

Post by donatj »

I've been using Twitter for something like 12 years now. I can count on one hand the number of actual positive interactions I've had in the last couple years. I'm my experience you can't even ask people mildly pointed questions anymore without getting blocked.

You can't even try to start a conversation anymore. It's just person makes grand sweeping statment. You cheer them on, ignore them, or get blocked. It's not a healthy environment. It's just grandstanding.

It used to feel really democratizing, anyone could comment on anything. Now between people only allowing people they follow to reply and the percentage of harmless to innate comments that get hidden behind "Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content" it really doesn't feel like it once was.

In their attempts to make it more "friendly", they both made it less friendly and killed the value proposition. It's just a place to build a cult of personality these days.

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

#413

Post by throwaway1492 »

civilized wrote: post #305
wpietri wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> "my life as a member of group X should be better than that of other groups" is a political position. This isn't at all what the GP said, and that fact is one of the biggest reasons we don't like engaging in these types of conversations: a hostile stranger is liable to stop in and hammer you with a comment that reeks of contempt and disdain, and egregiously distorts what you said. "I don't want to experience all the…

> distortion-loaded shaming definitely isn't the way to accomplish that.

I'd go further and say the poster you're responding to is non charitable and down right hateful, violating at least two community guidelines:

> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

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

#414

Post by Dylan16807 »

MattGaiser wrote: post #228
UnpossibleJim wrote: post #204

So, this article states that 42% of Americans identify as politically independent. This beats the next largest political identity (Democrats, 29%) by 13%. Yet, the political system has been rigged - obviously so, for anyone who cares to look - so that an independent party fails to get the 5% necessary to get onto the ballot and future funding for the next election cycle for presidential running. How is it that there…

There are very few true independents. They may label themselves such, but they don’t vote that way. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/few-americans-who-ident... They just want to avoid the label of being one or the other.

What is a "true independent"?

Are they allowed to have any opinions about political parties?

At a federal level, based on how strongly everyone toes the line, voting is basically just picking a party. So even if 100% of the way you choose is based on the individual candidate's actions, and your vote varies widely in more local elections, at a federal level the end result is probably the same party over and over for many years.

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

#416

Post by ladyattis »

vorpalhex wrote: post #316
progman32 wrote: post #301

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…

>If given a topic like "lgbtq" issues, the debate is not "Do gay people get basic rights?".

Eeh, it's still "do gay people get basic rights" for many even in the United States. I've seen folks have last wills overturned by family through insidious legal maneuvers. I've seen doctors refuse to contact patients with biopsy results because their patients were trans. And I've seen folks even withhold paychecks from LGBT folks because of their religious nonsense. So, basic rights are still a matter of contention until it becomes not merely a legal formality that LGBT folks are equal under the law but that the entire population does not even think that they have a chance to violate those formalities and that they feel bad about thinking of doing such a thing. Until that happens, LGBT discussions will always go back to "do gay people have basic rights?".

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

#417

Post by vikaveri »

vorpalhex wrote: post #146
toastercat wrote: post #71

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'…

I feel that if you're expecting your 'whole friend' to be exactly compatible with your opinions, you're not really looking for friends, you're looking for confirmation for your own opinions. I fully expect to disagree with a lot of things my friends say or think, and that there will be arguments. When we do argue, sometimes they change their mind, sometimes I change mine but mostly we agree to disagree. What makes a difference between a friend and a non-friend is that even if we disagree on some fundamental things and a lot of trivial things, our core values more or less align, and both sides respect the other and realize that there is no way you're right about everything. If you are, you don't have friends. You have followers and sycophants.

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

#418

Post by Fr0styMatt88 »

vorpalhex wrote: post #146
toastercat wrote: post #71

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'…

Maybe part of it is just that typing text into a post doesn't viscerally feel like standing in front of a group of hundreds of people and shouting over a megaphone. I noticed that in myself when I first got into Facebook way back - when it was still novel, I tended to post 'stream of consciousness' type stuff. You intellectually know that your post is going to be seen by a lot of people, but _in the moment_ it doesn't _feel_ like that.

I imagine that many people have a similar experience. You're yelling into a megaphone but it feels more like you're writing an entry in your diary.

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

#419

Post by manmal »

MiddleEndian wrote: post #147

I got my twitter account MyfirstnameMylastname somewhere early in the site's existence, probably around 2009. But never really got the appeal of Twitter so I never used it for anything, I'd check it once every six months or so. I eventually learned I share a name with a tech journalist who is very active on Twitter, and occasionally I would get tagged instead instead of him. Every time, I would respond with the Navy…

Is there something else to learn from this story besides not insulting people?

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

#420

Post by wpietri »

civilized wrote: post #305
wpietri wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> "my life as a member of group X should be better than that of other groups" is a political position. This isn't at all what the GP said, and that fact is one of the biggest reasons we don't like engaging in these types of conversations: a hostile stranger is liable to stop in and hammer you with a comment that reeks of contempt and disdain, and egregiously distorts what you said. "I don't want to experience all the…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN