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

631–640 of 784 posts

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

#631

Post by Ansil849 »

HWR_14 wrote: post #578
Ansil849 wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I, in turn, unfortunately had to listen to fellow players complain about the name change throughout a whole game the other week.

It seems like they read a lot of politics into a fairly simple issue. As brands go on, they try to simplify and occupy more space. I would be shocked if properties didn't see being able to simplify and maintain the brand as being a huge win.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. My point was just that even things which are supposed to be relaxing and apolitical like board games, are being politicized over things like discussing name changes. And that sucks.

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

#632

Post by Ansil849 »

isleyaardvark wrote: post #442
nonameiguess wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is politicized about that? I had no idea the name had ever changed, but thanks to your comment, just spent the last 20 minutes trying to figure out why and no Internet sources citing the fact that a rebrand happened give a reason at all. The only somewhat "political" theory seems to be a Reddit thread citing a Dutch publication claiming the rebrand happened because of pressure from Palestinians complaining that…

It is being politicized, just not by the makers of Catan.

Yeah, just to clarify: the point of my anecdote is that even things like board games, which are supposed to be fun and relaxing, are being politicized by some people over topics like name changes.

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

#633

Post by eloisius »

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'…

What you're describing is called "context collapse." Pre-social media you had face that you presented in different contexts, now you have one flattened out "you" feed.

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

#634

Post by findingaway »

ReactiveJelly wrote: post #563
lazide wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think so - my impression is that it’s feed algorithms pushing the most incendiary topics to people because they get the most engagement. Nothing gets people going like someone saying something divisive or controversial after all. So pretty soon most of the feed is divisive bullshit.

> Nothing gets people going like someone saying something divisive Shiri's Scissor: https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/30/sort-by-controversial/

Thank you for this.

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

#635

Post by tekknik »

mardifoufs wrote: post #599
abruzzi wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd never heard of "navy seal copypasta", so I googled it, and to my read, its very hard to see any >wink wink< in the text, which ends after a long screed, with threats of violence against the poster. So I think its reasonable to believe that maybe on of the people on the twitter abuse team didn't get the joke and instead saw what on its surface looks like a threat. I don't know twitter's ToS, but I'm guessing that…

The part about "gorilla warfare" wasn't a hint?

There’s also the part about “you’re dead”, which is a crime. The one time someone assumes this is a joke and then something bad happens…

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

#636

Post by tekknik »

mdoms wrote: post #337
buryat wrote: 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

User who is receiving unsolicited messages from strangers should be the one banned because he decides to respond with a little joke?

A little joke that ends in a death threat.

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

#637

Post by tekknik »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #433
manmal wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yeah, actually a fundamental rule of comedy: always get the audience on your side. If they don't know you, aren't rooting for you, or think you're on the "wrong side", they will misinterpret your joke as a real insult. Comedians directly insult people all the time and get laughs, but only because the audience believes they're on the same side as the comedian.

Did nobody read the entire copypasta? What comedian jokes using death threats?

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

#638

Post by zaargy »

thrwawy283 wrote: post #274
vorpalhex wrote: post #146

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'…

This is an interesting idea: I wish you could Follow a combination of a person and the #topic they post to. You could choose to follow "all of" a person, but more realistically the default behavior would be to attach to posts from a particular topic that person is generating. This would be similar to your example of playing a game of Catan with someone and enjoying just that limited bandwidth you have with them. Know…

No post body was provided.

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

#639

Post by pengaru »

As far as I can tell all "social media" is a raging dumpster fire, which self-selects for most engagement with people who actually enjoy spending their time in a dumpster fire.

But this all seems like a fantastic feature, just ignore it all! There are so many better things to do with your time. The people you most want nothing to do with are being most consumed by it, leaving the beaches, parks, campgrounds, trails, etc. more available for your enjoyment.

Let the twits have at it, good riddance.

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

#640

Post by vorpalhex »

hedgewitch wrote: post #597
mechanical_bear wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You constructed a straw man out of his comments very effectively. I didn’t gather that he meant you can’t mention your life, significant other, etc. I read it as maybe don’t discuss the political aspects of LGBT issues, etc

If you don't understand that the problem is that detractors have made simply being LGBTQ+ a political issue, you are not qualified to have an opinion here. I'm curious what you think you mean because there is no good answer. I also wouldn't have had to comment at all if people weren't casually asking people to instate don't ask don't tell in social settings.

Remember to interpret someone's arguments in the strongest possible sense. Chastising others is great for moral superiority but it is a poor tool for discussion.
Post reply on HN