81–90 of 174 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not the jokes and mocking they got the boot for it's spreading intentionally misleading election information like when and how to vote.
The article gives one example and says it was a "few" accounts. Why ban all of them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> These accounts posed as liberal activists and were used to spread — among other things — false information about November’s midterm elections Which violates the Twitter policy against intentionally misleading election content. Pretty straight forward.
Pretty sure like 0.001% of those accounts did that. But it's a good excuse, granted. I think the real reason they got banned is that under every tweet of every blue-checkmark liberal on Twitter you'd find dozens of replies of accounts called NPC209834029 with the same avatar nodding and saying the same platitudes. But of course, when all the replies to all Trump tweets are from blue-checkmarks shitting on him, Twitte…
Laudable goal. Yet they shot themselves in the foot. Instead of focusing on "everyone falls into the trap of substituting popular rhetoric in the place of critical thinking" they had too much of what could be dismissed as "orange man supporter bad."
> Last week, a trolling campaign organized by right-wing internet users spilled over onto Twitter. So Twitter bans a bunch of satire accounts for political reasons and the New York Times applauds the decision. This makes me incredibly sad but I guess it's to be expected. If your political position is so weak that some jokes can damage it, maybe it's time to take a deep inward look. I don't see anyone calling on SNL t…
It's not the jokes and mocking they got the boot for it's spreading intentionally misleading election information like when and how to vote.
One thing I really like about Twitter is that you can choose to follow who you want. If you don't want to see memes making fun of you, just don't follow accounts that post/retweet these memes. It's sad that Twitter is banning satire accounts. I'm against all censorship of lawful speech, and condemn Twitter and any social media platform that participates in this kind of censorship.
It used to be 'hey, that person said something stupid', lol ok what an idiot, anyway moving on to what we were doing'
Now instead it's 'hey that person said something stupid, I need to share it to 5000 followers to show just how stupid they are and how virtuous I am for pointing out that it's stupid, hey hey hey people look look look I'm resisting the stupid look look there's a stupid person'.
What we have is a large group of people who can only be described as professional offence takers. They wake up in the morning, and go out of their way to look though twitter what to be outraged by. They proactively seek out conflict purely for the sake of virtue signalling.
And when these people engage so consistently, after a while you get people who just post shit just for the sake of getting that emotional response out of the other side.
One thing I really like about Twitter is that you can choose to follow who you want. If you don't want to see memes making fun of you, just don't follow accounts that post/retweet these memes. It's sad that Twitter is banning satire accounts. I'm against all censorship of lawful speech, and condemn Twitter and any social media platform that participates in this kind of censorship.
My experience of Twitter is the opposite. Someone I follow posts something I think is intelligent and polite, and the replies are filled with people launching tangential attacks and making weird accusations.
A tweet is like a tiny conference talk whose attendees are self-selecting. Yet random strangers all over the world are able to detect the in-progress talk, parachute in, and yell crazy things, and nobody can take away their microphone.
> It's sad that Twitter is banning satire accounts. I'm against all censorship of lawful speech, and condemn Twitter and any social media platform that participates in this kind of censorship.
Would you distinguish satire from impersonation? Eg, https://twitter.com/RealDonalDrumpf?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7... is clearly self-identifying as a satire of Donald Trump. Nobody is going to confuse that account with the real one.
But suppose hoards of people with political opinions you detest start creating accounts that pose as "your side", using the worst possible arguments for your positions, insulting everyone, and making "your side" look stupid and cruel. Is that a kind of speech you want to protect?
Evan James has a good writeup on the sort of anxieties around society that sprung up the NPC meme [0]. There's a portion which I think has a kernel of truth, although it is definitely generous to the kind of people that immaturely lashed out and made very low-effort twitter accounts which wound up propagating the meme: >The far right can be profoundly intuitive creatures, who feel more deeply than cursory glances sug…
It confuses me, because "don't take things at face value" and "don't just follow a script" is, well, postmodernism. It's also anticapitalism. It's also a commentary about peoples reverence of traditional gender roles and religions. Actually, I totally fail to see why it's a conservative meme at all, unless it's being repeated without any attempt to consider broader implications.
That's just it, I think. The meme was taken in by a crowd that itself does not practice introspection. I don't think the New York Times is too far off when they mention its spread by "attention-starved gamers": disenfranchised young men attempting their own first run at exercising a naive political opinion over the internet.
This meme is originally based on the idea that not all people have an inner voice, and the supposition that people without an inner voice may be less likely to introspect and think critically. I think the ban is a little ridiculous and likely has more to do with it's origin on a so called "far right" website than anything else.
But with that said, what isn't 'far right' these days ... I'm just counting down the days until Bernie is called far right because he's not throwing bricks through Starbucks' windows.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/opinion/southern-poverty-...
While Twitter bans criticism of the left using the NPC meme, @dbwrf, a pro (yes they exist) FGM group is not only still up but also running a Twitter ad campaign supporting FGM.
The speed at which the media have rounded against this meme is breathtaking. Are some memes inherently powerful and just need to be controlled? Why are they powerful? How much longer can 30 year old boomers be let sip Monsters outdoors? It's not right.