Serious question, why is any non-nazi posting on twitter?
To use community notes
It’s becoming like Facebook, which is were people’s parents, uncles and aunts and even grandparents (as well as technically inept organisations) are, but you yourself either moved on or are too young to have ever wanted to be there (“because nobody my age is there”), only whilst Facebook is merelly a Propaganda outlet for the Far Right, Twitter is openly Nazi.
Not everyone wants to only see a highly censored echo chamber.
Right so why post on Twitter then?
Because Twitter is the only social media site that isn’t a highly censored echo chamber.
That’s not censorship. You can still post with that word and it doesn’t get deleted. It just won’t get spread as far and wide. All your followers etc will still see it.
It just won’t get spread as far and wide.
It’s being blocked from being read or seen, as per the definition. They are quite literally censoring a word for political reasons in line with their political agenda. Don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining.
Do you think they should classify the “n word” as a slur and limit its reach? Is that censorship?
Cis isn’t being blocked from being seen or read.
And why are you here?
Based on their username and posts they are here to troll.
Not trolling at all, just have different opinions to the echo chamber.
Being factually incorrect is not an opinion. It’s being factually incorrect.
But knock yourself out: X does not censor, Earth is flat, whatever you want to believe…
Since Musk took over, the censorship requests went from 50% accepted to 80% accepted.
How do you know this?
Eu please put up or shut up. Either hold X accountable, or just say they are big to regulate and can do whatever
Every time i saw a screenshot of these i was really confused why they were still around despite Musk being Musk.
Nobody should use that app. It is a scurge to humanity.
Folks need to make the switch to literally anything else
Oh noes: a private company that has no duty to challenge falsehoods has given up any pretense of giving a fuck.
They asolutely should and likely do have a duty to challenge falsehoods.
The word private makes people feel like it isnt anyone’s business but that isnt the case.
I’d rather “trust” a company that cuts the bullshit with notices like
The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.to remind the user that trusting noncredible information from unreliable sources is a ridiculous concept.
Except for the users presenting shit as facts and it being promoted through their platform.
Doesn’t reminding users not to be so gullible address that?
A problem is promoting unrealistic expectations that untrustworthy information is reliable because someone else will unerringly determine the truth & catch falsehoods from spreading. Claiming that ever made sense is bogus.
What is your position here, that they dont have a responsibility or they do?
The platform hosts everyone from nazi sympathisers to famed and accredited journalists, should they be presented as equals? Because if there is no onus and it is all caught under the same blanket warning there is a false equivalency being presented.
That it’s irresponsible to sell a false bill of goods: a company sincere about not giving a fuck & that merely puts out an advisory is more credible than one that entertains illusions that fact-checking all social media isn’t a foolish endeavor. We don’t get that in reality, so why should we pretend we can get that online? Ultimately, the burden & responsibility to work out the truth is & has always been with the individual, and it’s irresponsible to pretend we can sever or transfer that responsibility, especially in an open medium like the town square, social media, or general reality.
There’s also the intractable problem of settling the truth. Why should anyone trust a company or anyone to be arbiter of truth? Infallible authorities don’t exist & they are inevitably going to get this wrong & draw wild conclusions like that pro-palestinian protests are antisemitic & need to be censored. While they could merely place notes/comments of fallible, researched opinions, we already get that with discussions like in real life.
Social media isn’t a controlled publication like an encyclopedia or news agency that chooses its writers & staff. It’s a communication platform open to the public.
Instead of promoting a false sense of confidence that lowers people’s guard with assurances no one can deliver, it’s better to cut the pretense, admit there is no real solution, and remind everyone the obvious—unreliable information from anyone is untrustworthy, so they need to grow up, verify their information, and keep their guard up.
Your argument is built upon the position that it would be impossible to guarantee the veracity when it just is not the case. Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information.
If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible why cant the richest organisations on the planet be held to the same, or preferrably a higher, satandard?
