6 ms·

General sentiment might be this, but every social network (even Instagram and Facebook) can be good and productive if you change how you use them. If you follo

• secretsatan 20d ago
  But it’s still supporting a man who’s a toxic as they come and working hard to distort reality and undermine democracy, you won’t wash that toxic off.
  • philipallstar 20d ago
    Allowing more voices on the platform might've made it more toxic (who knows - you're not the judge of toxic) but at least we have left- and right-wing toxicity, instead of only left-wing. And we get a lot of additional non-toxic voices, which was the actual point.
    • secretsatan 20d ago
      You think there wasn’t right wing toxicity before?
      • philipallstar 20d ago
        Again, there's no point using a word like "toxicity".
    • angoragoats 20d ago
      [dead]
    • ImPostingOnHN 20d ago
      > Allowing more voices on the platform might've made it more toxic (who knows - you're not the judge of toxic) Allowing the nazi voices definitely did. And while that dude isn't the judge of what is toxic, a majority of people are. I don't know what you personally want to call it when someone posts condolences about a tragedy or massacre killing many people in their home country, and the nazis pop up to reply "you're next, [racial slur omitted]". Pretty sure most people would call that toxic, so it's toxic, even if a small minority of people disagree.
      • nxor5 20d ago
        Abdul Ballout drove a car into CSD-goers in Berlin on 25.7. Were affected parties able to discuss better on Twitter or Bluesky? As philipallstar wrote, in a chamber of only left-wing voices, the discussion is not better.
        • ImPostingOnHN 20d ago
          Maybe, maybe not. I don't use BlueSky, are there often people there threatening racially-based killings, with the reporters getting banned? That is the worst for sure. Seems like a tangent either way: letting violent right-wing nazis do violent right-wing nazi things on twitter has definitely made it worse and more toxic than not letting violent right-wing nazis do violent right-wing nazi things on twitter. Indeed, death threats are worse than whatever censorship one claims happened on twitter pre-elmu, because free speech is predicated upon appropriately responding to death threats. Otherwise, speech can be censored with violence, and on twitter, it is now (along with elmu and friends censoring accounts they don't like by banning them).
          • nxor5 20d ago
            I bring up an Islamist attack in Berlin and you respond with right-wing nazi violence this that. We won't see eye to eye. "They don't call you a Nazi because you are one, they call you a Nazi to silence you."
            • 20d ago
• spiderfarmer 20d ago
  > you have to choose between losing a source or compromise with the platform I thought so too. But after leaving 3 years ago it turns out: Not a single source is that important. Also, as the importance increases, the likelihood of seeing the same information outside that hellhole increases linearly.
• vvillena 20d ago
  The platform compromise is a new thing. One of the reasons people used Twitter was its open nature, enabling its use as a bulletin board where anyone could post a message and being sure that the message link was free for anyone to see. This isn't the case anymore, as X forces people to make accounts to see messages.
  • HarlequinHair 20d ago
    Yes, indeed, And just as the platform changed, also your choices can change :) Twitter is a private company, deciding for their own services. Leaving it behind is more useful than asking them to rollback.
• deleted 20d ago
  [deleted]