'private platforms don't have to host your speech' is the 'just move' of liberals

like yeah we can have leftist private platforms but that doesn't stop silencing of leftists by leftists

and so far leftists haven't made any rules or agreement about silencing people outside 'its up to whoever has power over the platform you use' which is kinda shitty?

@rosemary@deadinsi.de to put it explicity, i'm frustrated that leftists are fine with power structures where singular groups moderate online content at their own whim. granted it works better than hosting nazis, but we all have biases, and we're all subject to the overton window of acceptable thought

Follow

@rosemary@deadinsi.de inevitebly server admins will delete speech they don't like and will fall back on 'my server, my rules' which is an argument based capitalist bullshit and privilege, the same capitalist bullshit of 'if you dont like it, just move'. leftists are cheering when fascists get deplatformed by capitalist organizations

@jookia @rosemary

not a leftist, but, the problems are with expectations.

people shouldn't expect site owners to make decisions that are necessarily in their interest.

social platforms should not be treated as essential communication, but people pretend that they are.

things were fine before social media, and they'd be fine without it. and every shade between. people will pursue their echo chambers regardless.

@elliptic that's a fine and consistent argument, but not the one i'm finding trouble with

@jookia @rosemary

i'd close by saying, it's fine for people to feel good that donald trump has been kicked off some shit. he's the world's leading asshole.

i like the twitter-as-a-bar analogy. if you're unruly and cause problems in a bar, you're likely to get asked to leave, or tossed out. do that enough times and they'll ask you to never come around again.

why should donald trump be treated any different? everyone equal under the law, and that goes down to the neighborhood pub level

@jookia @rosemary

all that said, twitter does not enforce their policies uniformly and there is some valid criticism there. even if i know how these things work and know that it's impossible to scale a site with that kind of moderation.

at the end of the day, ideally people will be better, but that's not going to happen, so i think the most reasonable expectation is that site owners will imperfectly apply moderation in their own interest.

@jookia @rosemary

this doesn't need any government intervention.

offended conservatives need to stop being snowflakes, pull their pants up and get to work on building their own shit if it offends them so much.

conservatives pretty much dominate AM radio, but i don't hear leftists screaming for a federal takeover of AM radio.

leftists have already gone to work on the tech needed to be independent. conservatives largely haven't, and currently lack the competence to do it.

@elliptic like just to clarify (sorry for pulling rosemary in to this as a tag i wanted to reply but in my main thread) i don't have much interest in discussing twitter or trump or whatever moderation we should or shouldn't have. i just find it frustrating that anti-capitalists make capitalist arguments

@jookia

gotcha. i think both sides (and i'm on neither) fit the argument to suit the moment.

it's important to understand what the "commons" is, and what it isn't. a private site isn't the commons, unless of course they've explicitly gone out of their way to structure things with open licenses and ESPECIALLY if they're a non-profit taking government funding.

exactly zero of the primary social media sites people use fit any of that criteria. even in fedi, it's problematic.

@jookia @rosemary i said something like this some days ago. we'll find out who the real liberals still are because they're upset even though it's their opposition.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!