I think the election fraud nonsense suggests it might not be that simple. Bad actors in positions of power are abusing these services to the point where we have real conflict occurring.
How do we account for these edge cases?
Can we agree that calls for violence is a limit of speech that is good?
[0] https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim...
Did twitter contribute to the events on the 6th? Do they have any role to play?
Do you have to use the words "go and kill them" in order for it to be violence?
I'm trying to be genuine here, because I don't know. I will say it certainly feels like we saw the violence being induced for months ahead of time on twitter without explicit calls for violence.
Should we just allow this?
It's happening still. We have members of congress calling the election stolen. This is how more violence happens. It's a slow burn, but it's a burn.
Hackernews famously moderates their comment section, to the benefit of all.
Why can't this happen on Twitter?
I agree, they have created a really unfortunate situation for us and for them.
In principal, forgetting the practicalities, would you support HN style moderation on Twitter/FB?
My gut reaction is yes. It seems to be a good balance of gut check and "we don't have time for this".
o/t
5 star online conversation dude.