Reddit is worse imo just because of how the site is structured and the power of mods.
So no, Reddit is not worse than Xitter both on social and tech merit.
You may has well have replied that, in fact, its color scheme is more red than Twitter.
Option B: a power tripping drug-addled Nazi billionaire owns the entire site and can change the site behavior for every user on a whim, with no recourse.
This doesn’t seem like a hard choice to make.
Reddit can be good if you stay in your niche and off the default subs. Twitter is good if you similarly curate your experience and don’t let it push you into garbage.
I don’t use either much anymore.
I want to follow the guy who tracked Elon's jet and documented its fuel usage and CO2 emissions. Oops, can't make that part of my "curated experience" on Twitter. So much for free speech absolutism.
The point is that when you're subject to the whims of an irrational asshole, you can't have any assurance that your curated experience will stay consistent. For this reason alone, Twitter is worse than Reddit.
But I don't use either site anymore at all.
Are you anti-drugs? Do you think drug users are bad people or using drugs is condemnable? I'm asking because anti-fascists are typically pro-drugs. So I'm confused.
You don't think drug users are bad people, so surely that's just a neutral question...
Or maybe there are times where drug use can still be a problem, whether it makes people bad people or not.
Don't drink and drive. Don't do drugs and buy media companies.
But you are right, so you agree that frequent drug users should not be offered jobs with responsibilities because for example they might drug and drive.
I never said any such thing. Please don’t misrepresent my words.
No.
> Do you think drug users are bad people
No, no one is a bad person only because they use drugs.
> or using drugs is condemnable
As a general statement, no.
But my answer is yes, your actions are condemnable, if you decide to let drugs affect your mental state in any way as you’re making important decisions that affect other people.
For example, if you’re making safety decisions for a vehicle that’s being manufactured. Or if you are making pretty much any decision at all for a company that you run which makes medical devices that are implanted in people's bodies. Or if you’re deciding to gut a government program that is responsible for feeding or medicating thousands of people (meaning that your decisions can directly lead to thousands of deaths).
Do you think an emotionally inept billionare Nazi with a drug problem should have been in charge of deciding whether poor people from other countries (who are often non-white) continue to receive life-saving aid? Do you think if that person makes the decision to cut that aid, killing those people, it's appropriate for him to brag about it publicly using the term "wood chipper" as a metaphor?