Headlines Truth Hurts

BRiT

CRaZY
Founder
12,444
7,941
637
I think the large platforms should ban obviously harmful material. In particular Individual Number One should not be allowed on any public social media outlets.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Agree
Reactions: 2 users

BlastemSkyHigh

The Original Fuck You Bomb
Premium
339
252
88
I think the large platforms should ban obviously harmful material. In particular Individual Number One should not be allowed on any public social media outlets.

It shouldnt have taken this long to do so either. After the first years worth of crap you would think they would encourage some good political statement values,
but money from the ads speaks louder than common sense I 'spose.
 
  • 1Agree
Reactions: 1 user

BeautifulSniper

Lovely and deadly
1,003
574
136
It shouldnt have taken this long to do so either. After the first years worth of crap you would think they would encourage some good political statement values,
but money from the ads speaks louder than common sense I 'spose.
Trump makes all truthful statements. Trump is going to win the election!
 
  • 1Kill It With Fire
  • 1Smite
Reactions: 1 users

CoprophagousCop

Social Distancing Warrior
Premium
2,525
2,395
357
Donald Trump said:
Whoever cheated the most would win.

Actually, there is evidence to support this: 2000, 2004, 2016

Also, Trump's statement implies that he cheats too.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Catseye

Fresh Meat
4
1
3
Twitter labels Trump’s tweets with a fact check for the first time
https://www.washingtonpost.com/tech...wRqyhFAN4_pnGOSrYTSuEZiTPjVo_SBM8vkK-Q0ltVYww


And less specifically,
how do you feel in general about these large platforms being responsible for fact checking content posted to their space?

Vulnerable to all sorts of nefarious influences. How do you sort opinion from fact? If Trump says "X is the greatest X in the history of our country", how do you fact-check that? What means "great"? As the fact-checker, would your politics have a bearing? Would an honest finding alienate the money? Omigod, then what do you do!?

Probably as a card-carrying grownup you're on your own in these media when it comes to truth vs. fiction. Shouldn't expect the platform to hold your hand.
 

BlastemSkyHigh

The Original Fuck You Bomb
Premium
339
252
88
Vulnerable to all sorts of nefarious influences. How do you sort opinion from fact? If Trump says "X is the greatest X in the history of our country", how do you fact-check that? What means "great"? As the fact-checker, would your politics have a bearing? Would an honest finding alienate the money? Omigod, then what do you do!?

Probably as a card-carrying grownup you're on your own in these media when it comes to truth vs. fiction. Shouldn't expect the platform to hold your hand.

So, since I'm pretty much the age of your granpa, and still believe I'm smarter than the average old man in today's world.

You know I post this as general information..right?
Its a Post Filler..something to converse about..and if you think for a second that I don't fact check on my own, let alone post it somewhere to be vilified..I've been around long enough, I can take the heat,

But you....I can tell by your writing style, That you are a moron,
So Please Do Not Under Any Circumstances
Confuse Me With Someone Who Gives A Fuck About Your Opinion.
 
Last edited:
  • 1WTF!?
Reactions: 1 user

Canadian Pyro

Postaholic
1,744
124
377
I think the large platforms should ban obviously harmful material. In particular Individual Number One should not be allowed on any public social media outlets.
It's funny how the internet has changed in the last fifteen years or so. Back before boomer facebook, communities like this one hosted a lot of fairly lively arguments about all kinds of political issues. (Anyone know what happened to DanGeo, by the way?) Moderation was always pretty strict, though, and the stakes were always very low, because it's not like a billion people have wtf.com accounts. So you could mostly say what you wanted and if you were over the line of flaming someone then you might get banned and have to go somewhere else. But even that wasn't so bad because there were a lot of other places to go.

Nowadays we see like 4 or 5 major platforms where much of the conversation takes place, but somehow they are both far more consequential and way less well moderated than what came before them. So Donald Trump or weird qanon greebs can continuously spread total garbage and never really face material pushback. (Yes, I know twitter banned a bunch of qanon accounts, but watch how effective that isn't going to be.)

I kind of like applying the wtf test to these guys. (It's actually what got me thinking about this site again, believe it or not.) If it looks to me like your public statements and tweets could be enough to get you banned from wtf.com, where the stakes are far lower, maybe these platforms shouldn't be giving you the biggest megaphone in the world to shout with.
 
  • 1Agree
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 users

Catseye

Fresh Meat
4
1
3
But you....I can tell by your writing style, That you are a moron,
So Please Do Not Under Any Circumstances
Confuse Me With Someone Who Gives A Fuck About Your Opinion.

I'm not a moron. I've met enough morons on the Internet that I'd know if I was one by now. This instruction of yours seems simple enough. I'm glad to comply, and in turn, I'll undertake not to give a fuck about yours, either.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

RebelBuddha

Rey de Currumpaw
10,846
5,494
487
I believe in the right to be wrong. By choice or by lack of knowledge.

I think that fact checking is backdoor gatekeeping to information. It's control over morality.

In a truly free forum you need to be able to say anything and everything. But it's no different than standing on the street. You are responsible for what you say. But any unelected Borg that decides the truth is very orwellian to me.

Not to say that no post can be censored, but only those posts which are a violation of the law.
 
  • 1WTF!?
Reactions: 1 user

BeautifulSniper

Lovely and deadly
1,003
574
136
I believe in the right to be wrong. By choice or by lack of knowledge.

I think that fact checking is backdoor gatekeeping to information. It's control over morality.

In a truly free forum you need to be able to say anything and everything. But it's no different than standing on the street. You are responsible for what you say. But any unelected Borg that decides the truth is very orwellian to me.

Not to say that no post can be censored, but only those posts which are a violation of the law.

I don't understand why people want to be willfully wrong about things. It doesn't make you more free, it makes you stupid and gullible believing fake shit.
 
  • 1Agree
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 users

BlastemSkyHigh

The Original Fuck You Bomb
Premium
339
252
88
Maybe I came off a tad harsh, and honestly haven't seen enough of your writing to call you any names, so apologies..
Everyone has a right to be wrong, but whoever does it just to stoke flames,and use it as a distraction, that's wrong, and thats what I was getting at with the post.
 

BlastemSkyHigh

The Original Fuck You Bomb
Premium
339
252
88
I am a mean and grumpy old man, if I don't have my two cups of coffee when I get up, I tend to be a bit grumpier, this is my way of an apologies to you all since I do come off as harsh sometimes,
and I really have been thru many presidents and political bullshit in my days,
so I posted one of my favorite Fact Checks of PolitiFact..here is their excerpt on the POTUS and since I have used this platform before to check on things and people it seems like a good idea to have a look and laugh at some of the flumps he has made.


Code:
https://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

RebelBuddha

Rey de Currumpaw
10,846
5,494
487
I don't understand why people want to be willfully wrong about things. It doesn't make you more free, it makes you stupid and gullible believing fake shit.
I don't understand why people want highly regulated systems of control.

This is more an issue with power for me than if or not some thing is true or false or right or wrong.

There should also be a distinction between true false and right wrong. I don't think there should be any censorship, and I don't think that there should be any mechanism which attempts to tell someone how to interpret a thing.

And sure, it may suck to have people that are willfully ignorant or wrong.... But they should still have an unmolested right to free speech.

There would likely be a slippery slope with these fact checkers attempting to verify info with a political slant, aim or goal. It also turns these services into deities. Who checks the fact checkers? Do you want to hand over your ability to discern truth to someone other than yourself?
 

BlastemSkyHigh

The Original Fuck You Bomb
Premium
339
252
88
I believe the fact checker's fact check on their facts, and like reporters they probably have access to material that you and I couldn't get, when I see a story in my news feed, I go to more than one source to read it, because everyone writes it differently, I try to be open minded about it all, but people who stir the pot just to cause trouble just makes it worse than it should be.
 
  • 2Agree
Reactions: 1 users

CoprophagousCop

Social Distancing Warrior
Premium
2,525
2,395
357
I believe we have a right to know the truth so that we can make decisions based on the truth. People who spread falsehoods infringe on this right and should be called out, if not censored. Anarchy is a form of corruption.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

RebelBuddha

Rey de Currumpaw
10,846
5,494
487
Yeah, the news is subject to corruption for political aims through deliberate subterfuge... But fact checkers and journos.... Well... Those guys would never do that.

I think that we ought to use tyranny against the people who do and say the things I don't like in order to prevent tyranny from becoming common place.
 
  • 1LOL
Reactions: 1 user