site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  3yr ago (text post)   33325 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 5, 2022

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

9
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

See here. All perfectly fine, I'm sure. https://twitter.com/KingChristianCS/status/1594848557843943429

No rules being violated here, no sir ma'am https://twitter.com/Droidytv25/status/1595123798466269184

Definitely no calls for immediate violence here that are apparently perfectly ok as long as it's happening to a "fascist terf woman" https://twitter.com/A7aKoala/status/1595101534047576072

Definitely no bias on the part of Twitter's moderation team. What a thing to pick on as if this makes their behavior look any better...

I agree, Elon Musk's moderation is very biased.

  • -11

Do you really think this is helping you? The obvious deflection, the sneering, what's even the point of it? Acting exactly like everyone in that twitter thread isn't going to convince anyone.

The fact of the matter is the old Twitter team is literally not in charge anymore. Musk has owned the company for a month and a half. Every tweet you linked happened almost a month after Elon took over. How on earth do you blame pre-Musk Twitter for content that was created and remains up after he is in charge?

Because while he fired a lit of people, he didn't replace everyone, and even if he did, at the moment he can only draw from a pool of Californians. Regardless of management they will have the same bias.

Unless you're implying Elon should have hooked everyone up to Neuralink and control every single thing they do, I don't see how it's reasonable to claim he should be able to rid the company of it's pre-existing bias so quickly.

How long do we have to wait, post-acquisition, to start holding the CEO and owner responsible for the moderation decisions of the company he is CEO and owner of?

I'd give him 6 months to a year.

Keep mind, I find the project rather hopeless, and will be extremely surprised if he pulls it off. But at that point it will only be his fault.

Now, can you answer any of my questions? Do think company owners have the ability to read minds, and control all employees at once? If not, what is you expectation that the bias should be fixed by now based on?

Now, can you answer any of my questions?

Probably!

Do think company owners have the ability to read minds, and control all employees at once?

No, but they do generally have the ability to issue commands to employees and discipline or terminate them if they do not comply. Are you under the impression if Musk went to his moderation team and said "Take down the tweet doxxing LibsofTikTok" they would refuse? Or... did he just not know Weiss was going to mention it?

If not, what is you expectation that the bias should be fixed by now based on?

The part where fired, like, 80% of the company.

Are you under the impression if Musk went to his moderation team and said "Take down the tweet doxxing LibsofTikTok" they would refuse? Or... did he just not know Weiss was going to mention it?

So if he doesn't personally campaign to his own staff to get every single shitty moderation decision reversed its his bias?

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats