The joy of X

[Noodle]

I forget where people were commenting that X (Twitter) was great for breaking news. So why not a thread just for all the wacky crap that people believe on X?

Last night, it was the claim, from a reliable "verified source," that Joe Biden was in hospice care and was unlikely to survive the night. People ate it up, including that scion of decency and wisdom, Laura Loomer.

The account that originally posted the breaking news, even doubling down by saying they would delete their X account if it turned out to not be true.

As of this morning:

And you fools use X for news. LOL That explains a lot.

 

[Noodle]

As for Loomer...

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

I forget where people were commenting that X (Twitter) was great for breaking news. So why not a thread just for all the wacky crap that people believe on X?

Last night, it was the claim, from a reliable "verified source," that Joe Biden was in hospice care and was unlikely to survive the night. People ate it up, including that scion of decency and wisdom, Laura Loomer.

The account that originally posted the breaking news, even doubling down by saying they would delete their X account if it turned out to not be true.

As of this morning:

And you fools use X for news. LOL That explains a lot.

Biden announced his resignation on X far before MSM picked it up.

 

[Noodle]

Biden announced his resignation on X far before MSM picked it up.

Well that's because he posted it on X before telling any news outlets. That doesn't mean X is a reliable source for news. It simply means Biden chose to use X for his announcement.

 

[anon_mya1phvcpf5x4]

I forget where people were commenting that X (Twitter) was great for breaking news. So why not a thread just for all the wacky crap that people believe on X?

Last night, it was the claim, from a reliable "verified source," that Joe Biden was in hospice care and was unlikely to survive the night. People ate it up, including that scion of decency and wisdom, Laura Loomer.

The account that originally posted the breaking news, even doubling down by saying they would delete their X account if it turned out to not be true.

As of this morning:

And you fools use X for news. LOL That explains a lot.

At least they followed through

 

[ribbont]

I forget where people were commenting that X (Twitter) was great for breaking news. So why not a thread just for all the wacky crap that people believe on X?

Last night, it was the claim, from a reliable "verified source," that Joe Biden was in hospice care and was unlikely to survive the night. People ate it up, including that scion of decency and wisdom, Laura Loomer.

The account that originally posted the breaking news, even doubling down by saying they would delete their X account if it turned out to not be true.

As of this morning:

And you fools use X for news. LOL That explains a lot.

There is no such thing as news. It is all just information. We have to decide if it is true or not. Network and cable "news" journalism is dead.

 

[Noodle]

At least they followed through

LOL Indeed they did. Or, perhaps, they were booted? Either way, I bet that account is back within a few weeks.

I will admit there is one account I follow on X that does have a pretty good record of current news reports from the Middle East, Ukraine, etc. They definitely have some high level sources within various governments/militaries. And they also routinely blast accounts like the one claiming BIden was in hospice.

 

[DDE-6-20-23]

I forget where people were commenting that X (Twitter) was great for breaking news. So why not a thread just for all the wacky crap that people believe on X?

Last night, it was the claim, from a reliable "verified source," that Joe Biden was in hospice care and was unlikely to survive the night. People ate it up, including that scion of decency and wisdom, Laura Loomer.

The account that originally posted the breaking news, even doubling down by saying they would delete their X account if it turned out to not be true.

As of this morning:

And you fools use X for news. LOL That explains a lot.

Its obviously not for you...LMAO. Just confirming what we already knew that there are many incapable of using a thought process like X.

Some of you are programmed and thats OHHHHKAAAAAAY

DEMS=Many incapable

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

LOL Indeed they did. Or, perhaps, they were booted? Either way, I bet that account is back within a few weeks.

I will admit there is one account I follow on X that does have a pretty good record of current news reports from the Middle East, Ukraine, etc. They definitely have some high level sources within various governments/militaries. And they also routinely blast accounts like the one claiming BIden was in hospice.

View embedded media

I post that account routinely because in the ME threads.

 

[Noodle]

Its obviously not for you...LMAO. Just confirming what we already knew that there are many incapable of using a thought process like X.

Some of you are programmed and thats OHHHHKAAAAAAY

DEMS=Many incapable

LOL Priceless coming from you.

 

[BCCHoosier]

Its obviously not for you...LMAO. Just confirming what we already knew that there are many incapable of using a thought process like X.

Some of you are programmed and thats OHHHHKAAAAAAY

DEMS=Many incapable

Quit trying to be deep. It only makes you look stupid. X is not a thought process.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Some of you are programmed and thats OHHHHKAAAAAAY

Hmm, like all of you that automatically believe anything is true that you hope is true? It wasn't long ago there was a post from X of an event that happened in Tennessee that everyone on the right was so excited about, even continuing that excitement after someone noted the many cars in the pic had CA plates.

 

[Noodle]

The hits keep coming....and no, Jimmy Carter has not died.

 

[Noodle]

The hits keep coming....and no, Jimmy Carter has not died.

View embedded media

Note that the claim was from an X account with 65K followers. He was duped by this fake letter - note the fourth paragraph.

 

[DDE-6-20-23]

Quit trying to be deep. It only makes you look stupid. X is not a thought process.

It appears it is for some of you. Let me break it down for you.

The thought process being.

See post

Check link

Check source

Check to see what others are saying...Unfortunately if its against the right there will be numerous links from every major msm new source.

If it's against the left the msm takes a backseat and there are no major msm links. (Gee wonder why)

When several other news sources report on a "left negative" we present the information here and according to "the clap". Thats the side of this board thats not the dream team. CONGRADS you just earned yourselves a new nickname. Lets go with it..."The Clap" calls BS and says non acceptable.

Leeson over. Now GFY

 

[T.M.P.]

It appears it is for some of you. Let me break it down for you.

The thought process being.

See post

Check link

Check source

Check to see what others are saying...Unfortunately if its against the right there will be numerous links from every major msm new source.

If it's against the left the msm takes a backseat and there are no major msm links. (Gee wonder why)

When several other news sources report on a "left negative" we present the information here and according to "the clap". Thats the side of this board thats not the dream team. CONGRADS you just earned yourselves a new nickname. Lets go with it..."The Clap" calls BS and says non acceptable.

Leeson over. Now GFY

dumb

 

[mcmurtry66]

The hits keep coming....and no, Jimmy Carter has not died.

View embedded media

I don’t understand the point of this. Same occurs on instagram. I’m not on twitter. Fake transfer news. Fake injury reports. Fake firings. Is it to just draw attention to the account? What benefit follows?

 

[BCCHoosier]

It appears it is for some of you. Let me break it down for you.

The thought process being.

See post

Check link

Check source

Check to see what others are saying...Unfortunately if its against the right there will be numerous links from every major msm new source.

If it's against the left the msm takes a backseat and there are no major msm links. (Gee wonder why)

When several other news sources report on a "left negative" we present the information here and according to "the clap". Thats the side of this board thats not the dream team. CONGRADS you just earned yourselves a new nickname. Lets go with it..."The Clap" calls BS and says non acceptable.

Leeson over. Now GFY

X is a wasteland for the most part. You look silly in your first post pretending that only Dems struggle to use it. Try to be less partisan on topics that don't need to be.

I see both sides share obviously fake crap all the time. To pretend only one side is intelligent enough to use the tool is beneath even you.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

LOL Indeed they did. Or, perhaps, they were booted? Either way, I bet that account is back within a few weeks.

I will admit there is one account I follow on X that does have a pretty good record of current news reports from the Middle East, Ukraine, etc. They definitely have some high level sources within various governments/militaries. And they also routinely blast accounts like the one claiming BIden was in hospice.

View embedded media

There are lots of accounts on X that have reliable information.

For me, it’s never been all that hard to distinguish between those types of accounts and ones that warrant ignoring.

And thankfully they’re not doing nearly as much viewpoint censorship as they used to - which is a good thing.

For me, X is indispensable. But different strokes, and all that.

 

[DDE-6-20-23]

X is a wasteland for the most part. You look silly in your first post pretending that only Dems struggle to use it.

You said it not me. It's only a bitch for dems because you don't like the sources we link. X is very effective in many cases. Especially like Mace questioning Cheatle yesterday. Video is an excellent news source it's straight from the horses mouth as long as a segment is not used out of context. Stories get linked. I can't count the times I've linked a left negative news source that was FULL of referenced links that the clap disallows as real. So were at a stand still. I get all kinds of good news sources from X. Sports, News, Weather, Video, Memes, Gifs, all kinds of great stuff. Pick and choose what you want.

 

[outside shooter]

View embedded media

Lots of people of "her ilk" post here on the regular

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I don’t understand the point of this. Same occurs on instagram. I’m not on twitter. Fake transfer news. Fake injury reports. Fake firings. Is it to just draw attention to the account? What benefit follows?

It's for the lulz.

 

[anon_mya1phvcpf5x4]

There are lots of accounts on X that have reliable information.

For me, it’s never been all that hard to distinguish between those types of accounts and ones that warrant ignoring.

And thankfully they’re not doing nearly as much viewpoint censorship as they used to - which is a good thing.

For me, X is indispensable. But different strokes, and all that.

So trying to cut down on stuff that is verifiable false and sometimes dangerous is viewpoint censorship?

Twitter is a private company so there is no right to be able to post on it. If someone is posting lies that could be harmful, then it should be taken down or at least marked. Not a whole lot different than people not being allowed to yell fire in a building when there isn't a fire.

 

[mcmurtry66]

It's for the lulz.

There was one on instagram that you would have gotten a kick out of. It was like calob or something. A home chef. Young guy. 20s. His caption would just be wagyu ribeye medium rare. Then the comments would all go crazy. That’s not Fing wagyu. And his shit would be soooooooo rare. That cow can still walk. Then he’ll post wagyu filet and salmon. And he’ll have them in the same pan. Commenters going nuts. You’re cross contaminating the shit out of your meal. Or he’ll put all the steaks in the pan without a mm of room. And once in a blue moon he’d reply to a comment. Go Fck yourself old man. Etc. But eventually I realized I think he’s doing it on purpose for the lulz. But the comments were hilarious

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

So trying to cut down on stuff that is verifiable false and sometimes dangerous is viewpoint censorship?

Twitter is a private company so there is no right to be able to post on it. If someone is posting lies that could be harmful, then it should be taken down or at least marked. Not a whole lot different than people not being allowed to yell fire in a building when there isn't a fire.

It’s kind of ironic to anybody who knows the history and context of the “falsely shouting fire in a theater” analogy for it to be referenced in a post discussing censoring verifiably false information.

That line comes from dictum (by Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr) in a decision that was later overturned.

In other words, it’s verifiably false that “people (are) not…allowed to yell fire in a building when there isn't a fire.”

But if the moderators here were to censor your verifiably false information, then it would render it impossible for me or somebody else to use the forum to note the falsehood and correct it so that you and other participants are properly informed.

 

[BradStevens]

It's for the lulz.

 

[zeke4ahs]

X is a wasteland for the most part. You look silly in your first post pretending that only Dems struggle to use it. Try to be less partisan on topics that don't need to be.

I see both sides share obviously fake crap all the time. To pretend only one side is intelligent enough to use the tool is beneath even you.

I’m surprised DBM didn’t bring it over here honestly. Laura Loomer is one of his follows.

 

[BradStevens]

It’s kind of ironic to anybody who knows the history and context of the “falsely shouting fire in a theater” analogy to be referenced in a post discussing censoring verifiably false information.

That line comes from dictum (by Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr) in a decision that was later overturned.

In other words, it’s verifiably false that “people (are) not…allowed to yell fire in a building when there isn't a fire.”

But if the moderators here were to censor your verifiably false information, then it would render it impossible for me or somebody else to use the forum to note the falsehood and correct it so that you and other participants are properly informed.

That's not exactly true.

You're right that the quote was not part of the holding (technically, I'd call it part of his reasoning), and it is true that the case was justifiably later reversed. But if you yell fire in a crowded theater while knowing there is not one and people leave (which is the assumption behind the statement, as everyone knows), I'm pretty sure you'd be prosecuted in every jurisdiction in the U.S., especially if people get hurt as a result. I know some at FIRE, including Lukianoff want to split hairs on this so they can focus on circumstances vs. the content of the speech, but I think they're choosing the wrong fight.

 

[ChicagoFineForNow]

Community notes does a pretty good job clarifying false posts that have a lot of engagement. Much better than the old Twitter for reliable info.

 

[ChicagoFineForNow]

Community notes does a pretty good job clarifying false posts that have a lot of engagement. Much better than the old Twitter for reliable info.

As an example:

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

That's not exactly true.

You're right that the quote was not part of the holding (technically, I'd call it part of his reasoning), and it is true that the case was justifiably later reversed. But if you yell fire in a crowded theater while knowing there is not one and people leave (which is the assumption behind the statement, as everyone knows), I'm pretty sure you'd be prosecuted in every jurisdiction in the U.S., especially if people get hurt as a result. I know some at FIRE, including Lukianoff want to split hairs on this so they can focus on circumstances vs. the content of the speech, but I think they're choosing the wrong fight.

He didn’t say that the person in question knew there wasn’t a fire. He just said there wasn’t one.

As such, what he said is indisputably false. And, frankly, because Holmes’ original analogy was dictum, it would’ve been false even if Schenk hadn’t have been overturned.

But this misses the point - which is that we need to be awfully careful about deeming things to be subject to censorship because somebody considers them to be misinformation…

…which is why the new version of Twitter/X has a better view on moderation than the old version did.

I would argue that the outrage at this change, and thus at X in general, is specifically about people wanting to control speech by having it labeled as misinformation.

 

[anon_mya1phvcpf5x4]

It’s kind of ironic to anybody who knows the history and context of the “falsely shouting fire in a theater” analogy for it to be referenced in a post discussing censoring verifiably false information.

That line comes from dictum (by Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr) in a decision that was later overturned.

In other words, it’s verifiably false that “people (are) not…allowed to yell fire in a building when there isn't a fire.”

But if the moderators here were to censor your verifiably false information, then it would render it impossible for me or somebody else to use the forum to note the falsehood and correct it so that you and other participants are properly informed.

Go ahead and yell fire in a crowded theatre or venue and see how well that goes for you.

 

[anon_mya1phvcpf5x4]

He didn’t say that the person in question knew there wasn’t a fire. He just said there wasn’t one.

As such, what he said is indisputably false. And, frankly, because Holmes’ original analogy was dictum, it would’ve been false even if Schenk hadn’t have been overturned.

But this misses the point - which is that we need to be awfully careful about deeming things to be subject to censorship because somebody considers them to be misinformation…

…which is why the new version of Twitter/X has a better view on moderation than the old version did.

I would argue that the outrage at this change, and thus at X in general, is specifically about people wanting to control speech by having it labeled as misinformation.

Now you're just nitpicking because I didn't clarify that the person knew.

It's a common saying. I figured you were smart enough to know it. Apparently I overestimated you.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Go ahead and yell fire in a crowded theatre or venue and see how well that goes for you.

Nothing would happen to me, so long as I could demonstrate that I held a good faith belief that there was one or even might be one - even if, in fact, it turns out there wasn’t one.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Now you're just nitpicking because I didn't clarify that the person knew.

It's a common analogy. I figured you were smart enough to know it. Apparently I overestimated you.

It’s a commonly misused analogy - misused by people who don’t understand what they’re talking about.

And my point is that misinformation like this should not be censored. It should instead be refuted with corrective information.

 

[BadWakeboarder]

I don’t understand the point of this. Same occurs on instagram. I’m not on twitter. Fake transfer news. Fake injury reports. Fake firings. Is it to just draw attention to the account? What benefit follows?

It’s to draw “engagement” to the account. Monetized accounts are paid out by engagement metrics. It incentivizes clicks and responses.

It’s why there are so many hot takes with ending texts of “what do you think?”

It’s the whole reason Meidas Touch and the Krassensteins exist. Their propaganda makes them as much money as Loomer’s makes her.

 

[snarlcakes]

There was one on instagram that you would have gotten a kick out of. It was like calob or something. A home chef. Young guy. 20s. His caption would just be wagyu ribeye medium rare. Then the comments would all go crazy. That’s not Fing wagyu. And his shit would be soooooooo rare. That cow can still walk. Then he’ll post wagyu filet and salmon. And he’ll have them in the same pan. Commenters going nuts. You’re cross contaminating the shit out of your meal. Or he’ll put all the steaks in the pan without a mm of room. And once in a blue moon he’d reply to a comment. Go Fck yourself old man. Etc. But eventually I realized I think he’s doing it on purpose for the lulz. But the comments were hilarious

I thought Jimmy Carter died several years ago. Whoops 😬

 

[BradStevens]

It’s to draw “engagement” to the account. Monetized accounts are paid out by engagement metrics. It incentivizes clicks and responses.

It’s why there are so many hot takes with ending texts of “what do you think?”

It’s the whole reason Meidas Touch and the Krassensteins exist. Their propaganda makes them as much money as Loomer’s makes her.

I feel like I could make a killing doing that. Have two accounts, one for the left loonies and one for the right loonies.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

He didn’t say that the person in question knew there wasn’t a fire. He just said there wasn’t one.

As such, what he said is indisputably false. And, frankly, because Holmes’ original analogy was dictum, it would’ve been false even if Schenk hadn’t have been overturned.

But this misses the point - which is that we need to be awfully careful about deeming things to be subject to censorship because somebody considers them to be misinformation…

…which is why the new version of Twitter/X has a better view on moderation than the old version did.

I would argue that the outrage at this change, and thus at X in general, is specifically about people wanting to control speech by having it labeled as misinformation.

Social media misinformation is a problem. Look at the attempt on Trump. A large number here believe firmly it was setup. Social media didn't contribute to that?

And to add, I know progressives saying it was a false flag. Again, social media certainly plays a role.

It sounds good that people will research and draw informed conclusions. That does not seem to be happening. If Twitter handle "IWillLieAboutTheOtherSide" posts something, and "TheOrherSideSux" reposts it, that is confirmation and final proof.

Clearly blocking speech is bad. But so is flat out lying. If people penalized handles by unfollowing, there would be a little effort to post more toward reality. At least within a light year. As is, there is no reason to do anything but carry on lying.

 

[BradStevens]

He didn’t say that the person in question knew there wasn’t a fire. He just said there wasn’t one.

As such, what he said is indisputably false. And, frankly, because Holmes’ original analogy was dictum, it would’ve been false even if Schenk hadn’t have been overturned.

But this misses the point - which is that we need to be awfully careful about deeming things to be subject to censorship because somebody considers them to be misinformation…

…which is why the new version of Twitter/X has a better view on moderation than the old version did.

I would argue that the outrage at this change, and thus at X in general, is specifically about people wanting to control speech by having it labeled as misinformation.

No, re Holmes' analogy and calling it dicta. The SCt doesnt have to rule something is illegal for it to be illegal.

An analogy: If the Court was referring in its reasoning (or its dicta, there is a difference) to how someone could be charged with a crime for launching a nuclear weapon without authorization, while that has never been before the court before and the ultimate decision could be overturned, it would not make launching a nuclear weapon without authorization legal.

It is as illegal today as it was in 1917 for someone to "falsely shout[] fire in a theatre and causing a panic.” That people drop the "falsely" and "causing a panic" is a bit lazy, but widespread, and isn't that big of a deal, I don't think, since I think most everyone understands the concept.

I 100% back you on the care with which we handle censoring "misinformation."