[dillondoyle]

I think that's important to contextualize: these people are insane and are acting on these tweets. The Q people dissect these tweets twisting them to confirm their conspiracy beliefs.

They thought that Trump's tweet about transition meant that he would fire Pence and that's the transition, applying numerology.

At this point no matter what he says it's dangerous because of the thousands (millions?) of deranged psychopathic terrorists he has created who read them and act violently no matter what he says.

[dragontamer]

> these people are insane

While I agree with your emotions, the use of the word "insane" might be counterproductive. As a group, we're mostly optimistic, trying to find the best interpretation of actions.

"Insane" implies that these people are not in control of themselves or their actions. That's not what is going on: they are fully in control and are CHOOSING to feed themselves with conspiracy theories... hoping to undo the 2020 election.

I don't know what word to use to describe them. Conspirators might be more accurate and helpful.

Ex:

> I think that's important to contextualize: these people are conspirators and are acting on these tweets. The Q people dissect these tweets twisting them to confirm their conspiracy beliefs.

By and large, these people are NOT suffering from any mental illness. They'll be going to work on Monday, and will probably take off this weekend, maybe go to Church on Sunday. They are choosing to participate in the conspiracy.

[dillondoyle]

maybe. what's a better word though?

Are they really in control? That word is too coarse I think for the situation. HN talks all the time about the power of social media, the studies showing quick radicalization, etc. That implies some level of manipulation e.g. not 100% free will.

[dragontamer]

None of us are subject to 100% free will. I'm influencing your opinion of the situation right now. My words have some degree of power over you.

That doesn't mean I'm responsible for your actions or your words. We draw the line at individual responsibility for a reason. Its not perfect, but the buck stops at your own actions.

------

I'm sure you trust in a fair number of leaders. I don't know who your role models are, but if they started calling for violent insurrection, it would be your choice whether to follow them down that path of degeneracy.

[alsetmusic]

> While I agree with your emotions, the use of the word "insane" might be counterproductive.

I suggest “highly suggestible.”

[dragontamer]

Hmmm... maybe "brainwashed"

[trianglem]

Sometimes it makes sense to keep things simple. These people are insane even if they are able to manage certain aspects of life. Call a spade a spade and let things fall where they will.

[dragontamer]

Simple is better. But "better" is also better. I'm not trying to make things more complex, we need to simplify our message if we want to change opinions at this time.

I'm settling on "brainwashed" for now. "Insane" colloquially removes the sense of responsibility and even has a positive connotation at times. Brainwashed captures the precise situation best.

Brainwashed individuals are still responsible for their actions. But we recognize the outside influence upon their actions. We can use the word brainwashed to recognize that these individuals still deserve punishment, but also recognize that there's a greater-source of influence we also must dismantle.

---------

The dude who has 10,000 edits on Wikipedia is "insane". A runner who completes 4:40 mile run is "insane". The mob who stormed the Capitol are BRAINWASHED.

"Brainwashed" fits better than "insane".

[ttt0]

Okay, so the solution to calm these crazy people down is for twitter to ban Trump and then post his tweets that supposedly call for violence on their blog, so the Streisand effect will kick in and even more people will see it? I think that at this point you have to ask yourself whether twitter's goal is actually stopping the violence and not provoking it.

[dragontamer]

Its not about stopping these messages.

Its about stopping the messages Trump would have sent next two weeks. You know, when the attacks on the inauguration are planned (The 17th is also popping up as another attack date, but I dunno if that has any actual symbolism going on...)

[ttt0]

Planned attack? No, I'm afraid I don't know anything about that.

The latest video that Trump posted there was that the protestors will be prosecuted and that he basically concedes and will transition power over to Biden. At no point, including his latest tweets on the @POTUS account that were deleted within minutes, have I seen anything that would suggest that he's planning any kind of "attack". And in fact, I see it the opposite way. If my reading of the situation is correct, he's trying to control the damage and calm down his base precisely so nothing like this will happen, because he believes that there is still future for him, as the tweet in question suggest. It could very well be that he was the only person that was keeping his supporters from starting the actual uprising and not whatever the Capitol thing was. And now it might be gone.

Obviously that's my opinion, but if you actually don't want any violence to happen, you better hope that I'm wrong about this.

[dragontamer]

Trump isn't planning the attack.

Parlor / thedonald.win are planning it. The question is whether or not the president will take advantage of those groups and try to coordinate them better.

Without a head, those groups ability to coordinate an attack would be hampered.

Google and Apple are banning parlor and other apps too, cutting off cell phone traffic.

[dillondoyle]

That's fair!