[cbozeman]

> You need to have a thick skin

Actually we need the rest of social media to have this, and then we don't need these alternative platforms.

There are simply too many people who have grown up without having any meaningful opposition in their lives - without having someone challenge their ideas and values and making them defend said ideas and values, and they simply do. not. know. how to cope with it.

[TazeTSchnitzel]

Why is grinning-and-bearing harrassment by people who want you dead virtuous? “people who have grown up without having any meaningful opposition in their lives” always feels like a dogwhistle to me, because the people saying this tend to have far more privileged backgrounds than the people being harassed.

[didericis]

The entire world has been forced to act as diplomats. When coming from vastly different world views and experiences, being charitable in your interpretation of others is essential; it is important to distinguish disagreement, harassment, and true threat so as to avoid false positives and further degradation of the conversation. That charity requires having a very thick skin, and yes, it’s unfair when it’s not reciprocated and you are being targeted.

I think social media has taught us that most people are terrible diplomats. Which is to expected when a person’s threat response is engaged. Having a thick skinned and measured reaction to threat is still the best way to reduce that threat. And it requires a level of discomfort unprivileged people are generally much better at dealing with; the people who need to hear that advice most are those advantaged enough to be unfamiliar with dealing with discomfort.

I think a better solution than forcing everyone to become diplomatic or banning those who violate the norms of others is to have somewhat siloed social groups that are represented by open minded thick skinned diplomatic types that permeate the borders. That’s part of what’s appealing about a federated model; I think it better mirrors our social tendencies and historically successful political systems with diverse constituents (representative republics seem to be the only proven systems capable of dealing with lots of different peoples long term).

I’m of the opinion that the most virulent partisanship is actually due to the lack of silos rather than the echo chamber narrative. Before the internet, in group conversations stayed behind closed doors. That privacy allowed people who would be outraged at the contents of those conversations to get along in a diplomatic middle.

Now those conversations are public, and people seem to be fighting over control of one big room where all the walls have been removed.

[finiteseries]

I think a better solution than forcing everyone to become diplomatic or banning those who violate the norms of others is to have somewhat siloed social groups that are represented by open minded thick skinned diplomatic types that permeate the borders.

This is a genuinely fascinating idea that I haven’t seen before in discussion around Mastodon & co.

Not convinced it’s an actual possibility because of a lack of scarce resources & the like to actually cause diplomacy to happen over in a familiar way, but I have 0 idea of what the fediverse is like from within the fediverse, so perhaps there is something there I’m just not aware of.

Would upvote and read an insider’s “Diplomacy in the Age of Federation” esque article in a heartbeat.

[didericis]

Thank you, will consider writing one/fleshing this out.

[lmm]

> Why is grinning-and-bearing harrassment by people who want you dead virtuous?

Because it's what makes society possible.

[etripe]

The operative part is "want you dead". Ignoring murderous intent is decidedly not what makes society possible.

[cbozeman]

"It offends people, but good. They should be offended." - Paul Mooney, from Know Your History: Jesus Is Black; So Was Cleopatra

[throwaway45349]

Is this purely a US phenomenon? I don't see this much at all from people who live here t(the UK), but we're really starting to feel the effects of social media censorship hit hard, and I know a lot of people are really angry about Big Tech pushing their own moralistic world view on our country.

[cbozeman]

America has a long tradition of being vocal and offensive in its communications. At the very founding of our nation, you could find political cartoons of George Washington on a donkey, with the caption, "An ass being led to Washington."

In general Americans seem to be more thick-skinned than others. Or at least we used to be.

EDIT: Here you go buddy... this is almost a word-for-word of the argument that was used in the actual Supreme Court case, and should illustrate why we're at such a dangerous time in history - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeTuNES82O0

[cutemonster]

> America has a long tradition of being vocal and offensive in its communications

Selection bias. I'd think that's how people you happen to hang out with, or talk with on the internet, might be.

But not people in general, at least not the ones I've met from the US (lots of people).

[cbozeman]

> Selection bias.

Check out the book Infamous Scribblers: The Founding Fathers and the Rowdy Beginnings of American Journalism.

> I'd think that's how people you happen to hang out with, or talk with on the internet, might be.

You literally have no data to support that comment, whereas I'm referencing existing documents throughout American history that show just how vitriolic communications were.

You realize that our politicians used to get into fistfights on the floor of Congress, right?

> But not people in general, at least not the ones I've met from the US (lots of people).

What you've just described is selection bias, but I understand why would you feel that way. You're likely not exposed to a diverse selection of Americans. Do you know many corn farmers from the Midwest states? Do you know any deep sea welders from Mississippi? Do you know many club promoters from California? Do you know many book editors from New York?

[cutemonster]

Yes a bit selection bias in my case.

> referencing existing documents throughout American history that show just how vitriolic communications were.

> Do you know many corn farmers from the Midwest states? Do you know any deep sea welders from ...

Maybe you're right that those groups of people more often communicate in the ways you say.

At the same time, maybe they do also in Mexico or Italy or Kongo and in lots of other countries too.

So the examples doesn't really mean anything to me. Thanks anyway for explaining how you were thinking.

The US is a large country and by cherry picking examples one can "prove" anything one wants.