[pc86]

You're not required to participate. Nobody is, in fact.

There's something particularly disgusting about the elevated sense of self-importance required to say that because you don't like something, because there is a vanishingly small number of bad actors as there are in every single group above a certain size, it shouldn't exist at all.

[mattgreenrocks]

Correct. And I'm also not required to believe in the cultural relevance of Twitter at all.

There's no digital analogue to the IRL long stare of death that is elicited when someone is out of line. Downvotes, ratios, and whatever ridiculous thing people invent aren't effective enough because the offender has little concern for being ostracized from a group of people they don't even know. It's all just avatars on a screen yelling at each other. This is why people say scale is the problem. Smaller communities can more effectively enforce norms because they create a localized culture, there is less to moderate, and they can more effectively identify and punish bad actors.

These days I spend time on niche forums where people actively choose to be there and participate. There's no Internet Points to be gamed, no drama of the day, no personal brands to be pushing. It's absolutely refreshing. It moves slower, there's no sense of FOMO, it's not made to suck your attention span dry.

Twitter is rotting: it's why the front page has to tell you it is relevant, and why they started requiring logins to read beyond a thread. It'd be farther gone if journalists didn't prop it up as a way to do their job faster.

[memetomancer]

| Particularly disgusting

A phrase particularly lacking in decency, making you a bad actor on this forum. Especially when you are wrong. It takes an elevated sense of self-importance to say that because you don't like a moderate opinion it is palpably revolting.

Twitter isn't a technical problem, as others have pointed out. It is a social problem. One that leads to behavior just as intolerant and dvisive as Fox News or any of the demagogues making their fortunes by bringing out the worst impulses of the stupidest people. One that leads people like yourself to drag down the discussion with such uncalled for invective.

Trying to discuss the problem invariably brings out dim outbursts, such as your own, meant to stifle discourse. Yes you feel entitled to your own set of rules and care little for the effect it has on others, but the effect of Twitter is destroying the fabric that coddles you, that protects you and allows you to have small selfish views at the expense of everyone else, with no evidence that you understand the consequences.

| You're not required to participate. Nobody is, in fact.

As long as Twitter remains a powerful platform for social influence - even if you explicitly avoid participation - you face the effects. Nobody in the U.S. can escape the grandstanding, the vitriol, the ostracizing, or the influence that the forum represents. The problem extends to many other nations. Something should be done and discussing it freely is a sane approach.

So choke down your bile, bite your tongue and make your points with some dignity. If we all pull together we can get through this, I just know it.

[pc86]

My supposed lack of decency has nothing to do with whether I'm acting in good faith or not.

> a moderate opinion

> > Maybe global public squares don't work for the humans we have.

Tenuous argument that Twitter === "global public square" notwithstanding, saying some people don't warrant a public square is not a moderate opinion. It's borderline fascist, and disgusting is the most civil word I would use to describe it.

> Nobody in the U.S. can escape the grandstanding, the vitriol, the ostracizing, or the influence that the forum represents.

Oh please. If you're not on Twitter what does the ratioing or "ostracizing" do to your day to day? Even if you are, unless you're commonly delving into hot button topics or conversations between people you don't follow, there is very little drama unless you want there to do. I almost exclusively follow people I haven't met in real life, who are doing cool things in the tech space. I can count on one hand the number of times I've been subject to either grandstanding or vitriol, and I'm fairly active on the platform.

> If we all pull together we can get through this, I just know it.

Get through what? Musk buying Twitter isn't some apocalyptic event. Unless you're the type of sad person who gets their entire sense of self worth from having a little blue check mark next to your name, or you think it's generally a bad thing that people have a place to speak their mind, this will almost certainly be a complete non-issue. Have some dignity.

[counters]

Unfortunately the period from about 2015 to early 2021 made it very clear that even while direct participation is avoidable, the implications of the platform and it's users aren't.

Then again, the solution to the hooligan yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre isn't to close the theatre...

[naravara]

We do enforce fire codes though, including things like occupancy limits.

[pc86]

I would love to hear what you think fire codes and occupancy limits have to do with Twitter and social media.

[rokhayakebe]

We gotta build things for the humans we have, not the humans we wish to have. Maybe global public squares don't work for the humans we have. That's ok.

Where is the elevated sense of self importance? Where did OP say it shouldn't exist. You read this with filters.

OP simply stated that we need to build a product which is more aligned with how humans are and NOT how we wish humans were. A rebuttal would be to show that current products solve the problem we have and we do not need to change anything.

[nells]

You hear that all the time here about Facebook. I don’t like Facebook so Facebook should not exist for anybody. It’s disgusting.