[mschuster91]

> By Bluesky being put away as a platform for 'lefties' on X and users on Bluesky saying "Go to your fascist platform X" to other users it essentially participates in dividing people. At least, on the political parts of the platform.

What's wrong with that? I mean, yes, lefties can be pretty scathing against their own - particularly the questions of Israel/Palestine and Ukraine/Russia come to my mind as major dividers.

But even then: the death threats, "I wish you'd get raped by the n----s you invited to Germany, then you see the results of the great replacement yourself" and similarly inclined comments on Twitter are all but completely absent on Bluesky, and instead of feeding even the most obvious trolls, the general policy is to block them and move on - which is why the far-right is complaining so often about Bluesky being a "librul echo chamber". They just can't fathom that people might not be interested in interacting with them.

[BozeWolf]

What is wrong is that it does not help with the discussion. It makes the discussion personal by calling someone a fascist or a leftie. A good discussion is about the subject, not the person. Also it makes both X and Bluesky feel opinionated, making a good discussion impossible.

I must say that I did not see any death threats on X either, but i just choose to stay away from that part of the platform.

[mschuster91]

> A good discussion is about the subject, not the person.

That's the problem with trolls. They keep on pestering people with trivially-to-google questions, a tactic known as "sealioning" [1]. On top of that you have literal ChatGPT or otherwise AI-powered bots engaging in discussions in bad faith.

> It makes the discussion personal by calling someone a fascist or a leftie.

It's pretty pointless to debate with fascists, most of those that you can find on Twitter aren't interested in discussion - they're interested in destroying discussion by forcing others to interact with their bullshit.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning