[ajam1507]

Who needs censorship when you have an algorithm to feed people what you want them to see and you've self-selected for only people who aren't morally opposed to the new site?

Don't be fooled into thinking you're getting a dose of unfiltered reality on X.

[unselect5917]

>Who needs censorship when you have an algorithm to feed people what you want them to see and you've self-selected for only people who aren't morally opposed to the new site?

It feeds you what you engage with, and it changes surprisingly quickly. It caught onto my ARC raiders interest almost instantly. I engaged with a Portuguese post once, and now I get wonderful translated posts in Spanish, French, and Arabic too.

>Don't be fooled into thinking you're getting a dose of unfiltered reality on X.

What evidence could you possibly have that I'm not? There's lots of "politically incorrect" things which is a symptom of low filtration. Besides, you can't have seen my feed. Completely baseless allegation. So what's the real reason for taking the anti-X stance?

[ajam1507]

> There's lots of "politically incorrect" things which is a symptom of low filtration.

Politically incorrect things might be a symptom of low filtration on almost any other site, but not one run by Elon Musk. He has a clear agenda and is not shy about putting his finger on the scale at X. It's so blatant and well documented that it's almost hard to imagine you could be commenting in good faith.

[unselect5917]

>Politically incorrect things might be a symptom of low filtration on almost any other site,

Why would that change anything? I've always found political incorrectness to be a symptom of free speech.

>but not one run by Elon Musk.

Why would that be any different? Same symptom. Same free speech as far as I can tell.

>He has a clear agenda

What's the agenda?

>is not shy about putting his finger on the scale at X.

What instances of him putting his finger on the scale do you have? He gets community noted hilariously often.

>It's so blatant

What makes it blatant?

>well documented

By people who clearly hate the man and have lost their ability to reason over it. Like the ones who lost the narrative control of twitter.

>it's almost hard to imagine you could be commenting in good faith.

Having different opinions than you isn't bad faith. I brought up that the censorship is better than before (but still not great), and mentioned some cool new developments I've seen. You've attempted to steer the conversation to be about Elon Musk or myself. These are both ad hominem attacks, which is textbook bad faith.

I think the lady doth protest too much.

[ajam1507]

Sorry, I don't find it very interesting to debate whether the sky is blue. We can agree to disagree.

[unselect5917]

We can agree you've contributed nothing but bad faith nonsense to this thread and are mad nobody is buying your MDS addled nonsense.