[lovich]

> I was willing to give him a pass (still am) in a vacuum regarding the Twitter thing given the mass censorship of the old regime (sorry - no, it wasn't acceptable, in any way shape or form)…

Why give him the benefit of the doubt when he censors worse than the previous management? Just look at all the grok lobotomies he gave it because he didn’t like how liberal coded the answers it was giving.

[alex1138]

I was just trying to say old Twitter had a serious problem but apparently that goes against the hivemind so I accrue mass downvotes despite posting my comment in good faith

[lovich]

No man, I’d you had just said

> I was willing to give him a pass…

That could be logically consistent given how he is more censorious than the previous management, but you said

> I was willing to give him a pass (still am)…

That means you are giving him a pass on having more censorious behavior than what the group you disliked did. That just comes off like you’re biased and trying to hide it.

I don’t think you’re getting downvotes despite commenting in good faith, but because you aren’t commenting in good faith, and I say this as someone who hasn’t downvoted you.

[alex1138]

I don't think you're allowed to define what good faith is if you can't read my mind

And I don't even know what they censor now, it's just that the old system was more publically known

Please don't be intentionally irritating

[lovich]

It was more publicly known because Musk made a big deal about the “Twitter files” which were a big nothing burger hyped up by musk and a bunch of journalists like Matt Taibi who were being led around by their nose by Musk. I remember watching an interview with two of the journalists in question and they were adamant that they had seen everything because they sat down with Musk and one of his engineers and the engineer made custom sql queries for whatever they asked and then gave them the results of the query. They would not accept that the engineer could have modified the query or the database could have been modified before they even started the interview. They just accepted Musks narrative completely.

I’ll grant that you may be on good faith but if you have a strong enough opinion on the level of censorship under the previous regime to give Musks behavior a pass, but don’t know anything about his current massive amounts of censoring and narrative shaping, then you are speaking confidently from a point of ignorance and that will garner as many downvotes as being in bad faith.

[alex1138]

I don't believe that that can be true. Taibbi is far too respected a journalist to just be willy nilly tricked like that. There really was government directed censorship

[lovich]

How does respect for a person make them untrickable.

And don’t believe me then, read the twitter files yourself. It was the Biden admin going, “these guys are breaking your TOS, please do something about it” and then Twitter _sometimes_ removing the content if they agreed it was breaking their TOS. There were no orders beings given by the government that Twitter was following.

And then as soon as musk got in he started censoring shit he didn’t like people using the word “cis” because he hates trans people ever since one of his sons transitioned to a daughter.