Twitter's new TikTok copycat is filled with animal cruelty videos. Elon calls content "Edgy"

https://beehaw.org/post/812190

Twitter's new TikTok copycat is filled with animal cruelty videos. Elon calls content "Edgy" - Beehaw

All social media is filled with animal cruelty.
There's so many pictures and videos of cut up animal corpses with people going "yum" in the comments..
I don't get how I never see that on regular Twitter.
You've never seen any posts containing meat?
It's a too bad that you weren't more clear than your first post, people almost took you serious

Why wouldn't it be serious?

Meat is cut up animal corpses.
Humans can easily thrive without meat so it's clearly abusive to kill for profit/taste.

With respect, this approach does nothing to convince people to reduce their meat consumption, and in fact alienates people who might otherwise be on the fence about reducing their meat intake.

We get told this literally no matter how we approach the subject lol.
Which approach is it you think I'm using here and why is it ineffective?

Which approach worked on you?

You've been hostile ("reactionary fucks") and you've hijacked the broader discussion referenced in the article (Musk's Twitter showing terrible videos including human death, animal cruelty, etc) to make a point about meat consumption generally versus videos on Twitter showing the intentional and purposeful infliction of pain on animals for pleasure.

My meat consumption is down quite a bit. Information on substitutes, good recipes, studies on the intelligence of (for example) squid and such have shifted me into eating less meat. While I'm sure you'd prefer people not eat meat at all, convincing 5 people to cut their meat consumption 50% is better than convincing 0 people to cut their meat consumption 100% , no?

The "reactionary fucks" was in response to hostility. Hijacking broader topic? I'm sure you're on reddit complaining about John Oliver taking over the broader topic that is generally on r/pics. I'll let you ruminate on that until you see the obvious point.

I'm sure in history some abolitionists wanted to get rid of slavery all together, but just minimizing the number of slaves is better than nothing right so they shouldn't have been so absolutist. At least according to your own argument unless you admit to being hypocritical or simply not understanding the argument of those you're responding to. You can't be neither though.

You're putting forth either bad faith arguments or extremely toxic ones, under the guise of polite society. It's kind of sickening if you aren't actually intentionally doing it.