@PassiveIdeation This isn’t about rules at all, it’s about taking care of people’s brains and bodies so they can do the essential work of fighting fascism, which begins with not spinning out into despair and terror.

There are so many orgs working on defense and care and action, and none of that work is served by amplifying trolls. The people whose interests are served by paralysis and a constant state of fight or flight are the fascists.

@kissane @PassiveIdeation

I think there is a lot to be said about keeping a positive mindset, but the world turns regardless of how it makes us feel

The vile things people say bother me too, but over time I found ways to not allow the vitriol to spur an emotionally charged response.

Its our individual responsibility to find ways we can catalogue the nonsense, express strongly opposing ideas, and be calloused enough to not have a meltdown every time. It's happening whether we see it or not

@tethre @kissane @PassiveIdeation

If you are traumatically stressed out by the neverending hoard of jerks in the world and are having extreme anxiety about the impending far right extremism our government will be subject to I dont think it's realistic or healthy to expect the problem can be solved with censorship.

At this point I think it's important to know our enemy, and consider the lengths a fascist will go to get rid of their enemies

Pearl clutching ain't enough to win that fight

@gene_parmesan

The original topic here wasn't censorship, though. It was more like: taking into consideration the likely effects of reproducing ideas in specific contexts & frames.

For example, there's a big difference between "when you're ready, here's some things we need to be doing, here's why they're useful", & on the other hand, "here is a terrible thing, alert alert! here's another terrible thing! here's another one!"

@tethre @kissane @PassiveIdeation

@unchartedworlds @tethre @kissane @PassiveIdeation

"The likely effects of reproducing ideas"

Are you suggesting that merely hearing an idea is tantamount to effective promotion even in the clear context of opposition?

@gene_parmesan

I would say that depends on how you define "promotion". But in a sense yes. Even if you say plainly "I disagree with this idea", you're still transmitting it onward, and you're still validating that it's legitimate discussion.

I don't have citations on hand (maybe someone else does), but I'm pretty sure this dynamic has been empirically found to be a factor in why misinformation is so hard to counter.

@tethre @kissane @PassiveIdeation

@gene_parmesan

But that's the more general case: to loop back round, @kissane was originally pointing towards specifically "terrorizing messages":

"Yes, hate campaigns need to be discussed. Not by amplifying the messages themselves across networks rich in their targets."

It might be worth viewing the whole developing thread in a browser (because that view will get you all the public replies) for more nuance & more examples:
https://mas.to/@kissane/113459510206022015

@tethre @PassiveIdeation