@jeffowski said by a guy who is still posting to the world's largest child pornography website o. The planet.

He's right, but it hits less.

@log you might be missing the point. Posting at all on a child porn site is a problem.
@fiend_unpleasant Network effects are brutal for those in the communications field. Ultimately, those people have to meet the audience where they live, even when their neighborhood transforms into a degenerate sea of iniquity around them and they refuse to move. Posting abuse material is a problem. Posting political commentary is not, whether it be in virtueville or sintown. People *should* GTFO the former Twitter. I won't kick the ones who still feel like they have business there.
@log there is no reason to be on a child pornography site. Unless you enjoy child porn, being on a child porn site makes no sense.
@fiend_unpleasant I'm not certain that everyone would characterize X as "a child porn site". You can if you want. I would be more apt to call it a Nazi bar. One might enter, so as to alert non-fascist customers that the owner is a Nazi, and point out all the iconography and dog whistles, and try to convince them to visit another establishment, but it isn't an offense against me to be there. I have freed my mind from X. I don't go there, and I don't think about anyone who does.
@log the site itself allowed people to make child pornography. The users of the site created child pornography. How else should it be described?

@fiend_unpleasant As a pandegenerate site catering to all manner of humanity's dark impulses. It is *also* a fascist propaganda site, a disinformation campaign site, an ego-driven billionaire vanity site, a fallen social media site, a pump-and-dump scam site, an adult pornography site, a pointless waste of everyone's time....

And for some people, it is still Twitter, and their circle of follows and mutuals is not yet all monsters. I hope they get out okay.

@log @fiend_unpleasant --

Testimonial Injustice (Epistemic Injustice)
Coined by philosopher Miranda Fricker in her seminal 2007 book Epistemic Injustice, this occurs when a speaker receives a credibility deficit due to the hearer's identity prejudice (e.g., gender, race, class, or political alignment). The listener systematically downgrades the truth value of the claims purely because of who said them, harming the speaker specifically in their capacity as a "knower."

@log @fiend_unpleasant --

The Genetic Fallacy & Ad Hominem

In formal logic, rejecting an idea based solely on its source rather than its logical merit commits two related fallacies:

Genetic Fallacy: Evaluating the truth of a statement based entirely on its origin or genesis.

Circumstantial Ad Hominem: Dismissing an argument by claiming the source is inherently biased or compromised due to their circumstances, without actually refuting the argument's premises.

@jeffowski Logic is for debates. I am admonishing log for supporting (even if tacitly) the child pornography platform run by the billionaire son of a apartheid mine-owner, who is so inept at being a human that even sex trafficker Jeffery Epstein wouldn't hang out with him.

@fiend_unpleasant --

If you are rejecting ideas based on the source, then you are not here to debate.

Buh-bye.