lol. i have no idea who steve shives is. But today i heard this guy's name, as famous sjw who blocks people. I went, and lo n behold, i am blocked!
and, same thing happened with the feminist freq anita fuck. I discovered i was blocked about 3 months ago, even i never visited her twitter or blog.
so, i guess am somewhat famous.
am guessing, they have a network of ban list. sjw leftist tend to do that. On mastodon too.
it's truly puzzling what these severe sjw types is thinking.
Apparently, he's a youtuber.
Is it possible sometimes in the past i posted a comment to his youtube ? not likely, since i rarely do.
how is it possible he blocked me on twitter?? i don't think am a famous anti sjw guy neither.
does he actively daily troll thru comments or social media looking for conservative or anti sjw posts and find them on twitter and block them??
ok, i think in 2016 or 2015 i've sometimes tweeted anti feminist things with tag. I think that's how he found me and blocked me.
When I heard Trump was blocking his critics, I didn’t get why this offended them, either.
I don’t suppose there’s a right-wing version of this yet, but don’t be surprised if one arises — as a fork of the repo.
What am I missing?
@wrenpile @xahlee If I block you because I don't want to read your stuff, that's my business. But if I tell 10000 people "Don't read this guy because he's an evil harasser" (today it would be "Nazi" but these systems are a couple years old now), and people take my word for it without checking, is that harmless?
That said, I don’t think I have the right to order people who *are* being attacked not to use the s/w.
If I believe in free thought, I can deplore people burrowing into intellectual holes, but I can’t in good conscience stop them.
@wrenpile @xahlee I think the only people who've been helped by Twitter blockbots are people pushing a political agenda I abhor, helped to push that agenda. But I also think that's the wrong way to analyse it. Some people have been helped to avoid crime by racist housing covenants because no doubt at least one person excluded by such was a genuine criminal; that doesn't mean they were ever justifiable.
@wrenpile @xahlee that's an awfully general principle to infer from what I said. I think that Twitter blockbots are not justified by the supposed existence of "harassment," but that statement is informed by the observation of the way they've really been used in practice, and against whom, not by theoretical considerations.
@wrenpile @xahlee Yes, but A. I'm not convinced blockbots would work against mobbing in practice even if ideally used; B. I'm not convinced blockbots would be an acceptable measure against mobbing even if they worked; and C. in practice, blockbots *really are* used as a form of mobbing in themselves - not as a measure against it, despite the proponents' claims.
@wrenpile @xahlee I don't think it's possible to test A without deploying an ideal blockbot and having it be used ideally. The difficulty of doing that is one reason not to unleach blockbots lightly. For C, look at people we don't consider likely to be "harassers" who nonetheless get onto the blocklists. @xahlee seems to be one; @St_Rev from Twitter is another; and I think President Obama (while he was still President) was on one the the major lists for a while.
1/ Re muting: when I said I block boring people who get reposted by people I follow, I meant I mute tem; sorry.
I too reject the idea that anyone should expect to avoid ever being offended, especially in places supposedly designed for the exchange of ideas, like social media and universities.
2/2 But that doesn’t mean colleges/social media shouldn’t have rules for soeech. Threats of violence are out, right? And I bet you think people who shout down a right-wing speaker, making him inaudible, should be disciplined, right?
If you have those rules, you need a repirting mechanism, too, right.
If course, you also need a fair review process. I’m not saying Twitter or any specific college does that correctly.
@wrenpile @xahlee One difference is that most spam blacklists, and all those that serious people take seriously, have a defined appeal process. Also, the incentives to avoid false positives are stronger because false positives *really hurt* for the recipient, not only the sender. That's much less true of twitter blocking.
Apparently, if u r the first to reply to trump, say, a pro left empty post, u become celebrity overnight. and apparently there r pp doing exactly that, and got tens of thousands followers overnight.