Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

IWantAGrapeInMyMouth t1_iv4du3d wrote

Reply to comment by cyborgsnowflake in [D] Sigmoid Social, an alternative to Twitter by and for the AI Community by regalalgorithm

I don’t think a 23 point swing in favorability and a growth in unfavorability in literally every group over the span of 2 months illustrates the point you’re attempting to make about Musk only growing in unpopularity due to “politics”. And that’s grown since June. But I’d love to see proof on one sided bans against the right, because this feels like the standard whining and false equivalency the right loves to espouse without any evidence. It’s wild to me that people who regularly simplify and misrepresent issues get into a data based field.

10

cyborgsnowflake t1_iv4lbsp wrote

I didn't say only due to politics, I said largely. He's been the subject of heavy negative coverage starting around the time he started to really jump into politics that is probably partisan driven. but can have effects across party lines. But even disregarding that there are still huge differences between ideological groups. So yeah, politics isn't an irrelevant factor here.

In terms of your other question, Twitter keeps the best information to themselves and of course aren't going to release anything that makes them look bad and most of the media run interference for them but slightly more independent studies like these have found they suspend Republicans 5x more than Democrats.

https://www.newsnationnow.com/business/tech/is-twitter-really-biased-this-study-takes-a-look/

Of course most academics are also on team Progressive so they handwave it away with 'lulz misinformation'. But they can't deny the validity of the central fact that conservatives are targeted more.

−1

IWantAGrapeInMyMouth t1_iv4p5zw wrote

Politics isn’t irrelevant but it is a dumb wedge case you’re making because your explicit bias in favor of right wing politics. I think it’s pretty much a no brainer that people on the left are going to like a guy less when he explicitly repeats right wing talking points, but that doesn’t explain the poll you linked showing republicans also liking him less over that same time frame. He’s becoming more unpopular with everyone, it’s just happening faster with people he’s explicitly setting out to upset, shocking.

Republicans being suspended more than democrats isn’t proof of bias against the right. I’m asking for data that specifically shows a double standard for the same actions. You’re not showing that. I imagine open fascists have the highest suspension rate of any political party but I don’t think that’s “one sided banning”, open fascists are just way more likely to explicitly break TOS, lol.

3

MindlessIntroduction t1_iv56g22 wrote

>wedge case

Also what is this? Did you mean its an edge case. And if so how?

Also using the word "dumb" and the term "no brainer" doesn't help people trying to understand your points any better.

1

cyborgsnowflake t1_iv4w2v7 wrote

So you've moved the goalpost after I showed you how wrong your assumption was. Now showing some disparity among x race/gender/political groups isn't in itself enough to justify action or even curiosity? And further you'll proactively assume its a nothingburger rather than have an open mind? And you'll keep moving the goal posts.

Great! I've got you thinking like a 'FAR RIGHT racist sexist homophobic transphobic' conservative now. So what if blacks are arrested more? They probably commit more crime! So what if women are paid less? They probably don't work as hard on average! The groundwork is laid. Just shift the groups you apply your new logic to a bit and you too will know the pleasure of playing whack a mole with Big Tech in no time with your fellow 'neonazi fascist' rightwingers. Glad I could teach you something.

0

IWantAGrapeInMyMouth t1_iv4z01s wrote

Mate when your argument relies on comparing oppressed groups in society that are oppressed due to no reason other than something they cannot change to people who openly choose to follow an ideology, the comparison starts to fall apart. You being right wing doesn’t make you oppressed, lol. You can just stop being right wing at any point.

I’m asking for proof that right wingers are suspended at a higher rate for the same actions. You don’t have anything to prove that, so you’re just guessing. Why are you interested in a data based field when you can’t demonstrate correlation that removes confounding variables?

3

cyborgsnowflake t1_iv7fbit wrote

Mate when your argument relies on comparing oppressed groups in society that are oppressed

Either a correlation matters or it doesn't, how sorry you feel for a group plays no scientific role.

You being right wing doesn’t make you oppressed, lol. You can just stop being right wing at any point.

People can flip their deepseated beliefs like a light switch. Sounds scientific to me!

I’m asking for proof that right wingers are suspended at a higher rate for the same actions. You don’t have anything to prove that, so you’re just guessing.

I gave it to you. Republicans are suspended at a 5x for the same actions of talking on twitter just like Dems do. What confounding variables are you talking about?

0

MindlessIntroduction t1_iv55ubr wrote

So even though you concede that "Republicans are being suspended more than democrats" and Republicans lean more politically right you don't believe this is proof that there is a bias against right leaning people because Republicans are also "open fascists"?

I am not sure this is your logic because you also state that "open fascist" is a distinct "political party". Presumably a party distinct from Republicans. Not that i've ever heard of them.

I think the onus might be on you to prove that the data doesn't take account of this phenomenon that you refer to (not that i can understand what it is exactly). Since ATM its conjecture and you have the hard data you've asked for

−1

IWantAGrapeInMyMouth t1_iv58far wrote

Where did I say republicans are open fascists? I said open fascists would be the most likely to be banned and the most likely to break tos terms, and this wouldn’t constitute unfair or unequal banning. Try rereading

4

MindlessIntroduction t1_iv59upl wrote

But then what do Republicans have to do open fascists then?

−1

IWantAGrapeInMyMouth t1_iv5aobf wrote

Explaining that one ideology may lead its followers to violate TOS more. If you want things specific to people who aren’t open fascists, AFAIK no democrats are posting QAnon shit which gets bans. Very few dems post about vaccine conspiracies. Etc etc etc. if one political party has a contingent of voters who violate terms of service more, they’re going to be banned more. Y’all just gloss over that part to pretend people who choose to do these things that they know violate TOS are victims

3