Huge loss for the site if Rahaeli goes as there can be no clearer canary in the coal mine than "wise & seasoned social media trust & safety expert says this site has soured." If the general posting here has turned to "pancakes/waffles" that badly, Bluesky really is totally cooked.
I am top-posting an edited collection of posts that I have made over the last hour to explain why I am deleting the Bluesky application from my phone for at least the next 48 hours. I may be back. I may not. I haven't decided.
I mean I mainly use it for "stop eating the grated cheese now or you'll have to grate more" and "grate more cheese now you incorrigible cheese muncher" but it's great that it works for other things too!
I saw ppl dismiss Gloria Steinem as a TERF who changed her position for political reasons & without getting into the specific case of Steinem - isn’t it the goal? To make being a TERF not publicly tenable? Nothing is achieved by chastising people on your side for not getting there on your timeline.
The problem with "where have you been" responses to people's rising political concerns is that we should be encouraging people to become politically active rather than scolding them upon their arrival.
you can label the timers on your phone with the foods they're for, so you don't have to remember that the short one is cookies and the long one is potatoes or whatever
yes, moderation is leveraged against marginalised people and provides cover for bigots
no, zero moderation is not a serious solution
and of course they were unable to attack me without deploying an ableist slur
No, it's something different. Charlemagne lived near the European genetic isopoint which is more of a statistical concept. Short version - you've got 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 1024 10th generation ancestors, etc. Go back far enough in time and your number of ancestors is . . .
look "we just want a twitter where the roles of bigots and marginalised folx are reversed" is perfectly valid but let's not pretend that that's what happens in unmoderated spaces
I just clarified what bill got suspended for, but you've made it clear your preferred version of social media is a cesspit
I'm not at all upset about bigots getting upset. go build your strawman somewhere else
and I'm guessing if someone said it to one of your friends you be calling for the banhammer because you don't actually care about consistent moderation
yes but a lot of other people would have understood you. I feel like almost nobody understood Jess, and she has to take blame for that
I also get that she could have deleted and rewritten the entire thread perfectly and people would still cling to the original and that of course is a problem
she didn't. she didn't mention "legal and regulatory environment" in the original thread either. she was much, much, MUCH less clear in her language than rah is giving her credit for here. In my opinion she communicated extremely poorly throughout the original thread.
obviously if I read the thread and bounced I cannot accurately say what was and wasn't in it so I'm going to have to restate my claims in the first reply: at no point did I believe she was talking about legislators at all and at no point did I think she was doing anything but PEBKACing "techlash"
I honestly don't know how one can think she was communicating simply and clearly. I was constantly trying to read between the lines because I could not believe she was saying the things she appeared to be saying. Not at all surprised people got angry.
