top | item 46983610

(no title)

razingeden | 18 days ago

Well good for you. I’m still permanently banned from Xitter just for explaining what GoF even is.

Im sure it has nothing to do with Allison Fauci being a Twitter systems engineer at the time.

Selective enforcement doesn’t mean it didn’t happen just because you’re still online.

discuss

order

epistasis|18 days ago

Look, I know we're supposed to "believe women" and all, but in my personal experience every time I have followed up on the "They're censoring me for my views" thread it has not resulted in a conservative person being censored for tax policy and advocating for limited government, but instead, "you know the views" that amount to harassment. I admit I could be wrong, but my Bayesian prior from past data is pretty strong. So I'm hesitant to believe without evidence. I understand if others have a very different prior, but I can't deny my past experience.

In the past I've hesitated to even get involved with these discussions because they all seemed far too low signal to noise, and in fact lead to huge amounts of dangerous toxicity, but in these dangerous times I think it's important to interact more even if it's very unpleasant. I already got my first-ever "kill yourself" response to what was an extremely restrained comment response. We all see what goes on these discussions, we all see the common mischaracterizations, so if you want to overturn what people have seen in the past it's going to take documented evidence, I think.

razingeden|15 days ago

Ahem. I said I described GoF and got banned for it.

> but instead, "you know the views" that amount to harassment

Is sneering “believe all women” at people you disagree with one of these forms of “harassment” ? Or just discussions about biology?

Not sure what you’re suggesting here. That is okay. Honestly, I don’t care about anything you have to say.

Aeglaecia|18 days ago

this very thread is flagged, a simple link to science dot org. this directly supports the previous commenter who mentioned that these discussions are censored en masse.

im happy to keep discussing and bridge the gap between our perspectives. please understand that you came straight out the gate swinging with personal accusations in response to a hypothetical comparison, then in a later comment you engaged in the same behaviour that you accused me of, which is to say victimising yourself (by downplaying your actions and bringing up rude words others said to you). its my biased perspective, but those two in tandem make it seem like you have bad faith in the argument.