its older than the internet

If I go down to speaker's corner and say stuff that people don't like, I can expect a crowd to yell shit at me.

You do not have the right to make them listen to your insults

It's not a bug. It's a feature.

The only way to prevent the crowd yelling shit at me is censorship.

The crowd is just bigger online.

the internet for these people is like a place where to expose themselves as who they really are requires them to be exposed to mobs, mob sized quantitys of both praise and hate. its like walking down the street to the groscery store while being followed by thousands of people cheering and booing constantly and your responce is "the only way to solve this (and i would even take the time to consiter any other solution) would ruin everything so this person has to suffer the consaquences of the system"

They can make a pseudonymous account. They do not have to use their real identity.

how fun

What is your proposal?

i havent gotten to one yet, ive been to busy pointing out how giving up on finding a solution isint a solution

^^

its simply the status quo until something better comes along

"something better" is probably going to be some form of machine driven censorship, because how else are you going to prevent people from saying what they want to say to a public figure on social media?

some bot will detect an insult and shadowban you. the celebrity gets to bask in a sea of only positive comments.

something better is subjective i can conceed but i leave something better into the hands of universal acceptence to actually agree on an preposed idea that is actually good and not just seemingly good to one group of people. your seemingly good is also subjective and only applicible to people who think the same as you, its just that i believe your idea of doing nothing is better than doing worse. im open to doing better though. however my argument has been more toward not presuposing that someone your talking to who is looking for a solution will only assume a solution that you dont agree with and is the solution you assume is the only one they can come up with before they have even postulated one

i think one big problem is that these ppl seem to think that the only way to deal with the shit is to delete their account, when we all know that if you give it a few weeks it will die down and ppl will of moved on and any coming after that should be easier to manage.

wow that was a lot of words to say you don't know

you have a career in politics ahead of you

i have a spelling learning disability, not a vocabulary learning disability

hahah

dont assume they are the same thing

There are bascially two solutions to any problem: top down or bottom up

and it would also help to think about what someone is talking to you about rather than just coming up with a way to downplay them, even if your losing an argument

in this case top down would be instituting some sort of automated block or censorship feature

bottom up would be teaching people better ways to express their displeasure./encouraging more productive conversation

But sometimes you just want to call someone a cock and be done with it.

just 40 thousand people calling you a cock just one time is kinda sucky

I would hate the idea that everything I'm reading that has been sent to me has been through a fillter to get rid of the narsty. I'd need a way to let every tenth or so through if it was getting that bad.

I bet it does. this is the problem innit.

its kind of the bike cuck meme. you got 40k hatemail but it did make one person 1 message happier, so thats ok right?

i got 40k messages of hate mail and i was pretty bummed about it

but then i thought that those people who sent the hate mail were happier to send it than I was sad to get it

so

whatever

The birds have started singing, time to get some beauty sleep. night.

When the birds are up you know youve been up too late

see what MIGHT be a ok middle ground, though personally i prefer perhaps an education system that doesent both generate people who think they deserve constant praise and also people who think that the best thing to do when they dont like something that doesent actually have a direct effect on their livelyhood is to send people shit in the mail. but if theres a top down solution, id prefer that solution be opt in insted of a sweeping censor machine that monitors all interactions on a platform. the idea would be something that acts like a mail reader, or like how to post office checks your mail for anthrax. but its something you choose to use rather than something that everyone has forced on them

see i dont think the problem is that top down solutions exist, people have used top down solutions since people had self awareness. but the issue is that these few people who have problems with the system, and i do think their problems are legitament, have solutions implamented for them that effect millions of people at the same time who dont care or even know whats happening at the time

infact this may already exist, if so and this actress chose not to use it then yeah there's no helping them

if it doesent already exist then i think it should. yes when companys create algorythmic machines they do tend to use them on everyone, but THATS the problem, that implamentation takes a tool to solve a problem for some people and makes it a chore for all people in the world to have to deal with