I read some articles on the topic, but they struck me as deeply authoritarian. People talking as if they have a practical ability, a right, and a moral duty to try to control all speech on earth.
There's a whole spectrum of people I disagree with on the fediverse. From people I violently disagree with and can't easily coexist with to people I disagree with but respect and would invite over for a beer irl, and the fediverse is largely about choice. I follow folks who I can tolerate, and those people post things and repost things, and sometimes I fly a bit too close to the sun and need to unfollow someone who is filling my feed with something just a bit too out there, but there's no global algorithm playing Jerry Springer so typically I see mostly stuff I can tolerate just fine and I can tweak things to keep it that way.
The people I disagree with need to be here. First because I disagree with most everyone on something including myself at times so I'd be awfully lonely if voices I disagree with disappeared, but second because it's vital to the health of discourse.
There are all kinds of hugbox out there for people who want them. They are extremely diverse in the types of people on them. The one consistent thing is that the level of discourse is much lower as a bunch of people who already agree just yell at the walls about how bad "the other" who isn't around is.
Fact is, sometimes people I disagree with have something meaningful to say. Sometimes I might straight-up agree, or I might agree but in a different way than they imagine, or I might disagree but I learn something by the interplay of ideas. The last thing I want is to have them silenced because I don't like what they have to say.
There's a whole spectrum of people I disagree with on the fediverse. From people I violently disagree with and can't easily coexist with to people I disagree with but respect and would invite over for a beer irl, and the fediverse is largely about choice. I follow folks who I can tolerate, and those people post things and repost things, and sometimes I fly a bit too close to the sun and need to unfollow someone who is filling my feed with something just a bit too out there, but there's no global algorithm playing Jerry Springer so typically I see mostly stuff I can tolerate just fine and I can tweak things to keep it that way.
The people I disagree with need to be here. First because I disagree with most everyone on something including myself at times so I'd be awfully lonely if voices I disagree with disappeared, but second because it's vital to the health of discourse.
There are all kinds of hugbox out there for people who want them. They are extremely diverse in the types of people on them. The one consistent thing is that the level of discourse is much lower as a bunch of people who already agree just yell at the walls about how bad "the other" who isn't around is.
Fact is, sometimes people I disagree with have something meaningful to say. Sometimes I might straight-up agree, or I might agree but in a different way than they imagine, or I might disagree but I learn something by the interplay of ideas. The last thing I want is to have them silenced because I don't like what they have to say.
- replies
- 1
- announces
- 0
- likes
- 1
That's true, which is why it's so terrible that people go "oh, you're enjoying your personal life in ways I don't agree with? Maybe your employer would like to hear about this!" -- unless you're doing something associated with your job, of course you aren't in work mode and you shouldn't be because we aren't owned and operated slaves of our job 24/7.