I like this idea. We can exchange recipes, recall our favorites, hoist the beverage of our choice. It sounds like fun.
It has sox appeal.
When you have 53 posts in a thread and post 53 starts with the following (paraphrased):
"I have no experience or knowledge of the topic at hand, especially on a professional level… "
Maybe, just maybe… and I’m spitballing here, so hear me out… you shouldn’t spend 53 posts telling us how this works for those professionals? Including the 250-odd words which followed this disclaimer?
That’s a mischaracterization. Most of SoaT’s posts in that thread are about other aspects of Twitter and the Musk purchase, not about its use as a source for journalists.
He was one of several in the thread who were piping up about how Twitter was a useless tool and then admitted they had never used it themselves.
@JohnT, I appreciate many of your informative posts and the effort you put into them. But this criticism is a bit much. As already said, the vast majority of Stranger’s posts in that thread were unrelated to the use of Twitter in journalism and were about other aspects of Musk’s takeover. Furthermore, he expressed a willingness to be corrected by those with more experience in this particular aspect. I see nothing here deserving of a Pitting.
So? I think the hypocrisy would be the other way around – if someone who was an avid user claimed that it was useless. It’s not unreasonable for those who have never used Twitter but have observed the sorts of conversations that occur on it, and have also read the many extensive analyses of how Twitter and Facebook have contributed to massive disinformation and the dumbing down of society, to be justifiably critical of these platforms. This is not to say that they don’t have some genuinely useful functions. But their role in promoting the emergence of a nation of uninformed morons addicted to their phones has been characterized – with some justification – as a genuine threat to democracy.
Oh fuck off!
That’s like saying that conservatives are justified hating on Black Lives Matter. They have no direct experience with it, but they know better because they’ve heard all the detractors complain about it and seen the stuff on their news showing the rioting.
I don’t think it’s remotely controversial to say that, if you have no direct experience with something, then you know less about it than the people who do. And thus you shouldn’t act all pretentious like you’re superior.
That’s what there’s a lot of in that thread. And I say that as someone who is fully aware of Twitter’s downsides. But that’s because I use it. I’m not the “I don’t even have a TV” snob complaining about it in the threads about it.
Instead of telling everyone how bad Twitter is, Stranger (and others in that thread) should be trying to learn why Twitter is useful. We’re supposed to be here to fight our ignorance, not wallow in it.
I don’t understand this. You are saying that someone with direct experience of something who makes an observation about their experience is a hypocrite? What a completely bizarre thing to say.
I see a risk that I might unintentionally derail this resurrected Trolls thread, but I’ll just respond to this.
It depends on what you mean by “knowing about” something. Are you aware of how many research papers there are on the subject of Twitter’s impact on politics and society in general? Thousands. Here’s an interesting one from the National Academy of Sciences. Here is a large collection of dozens of peer-reviewed papers on the subject of “Twitter and Society” (check out the Table of Contents). Who do you suppose knows more about the impacts of Twitter on politics and society, researchers who have spent years analyzing the data and producing peer-reviewed research papers, or the average Twitter user? Do those researchers not know what they’re talking about if they are not themselves avid tweeters?
It would be bizarre if I had said that. But that isn’t what I said. At all. I said it would be hypocritical for an avid frequent user of Twitter to claim that it was “useless”. See also the point above about the extensive research that’s been done on the societal impacts of Twitter. You don’t have to be a Twit to be able to read research papers and news reports about them.
Someone who says it’s horrible but uses it anyway, rather.
Now, I don’t necessarily see that as hypocrisy. You can certainly call it awful but still use it because you have no effective alternative.
And in that case, I’d consider the term “useless” to be frustrated hyperbole.
No, and nothing I said in my post would contradict that. The comparison is people who actually use Twitter to people who don’t. Someone doing research on Twitter would inherently have to use the platform. For one thing, you can’t really get a lot of data on Tweets if you’re not logged in. But, even if you didn’t, reading a ton of tweets would make you someone who uses Twitter.
It’s also entirely irrelevant to the subject at hand, as Stranger (and the other posters indirectly referred to) are not said experts. So it doesn’t do anything to support you telling JohnT he’s wrong to be upset at the non-expert lecturing the people who have actual experience.
Acting like you know everything about something you have no experience or expertise in is indeed quite annoying–annoying enough that, if it were a new poster, I would think they were actually trolling. As is, it’s just typical Dope snobbery.
Sorry, but I disagree. Here’s an analogy:
I don’t drink. Never have.
Let’s say Elon Musk buys, say, Jim Beam and literally pours out the aging caskets saying his team will recreate and revolutionize the whiskey-making process using processes which have never worked.
Then someone starts a thread about this development.
I, a non-drinker (as in, for my whole life), pipe in with one long, wordy post decrying alcohol, citing alcohol statistics, mocking the culture of alcohol, ignoring any potential positives of alcohol, calling people who drink ‘drunks’ … all of this well written and part of the overall debate (if just massively one sided).
Most of y’all would ignore this. And properly so. My comments may be on point, well cited, and the overall antagonistic tone to my post to everyone who drinks or is involved in the business of alcohol would probably be ignored by most of the audience, especially if I never returned to repeat them.
But… imagine me repeating this message multiple times. With me eventually admitting that I have zero first hand knowledge or experience of what I am so furiously claiming to be correct on. With me arguing that obvious use-cases for drinking… ala “well, why not do this over a soda? Why drink alcohol at all during a business dinner? It’s a BUSINESS dinner, not an occasion to get drunk”… are not acceptable, even though you know this is incorrect.
Eventually, I would be breaking the ‘don’t be a jerk’ rule, would I not? If I were telling people who literally know different that their experiences were wrong, that their use of alcohol is the result of being programmed by the advertising industry and alcohol addiction, someone would eventually speak out.
Yes, my alcohol posts may be on point. They may be well written. But, repeated over and over, I would be surprised if I weren’t accused of thread (or topic) shitting. If I weren’t called out for using my ignorance to form counter-arguments to other peoples’ more-informed opinion.
And such were Stranger’s posts. Sure they are well written, researched, etc. But the open antipathy to the platform combined with their professed ignorance of it, repeated constantly in cases and situations where he(?) is demonstrably wrong (such as its uses for research, journalism, and community building), deserves to be called out.
Omg, I almost died. This was funny.
You, write a wordy post? I would never have imagined!
I mean, it boggles the mind! And I do it sober, too!
Who was that addressed to?
I’m not following this except to think all of this doesn’t belong in this thread.
I don’t know. I assumed Naita was making a Succession reference given that “Oh, fuck off!” is one of the characters (the CEO of a major media corp) catchphrases, and I read it as something Elon would’ve said (which is why I thought it funny).
Other than that, I got nuttin’.
I’m picturing myself as Logan Roy/Brian Cox delivering that line now. Which does make it funny, and which wasn’t my intention. I’m definitely no Brian Cox. I just felt it was all that dumbass post deserved. Some posters here would enjoy Monty Python’s Argument Clinic just as much as they enjoy posting here, and the rest of us would be much better off.
The poster who gives the MacGyver character a bad name finally tipped me to the plonking point in the Colorado Springs attack thread.