Monday, July 30, 2018

Twitter has decided to analyze 'conversational health' online, to work out what type of 'free speech' will be permitted on the platform.

1. One of the common traits of liberal progressives is their fundamental dishonesty. This latest twitter 'project' is an excellent example. Thoughts.
An update! We’ve selected 2 partners from 230 idea submissions. Our first goal is working to measure the “health” of public conversation, and that measurement be open and defined by third parties (not by us).
Show this thread
6:49 PM - 30 Jul 2018
29 replies336 retweets513 likes
 
 
 
Robby Ball ❌Tweet text
 
 

    1. New conversation
    1.  1 hour ago
      2. It's truly Orwellian. Twittet has decided to analyze 'conversational health' online, to work out what type of 'free speech' will be permitted on the platform. But what's Jack NOT telling you?
      8 replies73 retweets207 likes
       
       
       
    2.  1 hour ago
      3. Like many, I'm quite interested in the dynamics of online echo chambers. It's true - we all operate within our own perspective. And it's not a good thing, if that means we can't learn from 'the other side of the fence'. HOWEVER.
      3 replies36 retweets148 likes
       
       
       
    3.  1 hour ago
      4. It's a fact of life that humans have ALWAYS operated in echo chambers. That existed before the internet, WWW or twitter- and always will. The assumption that it's somehow a new thing is WRONG.  Another thing.
      6 replies34 retweets155 likes
       
       
       
    4.  1 hour ago
      5. In my experience, it's Trump supporters who have a far better understanding of both sides of the argument, not liberal progressives, who aren't interested in learning other perspectives. For 8 years under Obama, they never had to challenge their own views. They got LAZY.
      6 replies84 retweets262 likes
       
       
       
    5.  1 hour ago
      6. Like many Trump supporters, I was once a liberal progressive. We 100% UNDERSTAND that ideology - and REJECT it, 100%. How many liberal progs understand the POV of the Trump supporter? ZERO. They aren't interested, as they believe they are superior.
      9 replies85 retweets271 likes
       
       
       
    6.  1 hour ago
      7. And that they're never wrong. Reality? We are SMARTER than liberals. We argue with each other more, have a much better sense of humor & we're are far more attuned to what's going on in mainstream America, than liberals are. They HATE that. And want to shut us down.
      8 replies65 retweets234 likes
       
       
       
    7.  1 hour ago
      8. Anyway, back to this twitter project. You would think that if Jack was genuinely interested in improving conversational health, he'd establish a working group with true diversity of ideas - say a mix of Trump supporters & Obama supporters.
      5 replies40 retweets154 likes
       
       
       
    8.  1 hour ago
      9. You know, a group that reflected both 'echo chambers.' I mean, that would be the fundamental requirement to truly understanding each perspective, wouldn't it? DIVERSITY OF THOUGHT.
      5 replies39 retweets160 likes
       
       
       
    9.  1 hour ago
      10. You'd also want to make sure that the group is 100% objective. For example, you couldn't have conflicts of interest, if you're asking people to measure 'conversational health'.  So let's check out who is chosen for this critical project. And what ISN'T disclosing.
      2 replies31 retweets131 likes
       
       
       
    10.  1 hour ago
      11. First, Jack points out he has been inspired by the work of a not for profit, Cortico, quote: 'Cortico, a non-profit research organization who has spent time to more deeply understand the concept of measuring conversational health' 
      2 replies27 retweets103 likes
       
       
       
    11.  1 hour ago
      12. Impressive. But dig a little deeper & what do you find? Why, the 2 founders are BOTH ex-twitter senior managers. They're from Jack's echo chamber. They live, breathe and drink liberal progressivism.  That's an ABSOLUTE conflict of interest. Why didn't Jack disclose it?
      7 replies107 retweets222 likes
       
       
       
    12.  1 hour ago
      13. Now we turn to the 'multi-disciplinary' taskforce that he's selected. On its face, it's an impressive group of academics. Tromble is a leader of the project:
      2 replies32 retweets103 likes
       
       
       
    13.  59 minutes ago
      14. Again, dig a little and you find this from Dear Leader:
      2 replies44 retweets128 likes
       
       
       
    14.  58 minutes ago
      15. And this:
      2 replies30 retweets102 likes
       
       
       
    15.  58 minutes ago
      16. And this:
      4 replies28 retweets107 likes
       
       
       
    16.  57 minutes ago
      17. You get the drift. And how about this from another senior member of the group:
      3 replies26 retweets100 likes
       
       
       
    17.  56 minutes ago
      18. Or this:
      3 replies23 retweets91 likes
       
       
       
    18.  54 minutes ago
      19. Or this:
      4 replies24 retweets88 likes
       
       
       
    19.  53 minutes ago
      20. How on earth did this OBVIOUS BIAS slip through Twitter's selection panel? They're ALL Trump-hating, deplorable-loathing Democrats, ginned up on misandry and corporate feminism.
      5 replies69 retweets164 likes
       
       
       
    20.  52 minutes ago
      21. They also strike me as extremely boring individuals, who wouldn't have a clue about understanding a different POV (even if they tried). And these are the people who will decide on what is 'healthy conversation'? Give me a break.
      8 replies36 retweets142 likes
       
       
       
    21.  51 minutes ago
      22. There may be the false diversity preached by the Obama cult, in this group. But there sure as hell isn't any diversity of thought. But then again, this isn't a genuine attempt at respecting free speech by Twitter. It's a STAR CHAMBER. To censor & proscribe 'wrongthink'.
      3 replies36 retweets134 likes
       
       
       
    22.  46 minutes ago
      22. You'd be forgiven for being pissed at for pulling a fast one on you, in this way. He's being totally dishonest. FYI, 'being pissed' is apparently called an 'approach emotion', by these modern day NewSpeak totalitarians :
      6 replies40 retweets109 likes
       
       
       
    23.  44 minutes ago
      23. This group should be immediately be removed from the project. There's no way they'll deliver an objective, fair outcome. But they won't be. Because objectivity and fairness was never the objective, in the first place. You and I know that. It's all a charade.
      2 replies48 retweets135 likes
       
       
       
    24.  42 minutes ago
      24. Look, can do what he likes with . It's his creation. But I just wish he'd be honest, for once in his life. With us. But more so, with himself. The end.
      16 replies65 retweets165 likes
       
       
       
Posted by rkball44 at 5:07 PM