I think that’s the disconnect: I’m not looking for a compromise, a half-way meeting ground between my views and the views of people who support Trump with lies and half-truths. That middle ground is a bad solution, not one to be sought - like only caging half the children of asylum seekers rather than caging all of them, or only giving half of everyone’s future to the wealthy rather than giving them all of everyone’s future.
I also think that playing rhetorical games with people is an insult to their intelligence, a far greater insult than simply being rude to them; so the focus on bad language and tone rather misses the point.
That said, I get that it bothers you (as well as others), and I’ll try to tone it down.
Compromise does not mean meeting halfway, it just means coming to a common understanding. Part of that means acknowledging errors we’ve made, or misunderstandings.
But it’s always harder to acknowledge an error, if the person pointing it out is doing so while telling you that you are a liar, or stupid. Because then you are forcing them into a corner where admission of what might be an honest mistake, or stemming from a lack of perspective, means accepting that your personal attack is also true, which it often is not (based on my experience with those who post here on a regular basis).
So in this way, it precludes mutual understanding, and negates the entire point of the conversation, unless the point is merely shooting and bullying, which i don’t believe is what most of us are here for.
To be fair, I am certainly guilty of all of this myself at times. Knowing the path is often easier than walking the path. But it’s still something that we strive for.
Most folks here are pretty cool, and starting with that assumption ends up highlighting that differences are usually the result of misunderstanding, rather than inherent malice or evil.
Apologies if the hive prefers to just let this thread wither and die. Figured this would be more relevant to this thread than the “Stupid shit you see on Facebook” thread.
Facebook is trying to have it both ways.
As a private company, it can ban whatever bad content it wants from its site, so it outlaws nudity and hate speech. But it also says that it doesn’t want to be the arbiter of truth, so it doesn’t remove patently false information that plagues its platform.
Its convoluted—often seemingly arbitrary—policies leave Facebook performing mental gymnastics to decide what should be banned, and what should remain. On a day-to-day level, the confusing rules—in addition to the sheer amount of content uploaded to the platform—mean that a lot of illegal or harmful content lingers, for countless more eyes to see.
Its battle against bad content is as chaotic and muddled as the company’s policies on what is allowed on the platform, and what’s banned.
What does Facebook do with fake news?
Facebook likes to talk about its efforts to limit misinformation on its platform. But the war against fake news doesn’t actually include taking down fake news—except in rare instances.
