Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wincenworks" data-source="post: 9283427" data-attributes="member: 7038835">Well that can be a rather inoperable burden on a forum, particularly since demonstration of such can require grabbing samples from dozens of different sources and platforming terrible people, etc.   Also I feel like at this point we could footnote everything with "seen all screenshots posted generally".  But to give you an example of what I mean, here's a screenshot of a video I have linked in a blog post, because it's a proudly reactionary YouTuber who received a copy of GiantLands that he did not want after he found out you could have non-binary characters in it.[ATTACH=full]350015[/ATTACH]Yes, it's eight hours and at the point I'm at the host is ranting about his explanation of why he doesn't respect non-binary identities, and one of his co-hosts is giving a different stance that he's agreeing with - creating a dichotomy in isolation.  Is it reasonable to ask someone to watch ten minutes of this to confirm that these guys have x opinion because y? What about an hour? The whole eight hours... do I have to watch every one of the videos on his channel? What about comparing what he says in this stream vs what he says in his intro video?Can I just direct you to the Twitter thread that I started in June 2021 which is so long that it breaks threading constantly? Do I have to point to individual tweets every time? How many? How long do I need to make a post to justify that x believes y?  What about the absence of evidence? Does the inability to show Jeff didn't edit a book prove he did if the book says he did?I don't think that any of these analysis are particularly radical, or particularly personal or in-depth - they're just observations and pattern matching. Obviously there are areas people seem to want to go into that are wildly inappropriate (eg people speculating on childhood trauma as a cause of x behaviour, etc) but that's not really what's going on here.Encouraging the whole "you need to show us" can easily turn into <a href="https://wondermark.com/c/1062/" target="_blank">sea lioning</a> and arguments over judgement etc that essentially amount to demanding passive observation rather than enabling people to deal with it etc or be able to explain to their friends why they might not want to share an image they saw someone like on social media.Innuendo Studios has talked at length about <a href="https://youtu.be/lLYWHpgIoIw?si=lKzSDIhCTOxlYHIM&t=1683" target="_blank">how memes and other associated strategies were used</a> in GamerGate by incorporating communication etc that relies on layerings of shared knowledge specifically so that it can be used to communicate to the in group without incriminating themselves to the out group (and/or used to attack people who are trying to explain/expose the in-group).In the above scenario, would it really be helpful to say - present a four page essay with links to every questionable statement that appears on DHSM in posts or comment, to analyse the entire image used and the comments relating with cross-referenced quotes/posts, etc.  Or is it more helpful to explain the underlying basis behind it?  Because just explaining the wheelchair and how its come to significance to reactionaries etc could be a multi-page thread.At the end of the day, there is no perfect analysis tool for dealing with your fellow humans - but there are a lot of pitfalls you can run into looking for one.</blockquote>

Verification