to think Elon Musk is shining direct sunlight on a very grubby state of affairs?

[LondonWolf]

Just staggered at what's coming out tbh. When he first bought Twitter there were several lengthy threads on here lamenting that Twitter would soon move to the Right and be full of hate. Now it appears that no one was bothering to work on child protection, child sexual abuse and exploitation routinely unaddressed, and Twitter employees were working directly with the FBI and government to censor stories some which arguably had direct impacts on how people would vote. Are there any threads on here discussing what's coming out like there were screening about how horrific it was all going to be, because I can't see any?

@hamstersarse It’s the Neo Nazis for me, personally.

Where are the people supporting Roth? The most support I can see is people explaining an extract that has been taken the wrong way. It’s insane to suggest that means people are supporting everything he says and does.

Also, I can’t find where people are saying how wonderful twitter was before and how they got everything right? As I’ve posted before, it should be possible to stamp out CSE and violence against women, without opening the floodgates to Neo Nazis. Can anyone explain what’s controversial about that?

By all means debate, but debating opinions that are actually on the thread is far more useful.

Anyway. Stuff like this doesn’t help the image.

“Ukraine's country code has apparently been deleted from Twitter's database. This means Ukrainians with 2-factor authentication cannot access their accounts, in the midst of a deadly war. It's time to investigate Elon Musk's conversation with Vladimir Putin.”

People in #Ukraine, #Kazakhstan, #Tajikistan, and #Uzbekistan can no longer create accounts or log in with 2-factor authentication, because those countries - all of which are at odds with #Putin - have been removed from the list of nations recognized by Twitter.

mobile.twitter.com/DashDobrofsky/status/1602848955615748096

"By all means debate, but debating opinions that are actually on the thread is far more useful."

That's not what you said when I was being monstered a few posts ago, because of opinions that were ascribed to me but never expressed by me.. A little consistency would be nice.

@Dotellhimpike I’m sorry you feel that way. Which posts were those and what did I say to you that’s given you that impression? Happy to clear up any inconsistencies.

The reason I’ve chipped with my latest post is because posters are assuming that people who don’t like Musk (as I’ve expressed many times on this thread therefore a view related to me) must love Roth and think Twitter was great before (opinions that I very much haven’t expressed or have expressed the opposite of), ie a conversation that I was directly involved in.

There are, for obvious reasons, lots of references to the Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss tweets but the problem is, they have said that they had to agree to certain conditions in order to be given access to the material, they themselves have their own agenda and it’s difficult to see from this how the material has been selected, how much of it has been cherry-picked and what else is in there that isn’t being released.

It doesn’t seem that much like sunlight, because we don’t have our own access to the information, nor is there general journalistic access. We’re being told about selected parts of it by hand-picked journalists who are acting under corporate instruction.

@BewareTheLibrarians "Where are the people supporting Roth?"

The whole left-leaning, liberal mainstream media in USA is supporting Roth. They publish news about how Yael Roth's safety is jeopardized by Elon Musk after he publicly criticized Roth on twitter. No news on Roth's lack of incompetency on censoring child porn or his strange tweets, or his debatable remarks in his Phd thesis.

On the other hand, you can see everyday Elon Musk being vilified by the same media. Today it is about how he banned the twitter account that was tracking his private jt and publishing data about his whereabouts. Yesterday, how the twitter HQ building's rent was not still paid by him. On the weekend, how he was booed when Dave Chapel invited him on stage in San Francisco. So everything he does, says is being ridiculed, criticized and penalized (if they can). Why? Because he is not supporting the Democrats. As simple as that.

Sorry for the mistake, wrote too quickly. I meant "No news on Roth's incompetency on censoring child porn or his strange tweets, or his debatable remarks in his Phd thesis."

At the very least, I would really encourage you to check some of this out before just accepting allegations. I don't know much about Yoel Roth, but it's pretty apparent he's being smeared.

The PhD may not be great or everyone's cup of tea, but it's right there. Go read it. It doesn't say what you seem to think it does.

The student-teacher relationship thing is also not what Elon (who sure does like the paedophile accusation) is implying. In fact, Roth seems to be saying that students are never in a position to consent to a relationship with a teacher (the student in the case in question was 18).
twitter.com/a_h_reaume/status/1601715527340417024

I don't know much about the Weiner thing but it looks like that was in 2011. It wasn't until 2015 that his real predilections came out, so Warroom.org, Steve Bannon's (you know, Bannon who would be in jail if he hadn't been pardoned by his friend Trump and who is now Elon's new BFF) website, is implying Roth should have known 4 years in advance? Right.

@Danana Both Bari Weiss and Matt Taibbi are independent journalists. Bari Weiss was a senior editor at New York Times and she resigned criticizing the cancel culture and and NYT's contribution to it. She independently writes at Substack, not affiliated with any corporate media in the USA. I say USA because just found out she started to write for Die Welt the German newspaper.

Same goes for Matt Taibbi, he used to work for Rolling Stones but he is not affiliated with any corporate media, only publishes on Substack.

So your claim that they are limited by corporate interest is not valid.

@solisetlunae Matt Taibbi has stated himself that “in exchange for the opportunity to cover a unique and explosive story, I had to agree to certain conditions”. That’s what I mean by being limited by corporate interest.

We can all speculate about what those conditions might be but the point is that this has not been specified, and the information isn’t being opened up to “sunlight”. Instead something (we cannot tell how extensive or complete) is being shown privately to hand-picked journalists who have had to agree to something in exchange. taibbi.substack.com/p/note-to-readers-8d4

"At the very least, I would really encourage you to check some of this out before just accepting allegations"

Please don't patronise me. You think because I reach different conclusions to you then I mustn't have looked at it?

I read the PhD and it wasn't just the bit about who can access grindr, it was also the bit about child safety being an "enduring paranoid narrative" which when you look at the student teacher quote it is clear he coming form one specific angle, and that is we shouldn't worry too much about adult child relations. there's no smearing we are talking about his own words, taken in context.

@Danana yes, agreed with what you're saying. I can still draw my conclusions based on my prior observations on how twitter was operating previously plus what Weiss and Taibbi have stated. My anecdotal observations fit to their narrative.

@Dotellhimpike "there's no smearing we are talking about his own words, taken in context."

Well said! I couldn't agree more.

The only thing he is shining a light on is what an awful person he is.
This is another oddly right wing thread.
He has cut the amount of security monitoring offensive posts, reinstated nazis and posted attacks on Fauci. Musk is a dangerous idiot.

"He has cut the amount of security monitoring offensive posts"

The ones that allowed child porn to flourish on the platform, and with them gone the child porn is also disappearing. You seem to be suggesting that saying this makes a person right wing.

Yes, if we criticize anyone or any policy that allows child porn or tries to normalize pedophilia then we must be the right wing nuts.

Except absolutely no one here is saying that criticising policy that allowed CSE on Twitter makes you right wing. Literally no one.

Let’s try phrasing it this way. In order to remove CSE from Twitter, was is essential for Musk to reinstate Neo Nazi accounts that were previously banned for inciting violence?

It’s entirely possible to hold two separate thoughts in your head at the same time - that

1. The previous policies on CSE were abhorrently lacking
2. the current owner reinstating and deliberately amplifying Neo Nazi accounts is a very bad idea.

BewareTheLibrarians "no one here is saying that criticising policy that allowed CSE on Twitter makes you right wing. Literally no one."

I have said that in response to @Joshanddonna's "This is another oddly right wing thread." accusation.

@BewareTheLibrarians of course, we can hold two separate thoughts at the same time. luckily we're not even experiencing cognitive dissonance :) Here is my version of these two thoughts:

1. The previous policies on CSE were deliberately lacking
2. The current owner is not reinstating and amplifying Neo Nazi accounts. This is an outrageous lie. It might be happening as a by product of freedom of speech. If it crosses to hate speech then the current owner is deliberately not allowing it as in the case of Kanye West's account being suspended permanently after his antisemitic tweets.

@solisetlunae From my very first post on this thread:

“In recent days, the platform’s new CEO has reactivated the accounts of known neo-Nazis; shared a picture of a white supremacist who said he’d like Trump to be more like Hitler; failed to prevent users from posting videos of the Christchurch massacre; tweeted a popular alt-right meme; used a known antisemitic trope; and, inadvertently or not, shared a dogwhistle that white supremacists interpreted as praise for Hitler.”

www.vice.com/amp/en/article/n7zm9q/elon-musk-twitter-nazis-white-supremacy

I think the “oddly right wing” comment may have come from the continued brushing off of the impact of this “freedom of speech”.

"I think the “oddly right wing” comment may have come from the continued brushing off of the impact of this “freedom of speech”.

What does this sentence actually mean? It's just nonsense.

Oh look. It just happened again. Rather than address the far right content, you’ve just “attacked” my sentence structure instead. There’s no need reply rudely, just ask me to rephrase if you don’t understand it.

As you seem to love me repeating my self, it means:

People are saying that some posters come across as right wing because they keep ignoring posts about far right content. And/or twisting any concerns about far right content into “but CSE!” Both are valid concerns. Both conversations can be had.

Look, when I don’t come back to the thread, it’s not because anyone’s convinced me I’m wrong, or I can’t fight my corner. It’s because I’ve repeated myself so many times that there’s nothing more to say. You don’t get it, and I hope you never have to. Some empathy for the people it does affect would be nice to see though.

In terms of CSE, it’s worth remembering that what ends up online has first happened in real life. The info below is a useful guide to spotting the signs of CSE in real life. The second link is for hotel and hostel staff, which sounds a bit random but they are so well placed to spot CSE so please share if you know anyone in that profession.

I recommend checking it out. It never hurts to know what to look out for.

www.nspcc.org.uk/what-is-child-abuse/types-of-abuse/child-sexual-exploitation/

https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/media/11442/ws31643-cse-hotels-booklet.pdf

Most of the Vice article sounds like fabricated based on conspiracy theories. Especially, making conclusions based on numbers like 88 or 14, hard to believe.

This is serious though:

"Over the weekend multiple users uploaded copies of the video filmed by the Australian white supremacist as he murdered 51 Muslim worshippers at two mosques in Christchurch in 2019. The video, which is illegal to share in New Zealand, was not caught by Twitter’s automatic moderation tools, and was only removed after the New Zealand government alerted Twitter to the problem."

As I said before, they are still working on content moderation. Hopefully, in time, a tweet like the above will be automatically moderated accordingly. The fact that, it was deleted manually proves no ill-intention for the time being.

For most of the other tweets mentioned, I still think they mostly fall into the category of freedom of speech.

"Oh look. It just happened again. Rather than address the far right content, you’ve just “attacked” my sentence structure instead. There’s no need reply rudely, just ask me to rephrase if you don’t understand it.

As you seem to love me repeating my self, it means:

People are saying that some posters come across as right wing because they keep ignoring posts about far right content. And/or twisting any concerns about far right content into “but CSE!” Both are valid concerns. Both conversations can be had."

And I am saying it doesn't make me far right if I don't accept the premise of the argument about the nature, content and existence of far right posts. The New Zealand Christchurch massacre being a case in point, if the aftermath of that attack the same video content appeared acrosss all social media, and was taken down over the course of a few days. No one at that time argued that all the social media where it had appeared were being run by far right sympathisers. That some people have tested Musk's avowed commitment to free speech by posting it again is not surprising in the least, of course that was going to happen but as @solisetlunae says, we will have to wait and see how the content policy develops, you can't seriously argue what happens in the initial days and weeks of a new policy is in any way evidence of a new far right direction supported by the site's owners, and to extrapolate from this that people who don't share the most paranoid view about Musk and his platform are de facto far right themselves.