Shawn H Corey As has been noted repeatedly, the bias is overt, overwhelming, and both tacitly and explicitly encouraged by MeWe leadership. MeWe's own corporate advisors have described the situation as troubling. The rates and prominance of this activity are entirely unlike that seen on platforms which take a proactive stance against hate, of which I have and have shared direct quantified evidence. And as Yonatan Zunger has noted, an absolutist "free speech" policy preserves it only for those already shielded and empowered, not for the underprivileged and vulnerable lacking access to speech.
And that's before recognising that MeWe has no viable financial model, and that its direct solicitation and recruiting of extremist groups is likely both a consequence and exacerbation of this.
Anyone who claims they are not supporting white supremacy directly because they don't spend money to enrich its alt-right founder yet invite others and do all the marketing work for free resulting in others spending money enriching the alt-right are enabling hate and funding the Trump campaign indirectly which is destroying world peace, the world economy, and efforts to combat climate change.
It's simply a fact of life when a business cons new users into doing its marketing for them for free while later charging all users fees for features that are free elsewhere. In this case, it is of concern because the alt-right owner is "using you" to make money to support the alt-right. Silence, ignorance, and indifference by good people are how bad people have risen to power in both politics and tech businesses. We all hate politics but if you haven't figured it out by now, politics matter to all of us but mostly to those who come after us. I encourage people to make a conscious decision about where they spend their time online - know where the money goes if there is money involved in any form.
Ignoring evidence of hate presented from several reliable and fact checkable sources keeps one ignorant of the facts. Choosing to not face facts makes one an enabler of hate. There are good people who are speaking out to help others make educated decisions. The work and the research is up to each of us.
Shawn H Corey No one claimed everyone on MeWe was bad, that's an overreaction on your part. What is being pointed out are fundamental and well documented flaws in the foundation of the platform that those people are using. Which you've conceded exist, though you seem to feel it unfair that everyone won't ignore them. And given your frequent knee-jerk and frankly emotional defense of MeWe, you seem to mean "biased" in the "doesn't agree with me" sense.
I think there are questions of fact behind these strong anti-MeWe positions that Morbius, Aryes, and others have taken.
Most of us here agree with the Popperian and legal positions that there is a limit to freedom of speech when it harms society.
Morbius and Aryes claim that MeWe has crossed that threshold by permitting and even promoting anti-social groups. Therefore, they claim, we should condemn and boycott such an organization.
Corey and myself and a lot of others disagree with the claim that MeWe is dangerous. Does MeWe have the potential to become an evil force? Sure, but they also have the potential to be a good force.
What do the facts say? Morbius claims his data shows MeWe is a festering hive of awful. He claims the leadership is promoting the awful.
But other than these verbal claims I haven't seen any actual data to support such a conclusion. (Yes the CEO talks like a libertarian, but so?) Data may show the potential, but as far as I know, the communities on MeWe are no more diverse nor extreme than in any US city downtown square.
Portland Oregon has protests downtown all the time. Should we boycott Portland or it's downtown waterfront because these hives of nasty awful are always protesting?
So i would suggest that you fervent anti-mewe folks be a little less shrill in your criticism and back it up with more facts. (judging their business model as infeasible is not a supporting fact, btw, who does have a good social site business model?
I whole heartedly agree with your right to speak up and discourage people from MeWe. But fact is right now you are speculating that MeWe will become a problem. There isn't much data to suggest it is a problem yet, nor data to suggest the leadership isn't dealing effectively with the problem. So, bottom line, get some more substantial data before you continue with your extreme prejudice. Maybe you're right, maybe not, facts are not there yet to be so sure of yourself.
E.T. Smith no need to get personal with Corey. You said (in italics):
No one claimed everyone on MeWe was bad, that's an overreaction on your part.
No, that isn't an overreaction, he's pointing out that the tone of the anti-mewe criticism implicates everyone who isn't anti-mewe. Not to mention the fact that he used a figure of speech. You've done it yourself.
What is being pointed out are fundamental and well documented flaws in the foundation of the platform
No, you're quite mistaken, there are no well-documented data showing mewe foundation flaws, not to mention fundamental flaws. That's a judgmental opinion of some people. It may or may not be true, just hasn't been substantiated so far.
...given your frequent knee-jerk and frankly emotional defense of MeWe, you seem to mean "biased" in the "doesn't agree with me" sense.
No need to get personal, and no need to question his integrity. Stay on task, address the mewe issue.
Pedantry is a common refuge for weak positions
Well, you're demonstrating the very thing you're criticizing. Again, quit the personal attacks.
MeWe's embrace of extremist, Fascist, Nazi, and White Nationalist, and antivaxxer culture
The Nazi, antivaxxer, conspiracy-theory, woo, white-nationalist, and other distinct and unbalanced bias of MeWe are patently evident and easily found with even casual exploration.
With one exception: if you're using clients (apps) which have sanitized search, as is the case with MeWe's iOS app.
When I began writing the #PlexodusReddit MeWeTrip Report, I simply wanted to flesh out some information on a site/platform that had ... been mentioned with exceeding frequency but almost equally prominent vagueness, though the site's commitment to free speech was prominently mentioned.
Given that content isn't visible without making an account, I created one, and started taking notes, beginning with a basic outline of the business and its principals, then policies and self-descriptions, and a rough assessment of its size -- there are on the order of a million registered users, best I can tell, but the largest groups have fewer than 20,000 members. This is a small fraction of G+ membership or activity. These also suggest strongly that only a small fraction of MeWe's claimd "millions" of accounts are in fact active users of the site. Which means that groups with only a few thousnd membe may actually represent a large share of active users, besides being some of the largest groups on MeWe.
It wasn't until I started looking at the open groups that I started getting some idea that things were whack, and the more I looked, the more whack they got.
Examples follow:
The first listed groups for "Activism" are QAnon+++ (2,572), PATRIOT PREPPERS USA (2,430), Deplorables Republic (2,48), The War Drummer (1,898), Patriots for a United America. (1894), Anonymous (1,700). For Alternative Energy: Reiki, Crystals, and alternative healing (2,114), 💜Starseeds & Empaths💜 (345), Living in Colour (365)
Under Education: Q-Anon Patriots (1,616), http://InfoWars.com (1,217), Constitutional Liberty for All (907), Prepping, Homesteads skills and Community (887), Shamanic Community (756), Truther Talk (665).
For Fraternities: Freemasonry (1072), Brotherhood of the Blade (313), Proud Boys Canada (74). That last is a white nationalist organisation, and only one of several Proud Boys chapters represented on the site.
The largest History group is 9/11, False Flags, & NWO Truth (1,872).
For Self-Directed Learning we have, again, the largest listed groups: Exposing the Matrix of Lies (997), WAKE THE FUCK UP (474), Wake the Fuck Up. The Next Dimension (287). WTFU when SHTF (126).
And among the 403 political groups listed publicly, an overwhelming right-wing to alt-right stance. Even if you see nothing wrong with the political views, the fact is that this is not at all representative of overall political views within the US. The site has, and caters to, an extremely biased political viewpoint.
MeWe's CEO, Mark Weinstein, has specifically reached out to a group driven off Facebook and Twitter to court them to join MeWe.
It's one thing to be open to fascist views, another to invite them directly.
for additional content, ... well, it turns up. Greg X has shared a pastebin showing results for searches on numerous Nazi, fascist, and white nationalist terms and symbology: https://pastebin.com/gt1FUQkw
I've written directly to MeWe's own advisors. One responded to an email linking my trip report "Thank you. What I will say is that I have been unaware. This does not reflect well but is the truth."
I've written people who study online propaganda, disinformation, and hate groups. One researcher's response began "Holy moly, that’s an interesting list", and speculated as to whether this was a case of innocently repeating frequently-seen mistakes in the tech startup space, or a deliberate policy of support.
What I've seen of Mark Weinstein's responses in multiple contexts strongly suggest the latter.
Other sites are not all like this. In particular, Google+ is not like MeWe.
Given my interest in researching social media characteristics, I've got a list of all 8.1 million G+ Communities as of January 5-6, 2019, along with public/private status, membership, and most recent posting activity. I've searched that for the terminology listed in the pastebin above ... and whilst yes, there are a few results, they are small and very non-prevalent, with most of the groups long since stripped of members and posts.
(The notable exception is "Aryan", which turns out to be a very common name in India and South Asia. When filtering for obvious white nationalist references though, it also fits this pattern.)
There are a total of 40 G+ communities matching these terms. None of them appear in a casual perusal of Google Communities. 15 of these have any visible posts remaining, 8 have been active since 2018, 2 in 2019. Google appear to have actively managed and discouraged such groups from appearing at all.
(And yes, I'm deliberately not listing the groups, though I can assure you they do exist.)
There is what Google+ architect Yonatan Zunger has had to say about social media moderation policy:
I worked on policy issues at G+ and YT for years. It was painfully obvious that Twitter never took them seriously....
Twitter chose to optimize for traffic at the expense of user experience. That's why GamerGate, that's why Trump, that's why Nazis....
So what does healthy policy look like? You look for things which systematically cause people to feel uncomfortable engaging. Things that make people not post in the first place, because they know what will happen if they do. You shut down big bad things quickly and visibly, before they can pull the entire conversation to be around them. You reduce interaction opportunities for things which are known to be toxic.
You try to avoid "toxic meetings," period.
And the key to all of this is to define an editorial voice for the platform, separate from that of its users. That voice is your de facto set of rules for "No, this is not OK here; you don't like it, go somewhere else." Here's the big operational secret: 90% of what makes online policy hard is trying to do it while claiming neutrality.
nationalists, nazis, fascists, hoaxsters, fraudsters, and conspiracy theorists is likely either in precarious financial shape or has itself has exceptionally twisted morals.
2. Groups intentionally heading to MeWe are putting their members directly in contact with a hive of racism, fascism, white nationalism, and other ideologies and activities. It's one thing to join a site as an individual, another to be coerced through group or peer pressure.
3. It's quite likely that MeWe will find itself subject to attention from law enforcement, its vendors and/or hosting providers subject to pressure, or other activities, all of which imperil all users of the platform. The innocent parties are being used as human shields.
4. The "free speech" arguments being made are specious if only for this reason: the speech and liberty claimed by MeWe's strongest defenders is explicitly aimed at denying basic rights or freedoms, or even life, to others. This is Karl Popper's Paradox of Tolerance:
Edward Morbius What i'm choosing not to see is your interpretation of the data. I applaud your efforts, and i sympathize with your concern that anti-social groups can ruin it for the rest of us. But i haven't seen data that convinces me that MeWe is a threat.As you know I already critiqued your mewe study when you published, pointing out lack of data to support your conclusions, and your bias to focus only on what you wanted to see. So, time will tell. But the data hasn't done so yet.
Edward Morbius Open groups on mewe are not that much different than on reddit, from what i've seen. Yes, some deplorables on there, just like anywhere else that offers a private context. But we know that.
You're argument has been that the leadership doesn't take a stand against anti-social elements, promotes them even. That may turn out to be a valid threat, but what's your data to back that up, that there is a significant risk that mewe's deplorables will become a significant threat to society?
The only reason i even bother to pursue this issue with you is that Trump has nurtured this noisy bunch of anti-social jerks, and so there is a strong cultural shift, perhaps enough to start punching Nazi's so to speak. However, I have hope that mewe will stay in front of it. You don't have that hope.
But at any rate, data so far does not indicate severe threat, imho. So, let's not get to that "either you're with us or against us" mentality. Show me the data, you haven't so far convinced many of us that we're sleeping with the devil.
All that aside, i don't much care for mewe so far. It's noisy and boring. Perhaps there's not enough smarts and guts on the platform to keep the deplorables from overrunning the place. But again, it's speculation. But data so far is not sufficient to close the case against mewe.
Bill Brayman This old liberal, for one, prefers to err on the side of not being even remotely associated with neoNazis and other scum of the earth. You may well find it a good platform, but some of us have different standards.
Edward Morbius Just read your long comment above. I think Pat Kight summarizes your position well. "... err on the side of not being even remotely associated with neoNazis and other scum of the earth."
What you said: "MeWe has an extremist bias with extensive white nationalist, anti-muslim, Nazi, and antivaxxer content and communities"
Extremist bias? Not necessarily. Another interpretation is that they are confident in the goodness of people to overcome. You got a problem with that? Do you have evidence that mewe is failing, that it is a threat to society? Or you just don't want to be associated with it?
Extensive bigots and ignorants? Like Corey said, that might be an exaggeration. Groups with a few hundred people in them isn't exactly extensive. So, your data doesn't really show any significant social threat (tho there might be, just need better facts).
Edward Morbius At the heart of the mewe issue for you I think is the notion of social toxicity. You quote Yonathon to the effect that a social platform should be managed with the principle of low threshold for social toxicity, a nip it in the bud philosophy.
That frames the issue in terms of centralized authority. The corporation is responsible for the social discourse it hosts.
Suppose MeWe wants their platform to be like a common carrier. You don't hold AT&T accountable for toxic phone conversations, nor shun them because of it.
So, just for intellectual curiosity's sake, what's the case for presuming centralized social toxicity management?
If and when we get a full peer-to-peer or mesh social platform, who is going to be the central authority?
So, I'm saying you may be biased towards the yonathon framing of the problem. Perhaps there is a better, more organic, decentralized social civility method, that a corporation like g+ can't do. Maybe MeWe is trying to do that.
(This global alt-right cultural wave is a strong headwind for social platform evolution, but it'll be better for it in the long run.)
When someone supports racism and approves of or turns a blind eye to racist behavior, they have become racist.
When someone supports sexism and approves of or turns a blind eye to sexist behavior, they have become sexist.
When someone supports homophobia and approves of or turns a blind eye to homophobic behavior, they have become homophobic.
When someone supports xenophobia and approves of or turns a blind eye to xenophobic behavior, they have become xenophobic.
All of these are tenets of the alt-right as exhibited in their actions of harm, murder, hate speech, and manifestos.
When you knowingly support the alt-right and approve of or turn a blind eye to alt-right hate speech online, and spend money or encourage others to spend money that enriches the alt-right, you become a member of the alt-right.
I submit the vast majority of users that are being used by the alt-right to spread hate are doing so unwittingly. This is not limited to MeWe but is also seen on Facebook, Twitter, and G+. The difference is, as the verifiable data shows, MeWe does not intend to combat the alt-right because it is owned and operated by the alt-right.
My goal, and likely Edward Morbius, is to inform and let people make informed decisions so they are not unwittingly being used by the alt-right to enable hate while funding politicians who are taking away rights and causing needless harm and deaths.
If I failed to inform what I have discovered, I would be enabling hate and the alt-right. I refuse to do so. You and some others promoting or defending MeWe and its founder as a self-avowed member of the alt-right either are being paid well, lying to yourself, or are a member of the alt-right. I will not be complicit.
Shelenn Ayres You are way out of line. Do not slander me. Do your research first before accusing me of anything. Look at my G+ page and you will see a very different person than you allege. I will report you if continue to misrepresent me.
I and other MeWe supporters are not "members of the alt-right" You've made the mistake of letting Trump goad you into an Us vs Them mentality. I am not your enemy.
Apparently your hatred blinded you to what I actually said in this post. Look carefully and you will see that I've addressed your philosophical position. It is important that we do not let extremists goad us into a simplistic and bigoted attitude such as what you said.
No we don't have to boycott all places that have extremist awful people. Here in the US we would have to close down all big cities if we were to adapt your position.
There are more intelligent ways of fighting that awfulness that you describe. And it damn sure isn't through boycotts.
So, look at your own bigotry and hate. That should be your first clue that you made a mistake lumping all MeWe people into one category.
As with any politician, pay less attention to what they say and more attention to what they do. No one lumped all users of MeWe into the alt-right - I was very specific with plain language in not doing that. You seem quite defensive to language I used that gave you three options of how you are perceived by others.
Boycotts are effective. Companies have the right to run their services the way they see fit within the law. It is a fool's errand to believe human rights activism within the service will change policies. Private companies (other than social benefit corporations) are motivated only by profit. Boycotts have a proven track record of success because they affect profits. I personally did not call for a boycott anyway. I simply shared what I learned as a matter of conscience to have done all I can to help others make educated decisions. It is up to them whether they choose to boycott. The information shared by myself and others including Edward Morbius has obviously gotten your attention.
Private online service providers make money from the behavior of its users, from the premium fees of its users, and from the traffic of its users. None of these are better business models than others. With regards to user generated content, I believe the content belongs to the users not the service provided. I also believe how a user chooses to share that content should be 100% under the control of the user. My initial evaluation of MeWe was based entirely on its shortcomings with regards to my use case. I chose the decentralized Fediverse as a result of a combined assessment that had nothing to do with the type of content on any of the G+ alternatives. During that evaluation is when I discovered the alt-right ownership and operations of MeWe and made the decision to share that information with others.
Only you can look at the data and accept it for what it is regarding the founder of MeWe - he is self-avowed. Credible (verifiable) evidence shows us that he and his operations team are alt-right in their policies. By designing the system the way they have, the alt-right hides in plain sight using the others unwittingly to support the alt-right. What you do with the information is up to you. Now that you can no longer be unwitting since the information has been read by you (by your own admission), if you choose to become a witting part of the alt-right that is your choice.
Shelenn Ayres No you didn't just share what you know, you attacked me and others for our political beliefs and behavior with unusually vile terms. That doesn't belong in this community. You slandered me specifically. And it has me hopping mad. I am not paid by the alt-right, nor lying to myself, nor am a member of the alt-right. You said us MeWe supporters are complicit. "You and some others promoting or defending MeWe and its founder as a self-avowed member of the alt-right either are being paid well, lying to yourself, or are a member of the alt-right." I would like an apology from you for singling me out in your mistaken allegations. You have absolutely no right to tell me or others how to combat these nasty awfuls. Furthermore, you have a conflict of interest because you have for months been promoting friendica and denigrating MeWe. It's in your self-interest to bad mouth MeWe. I'm not sure you even know what you're talking about because your characterization of MeWe and it's people is not accurate.
I haven't yet read your response above yet, but expect to hear more from me until we get this cleared up. You simply have no right to tell me and others how to deal with social and political issues. Speak your mind that's goodness. Castigating others is stupid, simplistic, and childish and certainly won't win no wars against extremists.
If you feel attacked you must identify with the general statements that hit home for you. I stand by the statement you chose to feel guilty about. "You and some others promoting or defending MeWe and its founder as a self-avowed member of the alt-right either are being paid well, lying to yourself, or are a member of the alt-right." Your attacks and threats of harassment of me are empty and don't scare me.
The facts you refuse to believe are detailed in the reddit posting. A simple look at the founder's Twitter account shows us he is a proud libertarian member of the alt-right. These are the facts you refuse to acknowledge. It is fact that a proud member of the alt-right will politically support alt-right politicians with the money they make. Having an account and not spending money associated with that account does not enrich the alt-right. Recruiting for them and defending them does. These are undeniable facts.
Shelenn Ayres What kind of logic is that: "if you feel attacked you must identify with the statements" . Normal logic says the opposite. Sorry I overestimated you. I take it an apology isn't forthcoming. I've made myself clear here, and you have too. Tata...
Shelenn Ayres For your edification, I have researched MeWe including Reddit comments and reports and a video link. I'm an old scientist so i can assess the facts reasonably well. At this point i don't have any certainty about MeWe's leadership evilness. Hearing the CEO talk, he sounded OK for an open-minded optimistic guy. He may underestimate the potential for social toxicity and his ability to manage it. But that remains to be seen.
What i think the most damning data you are referring to comes from Morbius and one other fellow who amassed a bunch of conversational data from some groups. Frankly, as i've told Morbius, his conclusions didn't match the facts he presented. There just isn't any evidence to support the claim that MeWe is secretly or explicitly trying to nurture the alt-right crazies. Permissive yes, but that is his right - and and - maybe a better way of handling social toxicity, than the polarizing us vs them way that you and Morbius are advocating.
I'm only interested in this from an intellectual perspective, sociologically how are we as a society going to adapt to social networks. FB set the standard as centrally managed and manipulated. But it is completely fair to question that, like i have, and consider self-regulated systems.
Where I got mad is that you pre-empted my intellectual beliefs trying to demand that I (and others) take the zero-tolerance stance, and actively fight against any show of alt-right nastiness. And those of us who disagree with you must be wrong. But, who are you to claim that's the only way to help society adapt to the new frontier?
So, I only ask that you not slander me by calling me a nazi type just because i deal with society different from you. Maybe us MeWe supporters will solve the problem better than you can. Who knows. It certainly isn't worth going on a tirade with me and others because we don't share your polarized view.
So, please let us talk about the issues, not personal politics here in this forum.
Bill Brayman trying to use facts and logic against these SJWs is like trying to nail jello to the wall. No matter how hard you hammer, it just slides down. They don't care. Not about fact, not about logic, not about objectivity; not even about the issue they're harping about. The only thing they actually care about is having a soap box to stand on and thump their chest "Look at me, I'm taking a stand." That's it. That's all it is. The more you argue with them, the harder they thump their chest and the louder they rant. Fortunately, both of the ones in this thread blocked me a long time ago, so I'm only seeing your side of the "conversation".
eric peacock It's a public post so i think just view it when not logged into google and you'll see thru blocks. And yes i understand your sentiment, but I rather not lump people together like SJWs or as she did alt-rights. But yeah true once an emotional mind is made up, no getting through.
Unfortunately, the political leanings of the owner of a company and its policy staff dictate how it moderates social content. This is evidenced by credible data presented by Edward Morbius Therefore, discussion of the political leanings of the owner of a company and its policy staff is on topic. My comments are not emotional - they are based on fact and perspective of the impact of those facts where I believe the vast majority of MeWe users are unwittingly supporting hate hidden in plain sight. This includes all of the large following G+ers who failed to vet the site prior to taking its users there. This makes it difficult for them to accept truth even if it is new information because their livelihood is affected by the loss of followers if they subsequently leave. My advice from day one and still today is: examine your use case and choose the platform that best fits your use case and that could include multiple platforms. The most important thing is to make educated decisions based on information made available as it becomes available.
Shelenn Ayres Well, i'm still owed an apology for being specifically called out as a alt right supporter and lumped into with the nazi's.
The emotional claim i made with Peacock wasn't directed only at you, I too, and others, are suffering from emotional polarization created by people like you and Morbius' whose tirade against MeWe and any show of support for them has reached hysterical proportions.
If you would have stuck with your advice to vet, and your concern with the implications of MeWe's founder, then all would have been well. But no, you got to brow beat us into submission that any association with MeWe is evil. Just review your incessant hammering about the matter above.
I'm willing to drop it now. You've shown no remorse, nor insight. I don't care to discuss it any further with you.
MeWe may do well or it may turn out to be a disaster, but it remains to be seen.
Edward Morbius Haha, look who's talking. You've plastered the internet with your protests, more protest than i could do in a lifetime.
Anyway, you're a major source of the problem we were discussing here. So if you have something positive to contribute please do so, otherwise keep your personal insults to yourself.
Bill Brayman You took some general statements personal - that's on you and that is why it appears you protest too much. In no way am I responsible for how you perceived what I typed. When you are not feeling so emotional in your response demanding an apology, perhaps reread it as if you were someone else. ;) I have no ill will towards anyone but people who wittingly support the alt-right.
Shelenn Ayres Sure i could have ignored your fairly explicit innuendos and accusations as general statements. But I called you on it. Here are your words that i took as personal attack. As i said, I'm done discussing this with you.
"You and some others promoting or defending MeWe and its founder as a self-avowed member of the alt-right either are being paid well, lying to yourself, or are a member of the alt-right."
You repeated: "I stand by the statement you chose to feel guilty about [no one but you mentioned guilt, a cheap mischaracterization]. "You and some others promoting or defending MeWe and its founder as a self-avowed member of the alt-right either are being paid well, lying to yourself, or are a member of the alt-right."
"When someone supports racism and approves of or turns a blind eye to racist behavior, they have become racist. When someone supports sexism and approves of or turns a blind eye to sexist behavior, they have become sexist. When someone supports homophobia and approves of or turns a blind eye to homophobic behavior, they have become homophobic. When someone supports xenophobia and approves of or turns a blind eye to xenophobic behavior, they have become xenophobic. All of these are tenets of the alt-right as exhibited in their actions of harm, murder, hate speech, and manifestos. When you knowingly support the alt-right and approve of or turn a blind eye to alt-right hate speech online, and spend money or encourage others to spend money that enriches the alt-right, you become a member of the alt-right."
Bill Brayman MeWe is a scam site. I'm half so waiting for Mark Weinstein to say "gotcha", close the site and run off with the money when MeWe gets enough money.
Gary Gregory I checked your post with site reviews and it's comments. Interesting to read various impressions of these new sites. However, I come from a more formal background so it's hard to do much with vague first impressions. Do you have anything more than a gut feeling that mewe is a scam? I haven't found anything to suggest that the CEO is dishonest. Maybe naive and idealistic, but he doesn't seem underhanded.
Bill Brayman I think it's a gut feeling that tips one off of dishonesty before one reaps the consequences. It may not be a scientific response, but one based on wisdom from identifying scummy individuals and how they talk (in Mark's case, like a glib con artist). Even what I said sounds like I'm begging the question, until you have enough knowledge to discern for yourself why I say what I say.
New comments on this blog are moderated. If you do not have a Google identity, you are welcome to post anonymously. Your comments will appear here after they have been reviewed. Comments with vulgarity will be rejected.
And not a mention of G+ in that article.
ReplyDeleteEdward Morbius You are condemning the whole thing by the actions of a few. Just like the extremists you are ranting about.
ReplyDeleteShawn H Corey As has been noted repeatedly, the bias is overt, overwhelming, and both tacitly and explicitly encouraged by MeWe leadership. MeWe's own corporate advisors have described the situation as troubling. The rates and prominance of this activity are entirely unlike that seen on platforms which take a proactive stance against hate, of which I have and have shared direct quantified evidence. And as Yonatan Zunger has noted, an absolutist "free speech" policy preserves it only for those already shielded and empowered, not for the underprivileged and vulnerable lacking access to speech.
ReplyDeleteAnd that's before recognising that MeWe has no viable financial model, and that its direct solicitation and recruiting of extremist groups is likely both a consequence and exacerbation of this.
Anyone who claims they are not supporting white supremacy directly because they don't spend money to enrich its alt-right founder yet invite others and do all the marketing work for free resulting in others spending money enriching the alt-right are enabling hate and funding the Trump campaign indirectly which is destroying world peace, the world economy, and efforts to combat climate change.
ReplyDeleteIt's simply a fact of life when a business cons new users into doing its marketing for them for free while later charging all users fees for features that are free elsewhere. In this case, it is of concern because the alt-right owner is "using you" to make money to support the alt-right. Silence, ignorance, and indifference by good people are how bad people have risen to power in both politics and tech businesses. We all hate politics but if you haven't figured it out by now, politics matter to all of us but mostly to those who come after us. I encourage people to make a conscious decision about where they spend their time online - know where the money goes if there is money involved in any form.
I'm not going there precisely for the reasons mentioned by Edward Morbius and Shelenn Ayres , and thanks to you both for the excellent comments.
ReplyDeleteEdward Morbius Hate literature is against MeWe terms of service. If it's hate literature, they can boot the people off.
ReplyDeleteBut there are millions of people there not engaged is questionable content and saying MeWe is a bad site because of the people there is biased.
If you think MeWe is not enforcing their terms of service, say so. Don't imply everyone using it is bad.
Ignoring evidence of hate presented from several reliable and fact checkable sources keeps one ignorant of the facts. Choosing to not face facts makes one an enabler of hate. There are good people who are speaking out to help others make educated decisions. The work and the research is up to each of us.
ReplyDeleteShawn H Corey No one claimed everyone on MeWe was bad, that's an overreaction on your part. What is being pointed out are fundamental and well documented flaws in the foundation of the platform that those people are using. Which you've conceded exist, though you seem to feel it unfair that everyone won't ignore them. And given your frequent knee-jerk and frankly emotional defense of MeWe, you seem to mean "biased" in the "doesn't agree with me" sense.
ReplyDeleteE.T. Smith
ReplyDeleteEdward Morbius: "MeWe has an extremist bias with extensive white nationalist, anti-muslim, Nazi, and antivaxxer content and communities."
MeWe has ... extensive ... content and communities.
Extensive usually means vast, implying most. But if you want to change the English language, count me out.
I have been on MeWe for several months now, and I just don't see what you are saying. The alt-right you describe is not visible where I navigate.
ReplyDeleteI think there are questions of fact behind these strong anti-MeWe positions that Morbius, Aryes, and others have taken.
ReplyDeleteMost of us here agree with the Popperian and legal positions that there is a limit to freedom of speech when it harms society.
Morbius and Aryes claim that MeWe has crossed that threshold by permitting and even promoting anti-social groups. Therefore, they claim, we should condemn and boycott such an organization.
Corey and myself and a lot of others disagree with the claim that MeWe is dangerous. Does MeWe have the potential to become an evil force? Sure, but they also have the potential to be a good force.
What do the facts say? Morbius claims his data shows MeWe is a festering hive of awful. He claims the leadership is promoting the awful.
But other than these verbal claims I haven't seen any actual data to support such a conclusion. (Yes the CEO talks like a libertarian, but so?) Data may show the potential, but as far as I know, the communities on MeWe are no more diverse nor extreme than in any US city downtown square.
Portland Oregon has protests downtown all the time. Should we boycott Portland or it's downtown waterfront because these hives of nasty awful are always protesting?
So i would suggest that you fervent anti-mewe folks be a little less shrill in your criticism and back it up with more facts. (judging their business model as infeasible is not a supporting fact, btw, who does have a good social site business model?
I whole heartedly agree with your right to speak up and discourage people from MeWe. But fact is right now you are speculating that MeWe will become a problem. There isn't much data to suggest it is a problem yet, nor data to suggest the leadership isn't dealing effectively with the problem. So, bottom line, get some more substantial data before you continue with your extreme prejudice. Maybe you're right, maybe not, facts are not there yet to be so sure of yourself.
Shawn H Corey Pedantry is a common refuge for weak positions.
ReplyDeleteE.T. Smith no need to get personal with Corey. You said (in italics):
ReplyDeleteNo one claimed everyone on MeWe was bad, that's an overreaction on your part.
No, that isn't an overreaction, he's pointing out that the tone of the anti-mewe criticism implicates everyone who isn't anti-mewe. Not to mention the fact that he used a figure of speech. You've done it yourself.
What is being pointed out are fundamental and well documented flaws in the foundation of the platform
No, you're quite mistaken, there are no well-documented data showing mewe foundation flaws, not to mention fundamental flaws. That's a judgmental opinion of some people. It may or may not be true, just hasn't been substantiated so far.
...given your frequent knee-jerk and frankly emotional defense of MeWe, you seem to mean "biased" in the "doesn't agree with me" sense.
No need to get personal, and no need to question his integrity. Stay on task, address the mewe issue.
Pedantry is a common refuge for weak positions
Well, you're demonstrating the very thing you're criticizing. Again, quit the personal attacks.
Bill Brayman The linked Reddit post has much of the information.
ReplyDeleteI've discussed this over numerous G+ threads in the past months as well.
Your claim that there's no well-documented data is simply false. It exists. You've been given it. You're choosing not to see it.
Bill Brayman Borrowing from an earlier thread:
ReplyDeletehttps://plus.google.com/116984612302308681106/posts/AnunF8Nf5Lb
MeWe's embrace of extremist, Fascist, Nazi, and White Nationalist, and antivaxxer culture
The Nazi, antivaxxer, conspiracy-theory, woo, white-nationalist, and other distinct and unbalanced bias of MeWe are patently evident and easily found with even casual exploration.
With one exception: if you're using clients (apps) which have sanitized search, as is the case with MeWe's iOS app.
When I began writing the #PlexodusReddit MeWeTrip Report, I simply wanted to flesh out some information on a site/platform that had ... been mentioned with exceeding frequency but almost equally prominent vagueness, though the site's commitment to free speech was prominently mentioned.
Given that content isn't visible without making an account, I created one, and started taking notes, beginning with a basic outline of the business and its principals, then policies and self-descriptions, and a rough assessment of its size -- there are on the order of a million registered users, best I can tell, but the largest groups have fewer than 20,000 members. This is a small fraction of G+ membership or activity. These also suggest strongly that only a small fraction of MeWe's claimd "millions" of accounts are in fact active users of the site. Which means that groups with only a few thousnd membe may actually represent a large share of active users, besides being some of the largest groups on MeWe.
It wasn't until I started looking at the open groups that I started getting some idea that things were whack, and the more I looked, the more whack they got.
Examples follow:
The first listed groups for "Activism" are QAnon+++ (2,572), PATRIOT PREPPERS USA (2,430), Deplorables Republic (2,48), The War Drummer (1,898), Patriots for a United America. (1894), Anonymous (1,700). For Alternative Energy: Reiki, Crystals, and alternative healing (2,114), 💜Starseeds & Empaths💜 (345), Living in Colour (365)
Under Education: Q-Anon Patriots (1,616), http://InfoWars.com (1,217), Constitutional Liberty for All (907), Prepping, Homesteads skills and Community (887), Shamanic Community (756), Truther Talk (665).
For Fraternities: Freemasonry (1072), Brotherhood of the Blade (313), Proud Boys Canada (74). That last is a white nationalist organisation, and only one of several Proud Boys chapters represented on the site.
The largest History group is 9/11, False Flags, & NWO Truth (1,872).
For Self-Directed Learning we have, again, the largest listed groups: Exposing the Matrix of Lies (997), WAKE THE FUCK UP (474), Wake the Fuck Up. The Next Dimension (287). WTFU when SHTF (126).
And among the 403 political groups listed publicly, an overwhelming right-wing to alt-right stance. Even if you see nothing wrong with the political views, the fact is that this is not at all representative of overall political views within the US. The site has, and caters to, an extremely biased political viewpoint.
MeWe's CEO, Mark Weinstein, has specifically reached out to a group driven off Facebook and Twitter to court them to join MeWe.
It's one thing to be open to fascist views, another to invite them directly.
https://therealside.com/2018/09/still-not-running-to-mewe-but-dipping-our-toe-in-the-mewe-pool/
If you go looking
for additional content, ... well, it turns up. Greg X has shared a pastebin showing results for searches on numerous Nazi, fascist, and white nationalist terms and symbology:
ReplyDeletehttps://pastebin.com/gt1FUQkw
I've written directly to MeWe's own advisors. One responded to an email linking my trip report "Thank you. What I will say is that I have been unaware. This does not reflect well but is the truth."
I've written people who study online propaganda, disinformation, and hate groups. One researcher's response began "Holy moly, that’s an interesting list", and speculated as to whether this was a case of innocently repeating frequently-seen mistakes in the tech startup space, or a deliberate policy of support.
What I've seen of Mark Weinstein's responses in multiple contexts strongly suggest the latter.
Other sites are not all like this. In particular, Google+ is not like MeWe.
Given my interest in researching social media characteristics, I've got a list of all 8.1 million G+ Communities as of January 5-6, 2019, along with public/private status, membership, and most recent posting activity. I've searched that for the terminology listed in the pastebin above ... and whilst yes, there are a few results, they are small and very non-prevalent, with most of the groups long since stripped of members and posts.
(The notable exception is "Aryan", which turns out to be a very common name in India and South Asia. When filtering for obvious white nationalist references though, it also fits this pattern.)
There are a total of 40 G+ communities matching these terms. None of them appear in a casual perusal of Google Communities. 15 of these have any visible posts remaining, 8 have been active since 2018, 2 in 2019. Google appear to have actively managed and discouraged such groups from appearing at all.
(And yes, I'm deliberately not listing the groups, though I can assure you they do exist.)
There is what Google+ architect Yonatan Zunger has had to say about social media moderation policy:
I worked on policy issues at G+ and YT for years. It was painfully obvious that Twitter never took them seriously....
Twitter chose to optimize for traffic at the expense of user experience. That's why GamerGate, that's why Trump, that's why Nazis....
So what does healthy policy look like? You look for things which systematically cause people to feel uncomfortable engaging. Things that make people not post in the first place, because they know what will happen if they do. You shut down big bad things quickly and visibly, before they can pull the entire conversation to be around them. You reduce interaction opportunities for things which are known to be toxic.
You try to avoid "toxic meetings," period.
And the key to all of this is to define an editorial voice for the platform, separate from that of its users. That voice is your de facto set of rules for "No, this is not OK here; you don't like it, go somewhere else." Here's the big operational secret: 90% of what makes online policy hard is trying to do it while claiming neutrality.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/914605545490857984.html
There's the question of why this all matters
I'm working on that, but a few pretty obvious points occur:
1. Any company openly embracing and courting
nationalists, nazis, fascists, hoaxsters, fraudsters, and conspiracy theorists is likely either in precarious financial shape or has itself has exceptionally twisted morals.
ReplyDelete2. Groups intentionally heading to MeWe are putting their members directly in contact with a hive of racism, fascism, white nationalism, and other ideologies and activities. It's one thing to join a site as an individual, another to be coerced through group or peer pressure.
3. It's quite likely that MeWe will find itself subject to attention from law enforcement, its vendors and/or hosting providers subject to pressure, or other activities, all of which imperil all users of the platform. The innocent parties are being used as human shields.
4. The "free speech" arguments being made are specious if only for this reason: the speech and liberty claimed by MeWe's strongest defenders is explicitly aimed at denying basic rights or freedoms, or even life, to others. This is Karl Popper's Paradox of Tolerance:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
https://plus.google.com/116984612302308681106/posts/AnunF8Nf5Lb
Edward Morbius What i'm choosing not to see is your interpretation of the data. I applaud your efforts, and i sympathize with your concern that anti-social groups can ruin it for the rest of us. But i haven't seen data that convinces me that MeWe is a threat.As you know I already critiqued your mewe study when you published, pointing out lack of data to support your conclusions, and your bias to focus only on what you wanted to see. So, time will tell. But the data hasn't done so yet.
ReplyDeleteBill Brayman Go to the MeWe Web client and browse the open groups. Tell us what you see.
ReplyDeleteI am interested to know more about this Edward.
ReplyDeleteEdward Morbius I did. Hundreds of groups, none hatred. If they're there, they're well buried.
ReplyDeleteEdward Morbius Open groups on mewe are not that much different than on reddit, from what i've seen. Yes, some deplorables on there, just like anywhere else that offers a private context. But we know that.
ReplyDeleteYou're argument has been that the leadership doesn't take a stand against anti-social elements, promotes them even. That may turn out to be a valid threat, but what's your data to back that up, that there is a significant risk that mewe's deplorables will become a significant threat to society?
The only reason i even bother to pursue this issue with you is that Trump has nurtured this noisy bunch of anti-social jerks, and so there is a strong cultural shift, perhaps enough to start punching Nazi's so to speak. However, I have hope that mewe will stay in front of it. You don't have that hope.
But at any rate, data so far does not indicate severe threat, imho. So, let's not get to that "either you're with us or against us" mentality. Show me the data, you haven't so far convinced many of us that we're sleeping with the devil.
All that aside, i don't much care for mewe so far. It's noisy and boring. Perhaps there's not enough smarts and guts on the platform to keep the deplorables from overrunning the place. But again, it's speculation. But data so far is not sufficient to close the case against mewe.
Bill Brayman This old liberal, for one, prefers to err on the side of not being even remotely associated with neoNazis and other scum of the earth. You may well find it a good platform, but some of us have different standards.
ReplyDeletePat Kight Yes, i know, I feel the same way about facebook.
ReplyDeleteEdward Morbius Just read your long comment above. I think Pat Kight summarizes your position well. "... err on the side of not being even remotely associated with neoNazis and other scum of the earth."
ReplyDeleteWhat you said: "MeWe has an extremist bias with extensive white nationalist, anti-muslim, Nazi, and antivaxxer content and communities"
Extremist bias? Not necessarily. Another interpretation is that they are confident in the goodness of people to overcome. You got a problem with that? Do you have evidence that mewe is failing, that it is a threat to society? Or you just don't want to be associated with it?
Extensive bigots and ignorants? Like Corey said, that might be an exaggeration. Groups with a few hundred people in them isn't exactly extensive. So, your data doesn't really show any significant social threat (tho there might be, just need better facts).
Edward Morbius At the heart of the mewe issue for you I think is the notion of social toxicity. You quote Yonathon to the effect that a social platform should be managed with the principle of low threshold for social toxicity, a nip it in the bud philosophy.
ReplyDeleteThat frames the issue in terms of centralized authority. The corporation is responsible for the social discourse it hosts.
Suppose MeWe wants their platform to be like a common carrier. You don't hold AT&T accountable for toxic phone conversations, nor shun them because of it.
So, just for intellectual curiosity's sake, what's the case for presuming centralized social toxicity management?
If and when we get a full peer-to-peer or mesh social platform, who is going to be the central authority?
So, I'm saying you may be biased towards the yonathon framing of the problem. Perhaps there is a better, more organic, decentralized social civility method, that a corporation like g+ can't do. Maybe MeWe is trying to do that.
(This global alt-right cultural wave is a strong headwind for social platform evolution, but it'll be better for it in the long run.)
Bill Brayman
ReplyDeleteWhen someone supports racism and approves of or turns a blind eye to racist behavior, they have become racist.
When someone supports sexism and approves of or turns a blind eye to sexist behavior, they have become sexist.
When someone supports homophobia and approves of or turns a blind eye to homophobic behavior, they have become homophobic.
When someone supports xenophobia and approves of or turns a blind eye to xenophobic behavior, they have become xenophobic.
All of these are tenets of the alt-right as exhibited in their actions of harm, murder, hate speech, and manifestos.
When you knowingly support the alt-right and approve of or turn a blind eye to alt-right hate speech online, and spend money or encourage others to spend money that enriches the alt-right, you become a member of the alt-right.
I submit the vast majority of users that are being used by the alt-right to spread hate are doing so unwittingly. This is not limited to MeWe but is also seen on Facebook, Twitter, and G+. The difference is, as the verifiable data shows, MeWe does not intend to combat the alt-right because it is owned and operated by the alt-right.
My goal, and likely Edward Morbius, is to inform and let people make informed decisions so they are not unwittingly being used by the alt-right to enable hate while funding politicians who are taking away rights and causing needless harm and deaths.
If I failed to inform what I have discovered, I would be enabling hate and the alt-right. I refuse to do so. You and some others promoting or defending MeWe and its founder as a self-avowed member of the alt-right either are being paid well, lying to yourself, or are a member of the alt-right. I will not be complicit.
Shelenn Ayres You are way out of line. Do not slander me. Do your research first before accusing me of anything. Look at my G+ page and you will see a very different person than you allege. I will report you if continue to misrepresent me.
ReplyDeleteI and other MeWe supporters are not "members of the alt-right" You've made the mistake of letting Trump goad you into an Us vs Them mentality. I am not your enemy.
Apparently your hatred blinded you to what I actually said in this post. Look carefully and you will see that I've addressed your philosophical position. It is important that we do not let extremists goad us into a simplistic and bigoted attitude such as what you said.
No we don't have to boycott all places that have extremist awful people. Here in the US we would have to close down all big cities if we were to adapt your position.
There are more intelligent ways of fighting that awfulness that you describe. And it damn sure isn't through boycotts.
So, look at your own bigotry and hate. That should be your first clue that you made a mistake lumping all MeWe people into one category.
As with any politician, pay less attention to what they say and more attention to what they do. No one lumped all users of MeWe into the alt-right - I was very specific with plain language in not doing that. You seem quite defensive to language I used that gave you three options of how you are perceived by others.
ReplyDeleteBoycotts are effective. Companies have the right to run their services the way they see fit within the law. It is a fool's errand to believe human rights activism within the service will change policies. Private companies (other than social benefit corporations) are motivated only by profit. Boycotts have a proven track record of success because they affect profits. I personally did not call for a boycott anyway. I simply shared what I learned as a matter of conscience to have done all I can to help others make educated decisions. It is up to them whether they choose to boycott. The information shared by myself and others including Edward Morbius has obviously gotten your attention.
Private online service providers make money from the behavior of its users, from the premium fees of its users, and from the traffic of its users. None of these are better business models than others. With regards to user generated content, I believe the content belongs to the users not the service provided. I also believe how a user chooses to share that content should be 100% under the control of the user. My initial evaluation of MeWe was based entirely on its shortcomings with regards to my use case. I chose the decentralized Fediverse as a result of a combined assessment that had nothing to do with the type of content on any of the G+ alternatives. During that evaluation is when I discovered the alt-right ownership and operations of MeWe and made the decision to share that information with others.
Only you can look at the data and accept it for what it is regarding the founder of MeWe - he is self-avowed. Credible (verifiable) evidence shows us that he and his operations team are alt-right in their policies. By designing the system the way they have, the alt-right hides in plain sight using the others unwittingly to support the alt-right. What you do with the information is up to you. Now that you can no longer be unwitting since the information has been read by you (by your own admission), if you choose to become a witting part of the alt-right that is your choice.
Shelenn Ayres No you didn't just share what you know, you attacked me and others for our political beliefs and behavior with unusually vile terms. That doesn't belong in this community. You slandered me specifically. And it has me hopping mad. I am not paid by the alt-right, nor lying to myself, nor am a member of the alt-right. You said us MeWe supporters are complicit. "You and some others promoting or defending MeWe and its founder as a self-avowed member of the alt-right either are being paid well, lying to yourself, or are a member of the alt-right." I would like an apology from you for singling me out in your mistaken allegations. You have absolutely no right to tell me or others how to combat these nasty awfuls. Furthermore, you have a conflict of interest because you have for months been promoting friendica and denigrating MeWe. It's in your self-interest to bad mouth MeWe. I'm not sure you even know what you're talking about because your characterization of MeWe and it's people is not accurate.
ReplyDeleteI haven't yet read your response above yet, but expect to hear more from me until we get this cleared up. You simply have no right to tell me and others how to deal with social and political issues. Speak your mind that's goodness. Castigating others is stupid, simplistic, and childish and certainly won't win no wars against extremists.
If you feel attacked you must identify with the general statements that hit home for you. I stand by the statement you chose to feel guilty about. "You and some others promoting or defending MeWe and its founder as a self-avowed member of the alt-right either are being paid well, lying to yourself, or are a member of the alt-right." Your attacks and threats of harassment of me are empty and don't scare me.
ReplyDeleteThe facts you refuse to believe are detailed in the reddit posting. A simple look at the founder's Twitter account shows us he is a proud libertarian member of the alt-right. These are the facts you refuse to acknowledge. It is fact that a proud member of the alt-right will politically support alt-right politicians with the money they make. Having an account and not spending money associated with that account does not enrich the alt-right. Recruiting for them and defending them does. These are undeniable facts.
Shelenn Ayres What kind of logic is that: "if you feel attacked you must identify with the statements" . Normal logic says the opposite. Sorry I overestimated you. I take it an apology isn't forthcoming. I've made myself clear here, and you have too. Tata...
ReplyDeleteShelenn Ayres For your edification, I have researched MeWe including Reddit comments and reports and a video link. I'm an old scientist so i can assess the facts reasonably well. At this point i don't have any certainty about MeWe's leadership evilness. Hearing the CEO talk, he sounded OK for an open-minded optimistic guy. He may underestimate the potential for social toxicity and his ability to manage it. But that remains to be seen.
ReplyDeleteWhat i think the most damning data you are referring to comes from Morbius and one other fellow who amassed a bunch of conversational data from some groups. Frankly, as i've told Morbius, his conclusions didn't match the facts he presented. There just isn't any evidence to support the claim that MeWe is secretly or explicitly trying to nurture the alt-right crazies. Permissive yes, but that is his right - and and - maybe a better way of handling social toxicity, than the polarizing us vs them way that you and Morbius are advocating.
I'm only interested in this from an intellectual perspective, sociologically how are we as a society going to adapt to social networks. FB set the standard as centrally managed and manipulated. But it is completely fair to question that, like i have, and consider self-regulated systems.
Where I got mad is that you pre-empted my intellectual beliefs trying to demand that I (and others) take the zero-tolerance stance, and actively fight against any show of alt-right nastiness. And those of us who disagree with you must be wrong. But, who are you to claim that's the only way to help society adapt to the new frontier?
So, I only ask that you not slander me by calling me a nazi type just because i deal with society different from you. Maybe us MeWe supporters will solve the problem better than you can. Who knows. It certainly isn't worth going on a tirade with me and others because we don't share your polarized view.
So, please let us talk about the issues, not personal politics here in this forum.
Bill Brayman trying to use facts and logic against these SJWs is like trying to nail jello to the wall. No matter how hard you hammer, it just slides down.
ReplyDeleteThey don't care. Not about fact, not about logic, not about objectivity; not even about the issue they're harping about.
The only thing they actually care about is having a soap box to stand on and thump their chest "Look at me, I'm taking a stand."
That's it. That's all it is. The more you argue with them, the harder they thump their chest and the louder they rant.
Fortunately, both of the ones in this thread blocked me a long time ago, so I'm only seeing your side of the "conversation".
eric peacock It's a public post so i think just view it when not logged into google and you'll see thru blocks. And yes i understand your sentiment, but I rather not lump people together like SJWs or as she did alt-rights. But yeah true once an emotional mind is made up, no getting through.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, the political leanings of the owner of a company and its policy staff dictate how it moderates social content. This is evidenced by credible data presented by Edward Morbius Therefore, discussion of the political leanings of the owner of a company and its policy staff is on topic. My comments are not emotional - they are based on fact and perspective of the impact of those facts where I believe the vast majority of MeWe users are unwittingly supporting hate hidden in plain sight. This includes all of the large following G+ers who failed to vet the site prior to taking its users there. This makes it difficult for them to accept truth even if it is new information because their livelihood is affected by the loss of followers if they subsequently leave. My advice from day one and still today is: examine your use case and choose the platform that best fits your use case and that could include multiple platforms. The most important thing is to make educated decisions based on information made available as it becomes available.
ReplyDeleteShelenn Ayres Well, i'm still owed an apology for being specifically called out as a alt right supporter and lumped into with the nazi's.
ReplyDeleteThe emotional claim i made with Peacock wasn't directed only at you, I too, and others, are suffering from emotional polarization created by people like you and Morbius' whose tirade against MeWe and any show of support for them has reached hysterical proportions.
If you would have stuck with your advice to vet, and your concern with the implications of MeWe's founder, then all would have been well. But no, you got to brow beat us into submission that any association with MeWe is evil. Just review your incessant hammering about the matter above.
I'm willing to drop it now. You've shown no remorse, nor insight. I don't care to discuss it any further with you.
MeWe may do well or it may turn out to be a disaster, but it remains to be seen.
Bill Brayman Methinks thou doth protest o'ermuch.
ReplyDeleteEdward Morbius Haha, look who's talking. You've plastered the internet with your protests, more protest than i could do in a lifetime.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, you're a major source of the problem we were discussing here. So if you have something positive to contribute please do so, otherwise keep your personal insults to yourself.
Bill Brayman You took some general statements personal - that's on you and that is why it appears you protest too much. In no way am I responsible for how you perceived what I typed. When you are not feeling so emotional in your response demanding an apology, perhaps reread it as if you were someone else. ;) I have no ill will towards anyone but people who wittingly support the alt-right.
ReplyDeleteShelenn Ayres Sure i could have ignored your fairly explicit innuendos and accusations as general statements. But I called you on it. Here are your words that i took as personal attack. As i said, I'm done discussing this with you.
ReplyDelete"You and some others promoting or defending MeWe and its founder as a self-avowed member of the alt-right either are being paid well, lying to yourself, or are a member of the alt-right."
You repeated: "I stand by the statement you chose to feel guilty about [no one but you mentioned guilt, a cheap mischaracterization]. "You and some others promoting or defending MeWe and its founder as a self-avowed member of the alt-right either are being paid well, lying to yourself, or are a member of the alt-right."
"When someone supports racism and approves of or turns a blind
eye to racist behavior, they have become racist.
When someone supports sexism and approves of or turns a blind eye to sexist behavior, they have become sexist.
When someone supports homophobia and approves of or turns a blind eye to homophobic behavior, they have become homophobic.
When someone supports xenophobia and approves of or turns a blind eye to xenophobic behavior, they have become xenophobic.
All of these are tenets of the alt-right as exhibited in their actions of harm, murder, hate speech, and manifestos.
When you knowingly support the alt-right and approve of or turn a blind eye to alt-right hate speech online, and spend money or encourage others to spend money that enriches the alt-right, you become a member of the alt-right."
Bill Brayman MeWe is a scam site. I'm half so waiting for Mark Weinstein to say "gotcha", close the site and run off with the money when MeWe gets enough money.
ReplyDeleteGary Gregory I checked your post with site reviews and it's comments. Interesting to read various impressions of these new sites. However, I come from a more formal background so it's hard to do much with vague first impressions. Do you have anything more than a gut feeling that mewe is a scam? I haven't found anything to suggest that the CEO is dishonest. Maybe naive and idealistic, but he doesn't seem underhanded.
ReplyDeleteBill Brayman I think it's a gut feeling that tips one off of dishonesty before one reaps the consequences. It may not be a scientific response, but one based on wisdom from identifying scummy individuals and how they talk (in Mark's case, like a glib con artist). Even what I said sounds like I'm begging the question, until you have enough knowledge to discern for yourself why I say what I say.
ReplyDelete