that's a very misleading framing of it. the issue was that it was junior staffers that were against censorship and bans and stating that many cases people weren't in violation of the policies. So the higher ups and the Truth and Safety team started to invent adhoc policies and justifications to ban anyways. So no there wasn't an "earnest debate" only edicts from the top.
That entire tweet chain supports the article: that junior staffers were having an earnest debate regarding policies and moderation. And like the rest of these files, it merely confirms what (most) already knew: moderating a massive social media platform like Twitter is sophisticated, involves a lot of people, sometimes new rules are created as needed, and sometimes arbitrary decisions are made. Just obvious stuff. Twitter is still the same way now, just with far less people involved.
The weirdly politicized anti-Musk tone in here is strange.
Twitter pre-Musk was absolutely catastrophic for the human race, because it was a platform with enormous centrality (with bravado talk of being critical for radical movements in dangerous events or nations) while having intense levels of censorship against normal speech.
To circle back to one of the drivers for the takeover of Twitter, they blocked an enormously popular parody site for pointing out that a tranny man was in fact a man. Whatever you think of the topic, to even call that off limits for humor puts us into insane territory.
And regarding the Hunter laptop story: I don't even particularly care about Hunter, but the story was clearly true, and was entirely suppressed for strictly political reasons, on a massive platform.
To not be able to even speak reality on a platform with that reach is more damaging than anything Musk could do even if he put his mind to it. And I have never been any kind of fan of his cars or other projects (well, maybe Starlink recently).
Would you prefer weirdly pro-Musk tones? There's a reason the vast majority of the world now disapprove of him: it's his actions and behavior. One needs to earn respect, it's not arbitrarily handed out.
Pre-Musk Twitter had large, robust teams to handle content moderation. Now, on the other hand, those teams are mostly gone. Those that remain are tiny, and moderation even at low levels are being done by fiat by Musk and a few people close to him. There's now far, far more hate speech, with extremely hateful people having their accounts reactivated. As for it being "catastrophic" for the human race, well, that's the kind of alarmist rhetoric that the previously banned hateful people repeat.
You used a derogatory slur while advocating for bigotry, so I see no point in continuing this part of the discussion.....
I'll just say this about the conspiracy theory you mentioned and leave it at that: when the Senate was under control of the opposing party,
they already performed a long investigation and concluded no wrong doing by any of those accused. They concluded the obvious: that it was merely a bunch of unfounded allegations that echoed Russian propaganda.
People were banned for bigotry, anti-Semitism, racism, spreading conspiracy theories, advocating political violence, harassment - basically for violating the rules. I would not consider that prevention of anyone "to speak reality"?
www.bloomberg.com
futurism.com
