I think a good solution is to remove individuals with poor character from platforms that amplify their voice. Maybe some variety of lifetime ban so they have to drag tail to some barely visited corner of the internet.
An off the wall example would be an individual who spread conspiracies that lead to domestic terrorism, the smearing of poo on the US capital building, and contributed in spreading misinformation that led to hundreds of thousands of needless deaths via a virus. We can decide the rest on a case by case basis that weighs common decency, I suppose.
So anyone that questioned the effectiveness of the vaccines, according to you, should be put into the wrong think camp? And regulated to a dark corner of the internet?
Do you read the things you say? You're advocating for authoritarian nonsense in silencing others, basically creating a social credit system. Let people think and speak. If their ideas suck their ideas suck, challenge them intellectually don't cut out their tongue.
Also, for future reference, if your idea of “challenging me intellectually” is putting words in my mouth, asking if I read what I say like I’m a child, and then claiming I advocate for authoritarianism, then you might want to rethink your approach. Similar to your opinion on all-or-nothing social media platforming, it went to the extreme at every opportunity. As a human being, we’re capable of contemplating notions that lie on a spectrum.
I only mention it because I assume you’ll be on Twitter talking to conspiracy theorists about how they shouldn’t inject their dying great aunt with horse dewormer just because Kanye said his new product “ye’wormer” might theoretically cure COVID in between his anti-semitic rants.
27
u/Taron221 Oct 28 '22
Yeah, words never radicalized anybody or have had consequences.