Post

Who censored themselves talking about the Cornell case? Most inter-web experts like you jumped to unwarranted conclusions and convicted the suspects just as quickly as Cornell acquitted them, and based on the same shoddy investigation. That’s the opposite of censorship.

OR.. and hear me out on this one... You stop using those services and go out more. Hell, take a break from Bluesky once in a while. And I'm not talking about using it less (although that's a good start), but quit for a day, week, month(s). Trust me, it feels REALLY good.

People need to be on these services to participate in many parts of their lives. Are you saying to folks looking for jobs on LinkedIn that they should "just go outside"?

That still doesn’t give you the right to violate their community guidelines. If they don’t want you to blatantly call for murder on their site, tough titties. You can either accept that or remove yourself from their platform. There is no third option.

I'm really not trying to be cute here. I left for nearly a year once, and I'm still not sure if I missed anything. Leave long enough so that your login credentials expire, and rather than trying to remember it, you have to waste time in your life to reset it.

This is brilliant. 100% agree. Reposted and commented on. Thanks. See also the use of "passed" as a euphemism for death, albeit one with cultural significance and importance.

Um, your timing is waaaay off. This started way before TikTok and algorithms. We’ve been having to censor our online speech since the 1990s, thanks to porn filters on early corporate internet and email.

As I've said on here, it absolutely started way before TikTok, which I've written about many times. The use of "unalive" is a TikTok-era phenomenon.

But always a big fan of the condescending "um", cheers for that