Reddit is taking down posts linking to the manifesto of the suspected shooter of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson in a move that has angered many users.
  • robocall@lemmy.world
    31·
    6 hours ago

    “To the Feds, I’ll keep this short, because I do respect what you do for our country. To save you a lengthy investigation, I state plainly that I wasn’t working with anyone. This was fairly trivial: some elementary social engineering, basic CAD, a lot of patience. The spiral notebook, if present, has some straggling notes and To Do lists that illuminate the gist of it. My tech is pretty locked down because I work in engineering so probably not much info there. I do apologize for any strife of traumas but it had to be done. Frankly, these parasites simply had it coming. A reminder: the US has the #1 most expensive healthcare system in the world, yet we rank roughly #42 in life expectancy. United is the [indecipherable] largest company in the US by market cap, behind only Apple, Google, Walmart. It has grown and grown, but has our life expectancy? No the reality is, these [indecipherable] have simply gotten too powerful, and they continue to abuse our country for immense profit because the American public has allowed them to get away with it. Obviously the problem is more complex, but I do not have space, and frankly I do not pretend to be the most qualified person to lay out the full argument. But many have illuminated the corruption and greed (e.g.: Rosenthal, Moore), decades ago and the problems simply remain. It is not an issue of awareness at this point, but clearly power games at play. Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty.”

    • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.worldEnglish
      82·
      7 hours ago

      Moderation is broken because there is no longer a consensus on what is “right” or “wrong”. The very term implies that there is a moderate position that is allowed, and you cull the extremes.

      That consensus in moderating used to be simple in most adult spaces - no aggression/abuse/fighting, no porn. Everything else was fine.

      Now things have drifted - you have corporate censorship in social media to respond to some perceived need not to “endorse” views. But you also have users deciding some topics are not allowed to be discussed and certain view points are censored just because some people disagree with them. There seems to be a notion that you have to “protect” people from being offended or that certain ideas are just dangerous or wrong.

      I’ve even seen a moderator on Lemmy describe “freedom of speech” as nothing more than a right wing wolf whistle and banning someone.

      This whole CEO murder is just highlighting how a complex and multifaceted nuanced case cannot be reduced into a simple good vs evil narrative. The old mainstream media consensus that everyone shows “sympathy for victim, condemnation for the bad guy” is just restricting debate and discussion on something that raises complex and fundamental questions about our society.

      The “consensus” on what viewpoints are allowed is breaking down and people are mistaking them personally being offended as a barometer of what is right or wrong.

      • Glasgow@lemmy.mlEnglish
        6·
        2 hours ago

        We do need to protect people from the wrong opinions clearly. I was a free speech absolutist for most of my life because I was working on the false assumption that most other people thought like me. That people as a group were dumb but an individual person was smart. Or at least, reasonable and compassionate. It’s clear now that the idiots will just shout nonsense and if they do so loud enough and for long enough the ‘normal’ people in the middle listening on the sidelines will adopt it into their core values and be immune to reason or rationale otherwise.

        These people can be convinced to think and do anything using logic which is barely coherent. Centralised moderation isn’t going to fix it but we need to figure out how to collectively censor this poisonous mind virus or it’ll tear us to shreds.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      6·
      8 hours ago

      It’s treading new ground, assassinations of non-politician US citizens usually aren’t this popular so it contradicts many assumptions made when deciding rules. A site like reddit has to please its advertisers and investors, so they will ultimately side with the rich owning class, but may not want to risk banning huge parts of their userbase.

    • PowerCrazy@lemmy.mlEnglish
      16·
      8 hours ago

      Not true. lemmy.ml only has dumbass word filter so you can’t say “b!tch” or “r3tard.” but there isn’t any content filter about Luigi’s manifesto, or deny, defend, depose. Or declaring that you are happy Brian Thompson was killed, or that Trump was almost assassinated. Additionally CEOs addresses, wishes and suggestions that healthcare companies should have their entire corporate structure culled, won’t be removed.

      You can also discuss Tienanmen Square, or all of the weird key CIA internet keywords that emerged int he 90’s.

      • vii@lemmy.ml
        1·
        3 hours ago

        For example: removing anything related to Mangione’s manifesto or “glorifying violence”.

        • trevor@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          1·
          2 hours ago

          lemmy.world has some very power-hungry and boot-throating mods, especially when it comes to this.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      112·
      8 hours ago

      censored

      A very vague term on its own. Censoring what? The communist instances (e.g. lemmygrad) will ban racism and xenophobia to an extent that many people don’t even understand how what they said was interpreted as xenophobic, but will let you post “I want to torture every billionaire in the world” and post footage of the assassination with no problem, while liberalist instances who allow more general liberty are often more scared to host endorsement of violence (e.g. lemmy.world).

      All completely “free speech” platforms inevitably become safe havens for people unable to hold conversations (as in, medically delusional), ad spam, neo-Nazis, and child abusers who get kicked from every other forum. So you really need to be more specific when talking about what you consider censorship and what you consider common sense.

      • vii@lemmy.ml
        2·
        5 hours ago

        I was asking in general, thank you for the extensive answer.