The retarded idea of having two threads on the Ukraine war, and how it's the future of the internet.

[KingCoelacanth]

I'm not reading this thread but I assume the correct solution is to create a third thread

 

[mindlessobserver]

You can also dispute sources used in so called 'pro-ukrainian' thread with other sources or evidence. IDK, if you see a source that says about transport of US equipment in Poland that will go to Ukraine and you can present evidence that it is not going there it will be accepted (we have such affair few weeks ago, probably).

An example of this that I keep bringing up because it perfectly encapsulated what went wrong.

Before the threads were partitioned, I posted, without any commentary, a youtube video where a former infantry soldier goes over the Bradley IFV, what it can do, what it can't do. It was about 22 minutes long. 5 minutes after posting it I had caught two mad at the internet stickers, a dumb and an autistic.

At which point I opined that clearly people in this thread are just brigading posters they don't like with neg rates because I know nobody bothered to watch the video before neg rating it. What followed was an entire page of quote posting "imagine being mad about internet stickers lol" and then the moderator of the thread Banning me for a week.

Before that I was all for keeping the two sides together. After that it was clear the situation could not be salvaged.

 

[DumbDude43]

Segregating like that might be a natural instinct but so is eating until you're a landwhale or ignoring work because you don't feel like doing it, in order to act like a human being you need to resist the urge to do certain deleterious things sometimes. And besides I really do think having opposing points of view presented is a good thing, people religiously following one line of thought becuase they're willfully blind to contrary evidence is retarded and leads to bad places.

there is no value in an "opposing point of view" about fundamental issues.
like, let's go back to this site's all time favorite topic: trannies. there is absolutely no point in me trying to have serious discussions or debates or arguments with trannies about trannyism, because their whole starting point is fundamentally incompatible with mine - i know that sex is immutable and binary, while trannies believe that sex is some kind of infinite spectrum that can be arbitrarily changed at will.
these positions are impossible to reconcile, so there is zero value in listening to trannies spout their delusions at me for years and years with no end in sight, complete waste of time and energy.
much better to hang out in an anti tranny echo chamber instead and laugh at their retardation with like minded people.

 

[Whoopsie Daisy]

I'm pretty sure it is easy to make some quantitive measurments in which thread you will find more memes and in which you will find more backed by sources statments
More like 'in one htread we have sources (not always telling truth), in second we have opinions made on former posts and propaganda, rarely any info or source other than twitter'.

Well, why not? Seriously, you will not be killed in 'pro-ukrainian thread' if you will dispute on rational basis about how aid is distributed (but yes, you will be yelled if you post a cleary fake and will just dismiss hard evidence that it is fake) or how war is going (but again: yes, you will be puked if you will made posts like 'Russia is winning because a childfucker who escpaed to Russia says so' or 'Bakhmut is a smart trap for Ukrainians, more than gorillion NATO dogs-of-war die every second' - again, facts, not twitter).

You can also dispute sources used in so called 'pro-ukrainian' thread with other sources or evidence. IDK, if you see a source that says about transport of US equipment in Poland that will go to Ukraine and you can present evidence that it is not going there it will be accepted (we have such affair few weeks ago, probably).

And not always it is a middle ground. Let we look on John Paul Second: it is proved than he was hidding evidence and was refusing to report degenerates to police forces even in his days as a simple priest, but some people will just ingore all evidence. This means that both groups should make concessions to find a middle ground ('you can fuck children, but only in communist country if you are a anti-communist fighter') or just means that one of this groups is wrong?

Sorry for the multiple quotes, I couldn't reply to all in one go.

I appreciate your thoughts on the subject, but you seem to be missing the point by focusing entirely on the ukranian threads. They were only one example of what my point was about. While I did use you and your points to use as an example, it wasn't taking sides on either subject.

You last point shows that we are on different pages when discussing whether or not internet segregation and echo-chambers are a good thing, now that most topic-based threads are just a shit-show across the internet.

 

[Abbadon's Gate]

I'm just ready to reach the point where we point out how the Pro-Ukranian side are well meaning people who want to believe in the good in the world and aren't jaded enough to see how obviously astro-turfed this conflict is while the Pro-Russian side of this conflict are well people people who are so jaded and black pilled about the state of the world that they don't realize the conflict is equally astro-terfed because in a real world conflict there's no way Russia, who's army was like 10X the size of Ukraines doesn't just surge the border and kill them all in a week or two.

The honest reality of this entire war is simple: A lot of Western Politicians did a lot of corrupt shit in Ukraine and the longer this drags on the harder it will ever be to figure out what it is, plus it was a nice transition out of three years of covering a cough with a 99.9% survival rate that we decimated lives and the economy over.

This entire thing is fake and gay and its nice to have two opposing threads of people calling each other fake and gay while not being aware of how fake and gay they are.

 

[Whoopsie Daisy]

there is no value in an "opposing point of view" about fundamental issues.
like, let's go back to this site's all time favorite topic: trannies. there is absolutely no point in me trying to have serious discussions or debates or arguments with trannies about trannyism, because their whole starting point is fundamentally incompatible with mine - i know that sex is immutable and binary, while trannies believe that sex is some kind of infinite spectrum that can be arbitrarily changed at will.
these positions are impossible to reconcile, so there is zero value in listening to trannies spout their delusions at me for years and years with no end in sight, complete waste of time and energy.
much better to hang out in an anti tranny echo chamber instead and laugh at their retardation with like minded people.

This perfectly sums up my thoughts.

Why waste time and energy on people already set in their ways? At that point, having an echo chamber is better for discussion, not worse.

Thanks @DumbDude43 for summing it up so well

 

[malleusmaleficarum]

@Catherine the Great was first, I say we keep his thread and send the Khokhoal thread to spergatory.

 

[Spunt]

Should the internet be segregated and divided into echo chambers to avoid wasting time listening to incompatible opinions voiced by incompatible people?

No it shouldn't. But it will be.

I've always maintained that it's not Twitter in general that destroyed political discourse in the West, but the block button in particular, because it creates these echo chambers. If you never meet someone who is different from you, you can easily be convinced that they're the boogie man if you get told it often enough.

I was watching some streamer last night and he said that right-wingers "just hate human rights, hate treating people decently and hate democracy". Obviously as a rightoid myself I wasn't best pleased about this, but on the other hand it's the same as someone saying the left "just hate freedom, just hate Britain/America and hate white people". No they don't, not 90% of them anyway, just like 90% of right-wingers like human rights, democracy and treating people well. It's just that they have different definitions and understandings of those things, which are complex, difficult issues that don't have simple answers. But our brains like simple answers, and thinking that the other lot are the antichrist is a lot less taxing mentally than acknowledging that they have different value systems and that there aren't any easy answers. Likewise, all the most racist people I know (in the UK anyway) are from parts of the country where there aren't any immigrants - they just see the very worst ones on TV, assume they're all like that, and their friends, who don't know any immigrants either, agree with them. Whereas those who have grown up with people with different skin colours or cultures, even hardcore rightoids, know it's more complex than "muslims and niggers bad". Some are, some aren't. It's complicated. But complicated is hard, and pressing "block" on anything that challenges your world-view has put people in a position where they just talk past each other and conclude that the other lot are the devil.

The internet will continue to become more and more divided until actual violence breaks out. It's already starting to. Then one day there will be a gigantic boogaloo and if anyone is still alive at the end of it they can maybe learn some lessons and make sure it doesn't happen again. But given our history as a species, that's unlikely.

 

[Whoopsie Daisy]

I've always maintained that it's not Twitter in general that destroyed political discourse in the West, but the block button in particular, because it creates these echo chambers. If you never meet someone who is different from you, you can easily be convinced that they're the boogie man if you get told it often enough

I feel that the echo chambers are the tail wagging the dog. They didn't create the problem, they are a solution to the problem. I problem, as I see it, is that people no longer want to hear a differing opinion or want to open their mind and expand the possibility that their stance is flawed, dynamic and won't always be correct.

People on the whole, no longer want to think about things from a different perspective or challenge themselves, their biases - while fart-huffing and talking nonsense about bias 24/7.

How did we get a point where discussion is dead and can we bring it back to life? If not, would the best thing for the sane and rational minded, is to exile the extremists to echo chambers and let them live in their stuck ways?

 

[Spunt]

I feel that the echo chambers are the tail wagging the dog. They didn't create the problem, they are a solution to the problem. I problem, as I see it, is that people no longer want to hear a differing opinion or want to open their mind and expand the possibility that their stance is flawed, dynamic and won't always be correct.

People on the whole, no longer want to think about things from a different perspective or challenge themselves, their biases - while fart-huffing and talking nonsense about bias 24/7.

How did we get a point where discussion is dead and can we bring it back to life? If not, would the best thing for the sane and rational minded, is to exile the extremists to echo chambers and let them live in their stuck ways?

To be honest I don't think people ever did, but before the internet they just had to. The pool of people you could make friends with and get to know was restricted to your geographical area. Your friends had to be chosen from your work/schoolmates, your neighbours, even if you went to a hobby group based around a common interest, the guy next to you at the sports event, concert or D&D club could be from any background and have any political views, so if you wanted friends you had to grow up and learn to understand them. Now you can sort your friends so that they're all exactly like you in every way and delete anyone from your life who you might have to make an effort to get along with.

We're a tribal species. We are genetically programmed to sort people into "us" and "them", and to hate "them" and excuse even the worst behaviour from "us". We're now seeing the consequences of making that so much easier.

 

[A-Stump]

I don't think it has anything to do with coddling or janny pearlclutching. I think people legitimately wanted to discuss news and not have it be bogged down by 50k posts of people having slapfights over their preferred Eastern Euro shitholes. There are a few people on the site who have made it their entire personality on both sides and it gets a little tiring to have to wade through.

 

[Fortyone]

in a real world conflict there's no way Russia, who's army was like 10X the size of Ukraines doesn't just surge the border and kill them all in a week or two.

Russia is not the Soviet Union, it has less than half the population that the Soviet Union did in 1989 and it's military industrial complex and high tech sector atrophied so severely in the 90s that they were just barely starting to recover before the war started. They don't have the material or workforce to re-create the great patriotic war in 2023.





Sorry I had to sperg out there

 

[Abbadon's Gate]

Sorry I had to sperg out there

As non-aggressively as I can sound: No one gives a fuck you think this and it wasn't my point.

My point, in its entirety was that this war is entirely astroturfed, because even with a declining population of Russia in the last 30 years, they still outnumber and outgun Ukraine, a country who's greatest hit list includes Chernobyl and about 50% of who's population probably considers themselves to be Russian anyway.

This war, is almost by definition, a farce.

 

[Spunt]

Russia is not the Soviet Union, it has less than half the population that the Soviet Union did in 1989 and it's military industrial complex and high tech sector atrophied so severely in the 90s that they were just barely starting to recover before the war started. They don't have the material or workforce to re-create the great patriotic war in 2023.

View attachment 4851032

View attachment 4851036

Sorry I had to sperg out there

As non-aggressively as I can sound: No one gives a fuck you think this and it wasn't my point.

My point, in its entirety was that this war is entirely astroturfed, because even with a declining population of Russia in the last 30 years, they still outnumber and outgun Ukraine, a country who's greatest hit list includes Chernobyl and about 50% of who's population probably considers themselves to be Russian anyway.

This war, is almost by definition, a farce.

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the war thread!

 

[Abbadon's Gate]

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the war thread!

Well I for one, think we need two more threads. A thread for people who are obviously based and agree solely with me. A thread for people who are obviously cringe and agree with Fortyone. This thread can remain for posterity and for meta-analysis on either side.

 

[Whoopsie Daisy]

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the war thread!

This isn't a war thread. The thread has nothing to do with the war outside of it being used as an example of how internet discourse has deteriorated to the point where echo chambers are now preferable to open threads.

Case in point, this thread has the words Ukraine in the title and we have people bringing their views on the war into the thread.

Their emotions are so charged with the war, that they cannot reason or think logically. Pavlovian propaganda at it's finest.

 

[YourFriendlyLurker 2.0]

AFAIK the reason was that poor janny just got fed up with the amount of sheer autism in the unified thread, so the retards received two since segregated autism is easier to moderate. Also, it's been a deal since Trump, there are two threads on him. Segregated autism is just easier to moderate.

And besides I really do think having opposing points of view presented is a good thing, people religiously following one line of thought because they're willfully blind to contrary evidence is retarded and leads to bad places.

I would probably agree with you, but man, it's a fucking gossip forum where people shitpost to call each other a nigga. What kind of level of discussion do you expect lol?

 

[Ultrapenguin]

Just fucking execute anyone who feels the need to compulsively post about trending politics to strangers on the internet.

There, problem solved.

And I'm only barely on the edge of not being serious.

The internet and world at large would be such a better place without these joyless faggots grasping for social relevancy, and virtually every single one is fucking miserable in their (pointless) life beyond that anyways so you'd probably be doing them a favor.

 

[Thomas Talus]

The same in Ukraine. Those who support the west and Ukraine are generally left-leaning, trans-loving, twitter dwellers who support the message. Those who support Russia, or are against the expansion of the west, are right leaning people.

I don't think it's nearly that cleanly-corresponding of a split. I, and a number of other Ukraine-thread posters, are right-leaning; speaking for myself, I just dislike totalitarians who offer an ersatz mockery of religion and tradition more than I do the gays.

 

[Thiletonomics]

The internet is already segregated, just look at r/china and r/sino for example. Specifically, look at the about sections and the networks of subreddits for both. There is no overlap, they're segregated communities. The closest thing between the two is the Hong Kong subreddit, but if you look closely they're spelled differently so really it's just the two of them fighting over who really gets to represent HK.

And it's not just nations that are segregated, even video games are like this. r/thelastofus and r/thelastofus2 both exist, with the former being the original main sub, that started locking down any form of criticism of The Last of Us Part II, and somewhat with the TLOU HBO show as well. The said crackdown lead to people using the latter, due to it being one of the few places that allow you criticize the game and the TV show.