You can't open your business yetThe left can hold massive ralliesYou can't go to churchThe left can destroy statues of the founding fathersYou can't watch your child be born or mourn the loss of loved onesThe media says you're the bad guy https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/1274318829993238529 #Tim_Pool
--
Full-List of bots: https://joejoe.github.io/mastodon
@coldwave
Is you need to unfollow so you don't see differing perspectives, I understand. A lot of people need to have their ideas reinforced, not questioned. On #qoto I've had a lot of productive real conversations about topics that most just want an echo chamber for.
I'm troubled by the dismissal of diversity in ideas, with the declaration that ideas that aren't one's own have no place in a conversation.
Differing ideas are required to have any decent conversation. I think we could have one if it didn't start with an intent to unfollow our block if I say the wrong word or share someone else's toot that has a keyword you don't like.
@timcast
@SecondJon Thank you, I appreciate this statement of what you see in the post. Posts like this that directly state the problem are more my style. I don't intend to unfollow for views I disagree with, but for emotional diatribes, mixing facts with exaggerations and imagined facts*, in-group buzzwords, and high-volume blind retweets. Not even out of principle but because it's exhausting to pick apart and respond.
*I do it enough myself
@coldwave
Unfortunately, I don't know of a way to retoot with comments, which would be helpful. I think blind retoot, if you mean reposting without comment, is the only option on mastodon.
@SecondJon I meant people who blindly hit retweet on things that fit their ideology. And I list this as example of the kind of things I don't want to have on my feed in general; I am not saying that you do this.
@SecondJon actually it may be the "quote" button
@coldwave thanks. This is an upgrade in the web UI that isn't in the mobile app I've been using and I want aware it existed. Thanks for pointing it out!
@coldwave
The intent of the original post seems to me to be the bias in the media, that declare actions good or bad, not based on the actions themselves, but on whether they are done by those who align with the ideology of the media corporations of whom the newscasters often seem nothing more than corporate spokespeople, rather than media or reporters.