okay maybe i’ll ask more directly for opinions on this: sometimes i write tweets stripped of nuance for rhetorical effect, like “X is Y” when my true opinion is closer to “in many cases X may be mostly Y”. i could see arguments that this is bad. thoughts?
Conversation
partly this is a rebellion against rationalist speech norms where you have to caveat everything so much to avoid accusations of overconfidence that you end up not saying anything. and partly it is more fun. but perhaps i ought not contribute to loss of nuance in the discourse 🤔
6
45
there’s a specific way i want my writing to be received - as suggestions, hypotheses, thought-provoking shitposts, material for brainstorming - certainly not as any kind of “truth”. but admittedly this is not always clear from how i write, and maybe it’s unrealistic to expect
Replying to
(also i’m still in like jail so just assume i’m liking your replies. i’m in some kind of strange variant where i can like once every few minutes or something)
3
22
thanks for the replies everyone. i think the main thing i want here is a certain quality of playfulness that i can aim for without needing to do any caveating (which feels anti-playful to me). like i can make everything sound more like a shitpost instead
1
5
Replying to
tweets of course don't lend themselves to lots of qualification. That coupled with the fact that people here are to some extent aware provocation gets engagement may cynically assume strong statements would have qualification if spoken aloud