It's the principle of maximum retaliation, with the ultimate aim of deterrence I think. Don't engage, because it will be so unpleasant you'll wish you never showed up.
-
-
And indeed, nobody wants to hand out better vests, because then they won't be able to use their guns on each other if they need to. There's always this implicit hostage-taking attitude of "I need to be able to destroy you" we "joke" about on here.
-
and it's not, at all, a joke we're all very aware that we can and will see folks turn this shit against each other. it's why a lot of us lie or conceal aspects of ourselves while feigning total transparency.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
And trying to argue about the moral value of this in a vacuum is kind of impossible Like when Twitter mentions they're gonna roll out some armor - like being able to hide replies to "quell the ratio" - people immediately go "Oh so you want DONALD TRUMP to be bulletproof?!"
-
And, yeah, I'm not gonna say public shaming is universally evil and we should be nice to all other humans at all times (the disingenuous Maximum Smarm worldview) But come on, WE ALL KNOW that going on the offense is pleasurable for its own sake in an ugly way
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It's super weird to realise that the reason I had no idea what this was all about is that someone wrote an article defining "smarm" as something other than sycophancy and it just totally passed me by. At least now I have figured out WTF was going on all thread...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.