1/ One aspect I’m really excited about is better decomposing the perception of outrage and the perception of abuse.https://twitter.com/generativist/status/1160223379049205760 …
-
Show this thread
-
2/ There are so many CiViLiTy NoW hot takers who want to filter outrage, generally thinking it would facilitate better conversations. And it surely would — for them. Because mostly they are looking for conversations that never challenge their priors.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
3/ But, there are types of chronic outrage and deliberate performances that do corrode the information environment. It’s just that it’s desperately hard to discriminate it given existing tools.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
4/ The absolute worst thing you can do is elide outrage itself, using some sort of affective classifier. Outrage is impossibly tangled with the identification of social issues. If you just remove it, you’ll inhibit and bias problem identification severely.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread
5/ Again, that’s kinda why so many people want to erase it — it generally identifies problems that don’t affect them. But I do think there is a lot of attention left on the affective computation table by just saying “never condition presentation on outrage.”
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.