I'm not talking about demographics, I'm talking about people who follow a particular group of Twitter accounts, and who engage in a specific kind of obnoxious herd behavior. This is not an obscure or poorly-defined phenomenon.
-
-
It's not particular and specific, it's arbitrary. You can draw boundaries anywhere in a social network and start judging people collectively based on those boundaries. I don't have to believe the exercise has any justification.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @joftius @estarianne
Again, I'm talking about specific accounts and specific behavior. This epistemological agnosticism is silly. But I'm clearly not going to convince you of that, so I'm not going to bother trying any further.
1 reply 0 retweets 21 likes -
Replying to @studentactivism @estarianne
I'm not being pedantic, this is central to the dispute. Anyone could make a list of some specific accounts that engage in quote-tweet style harassment. The only reason that there are names for the ones that happen to support Bernie is because it's not a good-faith standard
1 reply 1 retweet 13 likes -
It was a narrative created by Bernie's opponents. It was never supported by anything like a systematic analysis of data, in fact it's been contradicted by those. But if the NYT writes an article about it, that makes it real?
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @joftius @studentactivism
Also some people on Twitter understand Twitter bubbles better than you do, so maybe stop with the pedantry?
1 reply 0 retweets 13 likes -
If they didn't exist you wouldn't need to exercise so much sophistry to avoid doing anything about it
1 reply 0 retweets 17 likes -
Replying to @estarianne @studentactivism
Being skeptical of marketing labels that people invented specifically to slander their political opponents is not "sophistry"
2 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Seems like you're being skeptical specifically in service to their behavior.
1 reply 0 retweets 10 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
I vote for deliberately obtuse.
-
-
What's deliberately obtuse about this conversation is everyone ignoring the motives of an NYT writer who obviously hates Chapo because they routinely dunk on their conservative friends who pal around with nazis
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Seems like your skepticism isn't without its own spurious motivations.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
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.