When attention is very scarce, and you have some discretionary ability to boost signals, any act of public curiosity becomes a political act. Whatever the content of your opinion on X, simply being publicly curious about X (minimum=liking a tweet) sends a message.
-
-
In an attention scarcity (or information overload) environment people are desperate for meta-signals on what to pay attention to. Hell, there’s even a
@pmarcaslikes account that RTs things@pmarca likes. That’s how starved the information economy is for quality meta-signals.Show this thread -
The “fiat news” concept from
@Aelkus is useful here. It’s a billion channel universe and you have some ability to mint fiat news whether you are aware of it or not, so be mindful what you boost.Show this thread -
I have always tended to self-censor public curiosity to things I think will harmoniously interest others in that space. This is from before I had any sort of platform. I suspect this is a basic personality trait. I just don’t like making a scene. I take all conflict offline.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Consistency, and how you became a public figure seems relevant. If you became popular spewing your stream of consciousness, individuals should be taking that into account. If you're a high profile oncologist and randomly signal something off-topic, seems more reasonable.
-
Also while I see many of it's virtues there is still some dark corner on my mind that feels against imbuing additional responsibility to those who fall into influence without intent. But perhaps that's my narcissism and ego dancing with each other.
End of conversation
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.