A steaming pile of steaming...Twitter

(This article is Part-1 in a series. For Part-2, click here.)

As you may have guessed by now, I’m not a religious devotee of Twitter. Their format, and the public relations nonsense about the format, encourage all sorts of bad habits, and as a result, a generalized stench rises from the “Town Square.”

So here’s a steaming pile of a quote….and my comments.

The 2015 quote comes from Twitter’s number one lawyer, Vijaya Gadde. She’s the person who reportedly cried a few days ago, in a Zoom meeting with Twitter big shots, as she was talking about Elon Musk’s buyout of the company:

Gadde, 2015: “I’m often inspired by the vigorous debates on controversial issues that occur on Twitter, but I’ve also been seriously troubled by the plight of some of our users who are completely overwhelmed by those who are trying to silence healthy discourse in the name of free expression. At times, this takes the form of hateful speech in tweets directed at women or minority groups; at others, it takes the form of threats aimed to intimidate those who take a stand on issues.”

Really?

To users: You go on Twitter, you take your chances. People post briefly there. In short bursts. In case you haven’t noticed, many, many people are blandly and meaninglessly brief, and stupidly brief. If you’re engaged in Twitterverse “healthy discourse” and someone tweets BULLSHIT at you, well, that’s the venue you’re in. It’s pithy. You should have known. Don’t try “being overwhelmed” as a response. Actually, Twitter isn’t the place for DISCOURSE of any kind. Look up the word. You had something important to say? You needed to write an essay. You needed to post it somewhere else. Socrates isn’t on Twitter.

Gadde: “Some of our users are completely overwhelmed.” Really? Who are you, lawyer Gadde? The head nurse? Is this a hospital? A rest home? Twitter is a drive-by locale you’ve helped maintain. There’s nothing healthy about it. It’s a football game without pads and helmets, where the refs keep interfering arbitrarily to block moves and penalize the players. By its very nature, it invites wise guys and wise cracks. It invites people who like to munch on each other.

You’re “inspired by the vigorous debates” on Twitter? You’re joking. There aren’t any. Only an idiot would imagine actual debates are occurring on the platform. A debate takes time. It doesn’t compress time and space down to a few globs on the page. Twitter’s format is set up so there can’t be debates.

“Yes, professor, I believe my worthy opponent, Dr. Moghog-Bloviate, and I resolved the burning question about the nature of racism yesterday, in a Twitter exchange. Here is the link. I’ve submitted the whole 11-part debate to the New York Times. One of their social justice and inclusion reporters is writing a piece on it. The Pulitzer Committee has already contacted me.”

You mention those Twitter users who are “trying to silence healthy discourse.” You mean you, Gadde. You’re the lawyer who’s in charge of shaping policy on censorship and banning. What would you call your decision to block all comments highlighting the NY Post’s article about Hunter Biden’s laptop, in the days just prior to the 2020 election? Please, tell us about your agonizing struggle to make the correct judgment call there, so we can shed a few tears.

You mention “Hateful speech…directed at women or minority groups.” I notice hateful Twitter speech directed at pretty much everybody. Again, the format invites it. And if I were a member of a group who feels oppressed, the last place I’d go to make my case is Twitter. You should post this notice prominently: “If you’re a person who is sad or angry about how your life is turning out—for any reason—know that you’re about to enter a war zone. You may naively believe Twitter is the place for you, but you’re dead wrong. You’ll become the butt of jokes and memes and mockery. That’s how the platform works. By limiting the length of tweets, and opening the door to every Tom, Dick, and Harry—what else would you expect? Come on. You won’t be fooling anybody if, after reading responses to your tweets, you post a video of yourself weeping and wailing.”

And by the way, lawyer Gadde, tell us everything you and your colleagues know about the number and nature of fake bot Twitter accounts. The ones that seem to be human but aren’t. The ones that are backed by people who have overt political agendas and use the bot accounts to pile on users who express “incorrect ideas.” You really think we don’t know about this con, this method of creating the appearance of a consensus?

Over the long haul, Twitter is an operation that aims to find lowest common denominators. You, Gadde, went to law school so you could make that your life’s work? So you could build pretty little fantasies about communities of good-hearted people exchanging important ideas?

For anyone who believes your fairy tales…I’ve got condos for sale on the far side of the moon, right next to the green cheese factory and the Pope’s Closer to God telescope. Full cash up front, no mortgages.

Face it. If Twitter somehow built an environment in which actual discussion and debate were the top features, millions of grumpy people would delete their accounts and walk away. Twitter is constructed and designed to host and peddle the majority of its content in the form of shit. And to censor.

These are called clues.

Thanks for listening. You’re faithful servants,

Sherlock Transgender and Doctor Non-Binary

-- Jon Rappoport

Jon also writes at NoMoreFakeNews.com and OutsideTheRealityMachnine.com