"Meaningful discussion" and the "disinfo agent" charge

[MacCruiskeen]

4m 59s

https://youtu.be/fQl9H-gi9NE

Guardian:

Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media

Military's 'sock puppet' software creates fake online identities to spread pro-American propaganda

Jeff Jarvis: Washington shows the morals of a clumsy spammer
Nick Fielding and Ian Cobain

Thu 17 Mar 2011 13.19 GMT

https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/ ... l-networks

Telegraph:

US military creates fake online personas

The US military awarded a contract for software to create 500 fake personas on social networks in order to secretly influence online debate in its favour, it has been reported.

Christopher Williams, Technology Correspondent4:54PM GMT 17 Mar 2011

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/838860 ... sonas.html

[kelley]

"Most of what exists in US media are weaponized lies, addictive narratives, soundbites and hashtags. It's poison, and besides, the shape of the control system is clear enough, right?"


boom

cross-posted quote

[Elvis]

Mac, please refrain from insinuating that RI members are spies or what have you. Not that you did that. But it's against Jeff's rules. Is there some part of "jeff" you don't understand? Of course there isn't, but for everyone I'm just spelling it out, "j-e-f-f...r-u-l-e-s."

I was going to lock this thread but changed my mind and am issuing you a Warning. This warning will go on your permanent record for any moderator to look up. I hope you realize the seriousness of the matter.


Now for the rest of you troublemakers out there:

For seven months from February through September, this place required no moderator actions except for deleting two inflamatory posts (by Grizzly and Mac, incidentally).

Then someone got the brilliant idea to hand out licenses to riot. It was an interesting experiment, reproducing earlier findings, but is anyone happy with the result?

For now, we're stuck with the existing who what & why here. So everyone—you know who you are—it would be nice to get this train back on the tracks.

[overcoming hope]

I'm all about net results.
sometimes there seems to be a form of gish gallop taking place here.
Damn shame a few of you aren't getting paid for the work you do.

[Elvis]

overcoming hope, that's fascinating, thanks:

The Gish gallop is a technique used during debating that focuses on overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments. The term was coined by Eugenie Scott and named after the creationist Duane Gish, who used the technique frequently against proponents of evolution.


Technique and counter measures

During a Gish gallop, a debater confronts an opponent with a rapid series of many specious arguments, half-truths, and misrepresentations in a short space of time, which makes it impossible for the opponent to refute all of them within the format of a formal debate.[3][4] In practice, each point raised by the "Gish galloper" takes considerably more time to refute or fact-check than it did to state in the first place.[5] The technique wastes an opponent's time and may cast doubt on the opponent's debating ability for an audience unfamiliar with the technique, especially if no independent fact-checking is involved[6] or if the audience has limited knowledge of the topics.

Generally, it is more difficult to use the Gish gallop in a structured debate than in a free-form one.[7] If a debater is familiar with an opponent who is known to use the Gish gallop, the technique may be countered by pre-empting and refuting the opponent's commonly used arguments first, before the opponent has an opportunity to launch into a Gish gallop.[8]

Gish gallop - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Gish_gallop

I'm trying to take all this seriously but it's gotten ridiculous. MacCruiskeen is not the problem.

[RocketMan]

I'm all about net results.
sometimes there seems to be a form of gish gallop taking place here.
Damn shame a few of you aren't getting paid for the work you do.

The Gish Gallop, hmmm... Thank you for the edification.

Yes, some of us are definitely putting in serious hours in pursuit of their passion...

[MacCruiskeen]

I'm all about net results.
sometimes there seems to be a form of gish gallop taking place here.
Damn shame a few of you aren't getting paid for the work you do.

1. "Seems to be" or is? Specify. 2. Who are you accusing, exactly? Name your target. Certainly I have gish-galloped nobody here. 3. Your calculatedly-vague drive-by postlet contributes less than nothing to this discussion. It is a net loss.

[overcoming hope]

I'm all about net results.
sometimes there seems to be a form of gish gallop taking place here.
Damn shame a few of you aren't getting paid for the work you do.

1. "Seems to be" or is? Specify. 2. Who are you accusing, exactly? Name your target. Certainly I have gish-galloped nobody here. 3. Your calculatedly-vague drive-by postlet contributes less than nothing to this discussion. It is a net loss.

I don’t have any targets I’m not going to say anything else about this it quickly turns into people telling me that I want them to die