Post AREfQLu7cFUMbhjwGG by mathlover@qoto.org
(DIR) More posts by mathlover@qoto.org
(DIR) Post #AR4BcqUykdEWP1zqbo by avedik@mastodon.world
2022-12-27T17:44:56Z
0 likes, 2 repeats
"#Mastodon: A Social Media Platform Dominated By #Pedophiles & #Child #Porn"The #disinformation at #Secjuice is quite well done: The article gives itself an #investigative veneer, there are many links, alleged evidence and screenshots. Everything seems somehow conclusive - if you read too fast....https://www.secjuice.com/mastodon-child-porn-pedophiles/
(DIR) Post #AR4Bcr0WrKTDysl2mm by avedik@mastodon.world
2022-12-27T17:56:38Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
Obviously, the author leaves out, that the majority of the community moderates other inhuman attitudes such as #racism, #sexism, #homophobia and #transphobia and blocks instances which don't actively take action against this content. That's also why radical right-wing Mastodon projects like Gab.ai don't stand a chance in the community and wither away in isolation....Just another article filled with #bullshit...
(DIR) Post #AR4BcrMrWIKp69Csb2 by 73ms@fosstodon.org
2022-12-28T11:38:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@avedik Would like to see some debunking of this because I've already seen it used as for example a wikipedia source to claim that the #mastodon user surge in april 2017 was caused by #pedophiles
(DIR) Post #AR4Bcrkc5zKkHoJqcK by zleap@qoto.org
2022-12-28T13:18:34Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@73ms @avedik A good way to counter mis-information would be to ask for people to back up claims with EVIDENCE. Another way is to provide EVIDENCE to back up statements.As far as I am aware Wikipedia is NOT considered an academic source of information. No harm in quoting it depends on where you are using that information.
(DIR) Post #AR4Bcs6wkxCLP4lgQa by avedik@mastodon.world
2022-12-27T17:51:28Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
This blog article, whose author has also written against Mastodon in the past, has several weaknesses at once: He mixes past and present by omitting events in the past.He also uses disinformation in the article with the misleading rendition of the underlying technology in Fediverse, the responsibilities of freely available software, and the misappropriation of the moderation mechanics and actual moderation practices in Fediverse..
(DIR) Post #AR4C6dTlioiii8dSeO by ncrav@mas.to
2022-12-28T13:23:59Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@zleapNewspieces like these should get the libel treatment unless they are able to provide concrete (court acceptable) evidence of what they're saying. No wonder so many people hate "journalists".@73ms @avedik
(DIR) Post #AR4CLHG0cnEQ8PBIGW by zleap@qoto.org
2022-12-28T13:26:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ncrav @73ms @avedik +1 another plan would be to create better journalists, as some are just lazy and sloppy so those who are actually good need to be recognised but THEY need to stand up for their industry and root out those who are giving all of them a bad name.
(DIR) Post #AR4D1jEwyWGz5Ivc1o by avedik@mastodon.world
2022-12-28T13:34:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@zleap @73msAsking for #evidence in a private discussion makes always sense. I think it is more complicated however, if a 'author' is writing on a news-platform that "#Mastodon is a Social Media Platform Dominated By #Pedophiles & #Childporn" And if he is smart enough to give the article a conclusive touch with alleged evidence...Is it worth to react? If so, how?
(DIR) Post #AR4DvLrT5FpCnFT3lg by ncrav@mas.to
2022-12-28T13:44:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@zleapI agree, and most editors should also be held accountable for promoting shit-content that promotes clicks or sponsors instead of the search for the truth.@73ms @avedik
(DIR) Post #AR4J0IxJoW6f05NxPk by zleap@qoto.org
2022-12-28T14:41:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ncrav @73ms @avedik Indeed the recent article in The Sun written by Jeremy Clarkson about Megan Markle was criticise, however in reporting this, the BBC also asked the question why was it even allowed to get past the editorial stage.
(DIR) Post #AR4KnzljWYYLvWDzHs by zleap@qoto.org
2022-12-28T15:01:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@avedik @73ms You could always try a indirect approach ask for more information and links to sources to help verify the information.Eitehr that we ignore the bad journalists and promote / praise those who are doing the right thing, but I guess we need to balance that wit helping the less experienced do a better job. Everyone has to start somewhere, it is the attitude to improving what and how you do things that should also count.
(DIR) Post #AR4SjFYOCzUR4GEP7Q by 73ms@fosstodon.org
2022-12-28T16:30:12Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@zleap @avedik You're right, Wikipedia is not really a source at all and one should always look at the references there instead of just accepting whatever is written but it does still matter what is there. Not everyone is going to check sources and Google for example displays parts of Wikipedia articles when you search for something that has one.Thankfully Wikipedia should be reasonably to correct too but it becomes easier if you can point to quality sources.
(DIR) Post #AREfQLu7cFUMbhjwGG by mathlover@qoto.org
2023-01-02T14:39:36Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@avedik JFC what the crap did I just read?!Also your analysis of the article is very spot-on as to why this author is full of crap.