Read on Twitter
I've been blocked by @greenandreac.
It's really disappointing to see that one candidate would block another in an election.
A little thread about blocking people:
It's really disappointing to see that one candidate would block another in an election.
A little thread about blocking people:
The internet overall is a pretty dangerous place when it comes to politics.
It allows and somewhat encourages people to split into groups of people that all think the same. This can be really problematic, because it can skew your perception of the world and of people's opinions
It allows and somewhat encourages people to split into groups of people that all think the same. This can be really problematic, because it can skew your perception of the world and of people's opinions
When all you see is people that agree with you, it's quite easy to end up supporting a stance on something just because everyone around you does the same.
It's really important to be able to see the views of those who think differently or disagree with you.
It's really important to be able to see the views of those who think differently or disagree with you.
If we want to move forward in politics, we need to be able to think critically. We need to be able to consider both sides of an argument.
And it benefits us to do so. The best way to get someone to support your position on an issue is to be able to understand their experience.
And it benefits us to do so. The best way to get someone to support your position on an issue is to be able to understand their experience.
This does two things:
Firstly, you know what, you might actually be wrong on an issue. You might have come to a conclusion that doesn't make sense. That's perfectly okay, and it happens. The internet often ends up making us see a lot more info from one viewpoint.
Firstly, you know what, you might actually be wrong on an issue. You might have come to a conclusion that doesn't make sense. That's perfectly okay, and it happens. The internet often ends up making us see a lot more info from one viewpoint.
But secondly, maybe you're right. And now you understand and can empathise with the person who disagrees. You can help them understand why their position is wrong because you appreciate what it is like to think like them.
You appreciate how they've come to their conclusion.
You appreciate how they've come to their conclusion.
Now obviously, being able to block someone can be important. There are people on the internet who just want to create hate or cause harm.
In those situations, definitely, the block button is valid. If what someone is doing is causing you harm, then please block them.
In those situations, definitely, the block button is valid. If what someone is doing is causing you harm, then please block them.
However, we need to be really careful with how we use the block button in other situations. If someone disagrees with us, that isn't a reason to block them.
Using it this way creates that filtered environment, which isn't a good place to be able to think critically.
Using it this way creates that filtered environment, which isn't a good place to be able to think critically.
If we just split off into a group of people that all think the same and never speak to others, we will never see Green policies delivered.
We have to be able to talk to those that have come to different conclusions.
Please use the block button responsibly.
We have to be able to talk to those that have come to different conclusions.
Please use the block button responsibly.
Just a bonus mini-thread. @greenandreac accused Bright Green of libel. I first decided to assume that was the case and read through the article but found nothing that I could identify as a lie (or a significantly misleading statement). I then asked her what she though...
thought* was libelous (a specific sentence for example). She wouldn't respond. Nor would someone who retweeted it calling it libel.
If either had identified something that was libel and could back it up, I would've supported them in challenging it, although...
If either had identified something that was libel and could back it up, I would've supported them in challenging it, although...
not necessarily going straight to a cease-and-desist letter.
I think libel is really serious, and a big problem (example here: https://twitter.com/NickHGreen/status/1291128328691253248?s=20) and would always support challenging it.
But if you can't explain why it's libel, there's no way I could support you.
I think libel is really serious, and a big problem (example here: https://twitter.com/NickHGreen/status/1291128328691253248?s=20) and would always support challenging it.
But if you can't explain why it's libel, there's no way I could support you.
