Flatworm7591

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
 

Researchers have attributed at least five falsehoods to a Russian campaign dubbed "Storm-1516." Linvill and Patrick Warren, co-directors of the Clemson University research group, Media Forensics Hub said they were the first to identify the disinformation campaign and did so as part of their work studying online deception. Microsoft Threat Analysis Center, an expert group that analyzes nation-state threats, soon named it "Storm-1516." (Microsoft names emerging groups of threat activity using "Storm" and a four-digit number.)

The Media Forensics Hub tracked at least 52 online narratives between August 2023 and Oct. 3 that they believe stemmed from Storm-1516. In the weeks before Election Day, some took the form of videos that employed actors who recounted wild stories about the candidates and about battleground state voting.

  • In clips shared Sept. 4, a woman supposedly named "Alicia Brown" told a fabricated story about a 2011 hit-and-run incident in which she alleged Harris was the driver of a car that struck her. PolitiFact rated that claim Pants on Fire!

  • In another instance, video clips showed someone who claimed to be one of Walz’s former students, accusing the governor of sexual abuse. This video was uploaded days after an X account posted supposed screenshots of documents claiming Walz had "an inappropriate relationship with a minor" during his time as a public school teacher. PolitiFact examined the account’s posts and rated the claim Pants on Fire!

  • Another video showed a person opening mail ballots in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, and ripping up those with votes for Trump. PolitiFact found it baseless and rated it Pants on Fire!

  • Less than a week before Election Day, a man in a video claimed to be from Haiti and said he would be voting many times for Harris using several driver’s licenses. It received PolitiFact’s Pants on Fire rating, too.

  • On Nov. 5, Election Day, a video circulated on social media claiming that two Harris supporters assaulted a Trump voter at a polling place in Wisconsin. PolitiFact also rated it Pants on Fire!

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 7 hours ago

For those who aren't aware of this new series:

I don't think anything about Biden set "the commies on fire", but he was elected long before 7 October 2023, so he didn't have to contend with all the well-deserved outrage over US support for Israel's genocide in Gaza. And yes, I'm well aware it'll likely get worse under Trump. But not being as bad as the next guy simply doesn't seem to inspire voter turnout for some reason.

It's kind of like selling a new brand of chocolate, and advertising it as being "not quite as bad as Hershey's" (yes, I know, it's a low bar), then blaming customers for "sitting on the couch" and not buying it. Oh, and lets not forget that both chocolate bars advertise a policy of "10% of profits goes to genocide".

Democrats are up in arms about people not buying their shitty chocolate bar, when any decent person would just stop eating chocolate if those were the only two options available. But the Democrats refuse to change the recipe or the packaging because it's their position that nothing needs changing - it's the voters who are wrong. Does that sound like an argument that's likely to win over any voters?

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 11 hours ago

PSA: all women in Trumpistan should be especially very mindful of state-level surveillance of their internet use, whether or not they pirate stuff. But this is also good advice for all pirates.

 

The one where Hexbear unironically rebrands some of their vilest propaganda-filled troll communities (aka "beloved spaces") as "counterpropaganda" and "gossip" 🤣

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/3856299

Hello users of Hexbear, we wanted to inform you that we are going to be locking the_dunk_tank and dredge_tank communities. We have created two new communities /c/gossip and /c/counterpropaganda to serve a similar but clearly distinct purpose than the dunk/dredge tanks.

Not only is the dunk tank a term that has racist origins, but also many posts there were almost no effort and often times requiring later edits to show how they weren't reactionary, ~~not useful with regard to developing rhetoric and furthering dialectical analysis of that which we dunk upon~~.

To that end, we wish posts of reactionaries to be placed in !counterpropaganda@hexbear.net along with an accompanying explanation (as simple or complex as desired) with the intent of countering the reactionary propaganda in the post body, as of now comments are not subject to the same ~~rhetorical rigor~~ rule.

For the posts ~~that are not "low-hanging fruit'~~ of notable people we ask that you use !gossip@hexbear.net .

These changes are mainly part of a continued effort to remove the racist and misogynistic elements from our community and grow.

Any moderators of the dunk tank or dredge tank that want to be a mod in the new communities let me know.

[...]

As a personal addendum I am sorry if the closing of the tanks, removes a beloved space on the site, if you want to suggest a community to replace them you may do so at !commrequest@hexbear.net or submit a mod application to take a more active role in shaping the site. Sitewide or community changes come from proposals put forth from the mod team, discussed, and voted on by the mod team.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 12 hours ago

This is a very paternalistic attitude imo. Your peers don't need "protecting" from AI content any more than they need "protecting" from pornography, for example. Isn't it preferable that they get to decide for themselves without you trying to sink those communities in the feed?

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

WASHINGTON — The leaders of the Democratic National Committee announced they plan to learn absolutely nothing from their embarrassing loss to President-elect Donald Trump, multiple sources confirmed.

“We learned a lot this time around. The most important takeaway from all of this is that we have to stay the course. In 2028 we plan to put forward the most disliked candidate yet. The primary process will probably be truncated, maybe we will skip it altogether. It all depends on what our biggest corporate donors want,” said DNC chair Jaime Harrison. “But we can’t do this without raising money. If you thought our fundraising efforts were annoying before, you haven’t seen anything yet. We also want to congratulate our friends in the Republican party, they played a great game and we can’t wait to work with them more.”

Lisa Fouts, a reluctant member of the Democrat party, is not sure what to do from here.

“This wasn’t supposed to happen. It was supposed to be an easy win. Trump is a felon, a rapist, and he’s legitimately losing his mind. But no, the DNC fucked everything up at every level. They just assumed people would vote their way despite doing nothing for years, it makes me want to puke,” said Fouts. “The DNC already sent an email with the subject line ‘Shame On You’ and it said I didn’t send them enough money to get them to win. Then they sent a follow up email that called me a ‘spoiled child’ and then left me a voicemail saying they are going to kick my dog if I even consider looking into a third part candidate.”

Satire or real life? It's honestly hard to tell the difference nowadays.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 16 hours ago

I think you pretty much summed it up, matey.

If only we had an option to disable downvotes from non-subscribers!

Now that would be great!

And yes, I agree it would be preferable to have something that mods can opt into and configure to their community's needs, only if needed.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Or, it could mean they weren't fine with either option? "We're not quite as evil as the other guy" isn't the campaign slogan you seem to think it is.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

No I'm not happy, I'm disappointed. And I'm annoyed that liberals can't seem to be bring themselves to accept that the blame for Harris losing the election does not fall on the electorate, it falls on the Harris campaign and the long established Democratic practice of putting the needs/want of oligarchs and foreign policy hawks before the needs/wants of their own citizens.

And what are the chances that the Democrats have learned their lesson and will pivot to a more progressive candidate for the next election cycle? It seems more like a Zoolander situation - they just can't turn to the left.

 
 

This is not a new issue, but we've had reports from some communities that they are experiencing a lot of repeated downvotes from the same set of people.

This is how it typically plays out, using AI images as an example:

  1. A section of the lemmy user base really hates anything AI generated.
  2. Instead of blocking AI generated image communities, they down vote those posts every time they see them.
  3. The posts in those communities effectively have to overcome a "handicap" of down votes each time they are posted. This harms community growth and discoverability.

The admin team would like to know how our community would like us to handle this issue, since it isn't clear to us what is the best approach, and we would like a consensus view.

Some option for consideration:

  1. Encourage/allow community mods to ban persistent down voters from their community (note that we currently have no specific rule in place for this, so it is currently allowed).
  • Pros: prevents future down votes; essentially "unsubscribes" from the community on their behalf
  • Cons: could potentially be abused by mods who want to eliminate all down voters and "game" the system
  1. Have a policy of ignoring the persistent down voters
  • Pros: allows people to continue to express their dislike of [insert topic]-type posts
  • Cons: means that communities on topics that are not of interest to (or are actively disliked by) the majority of users will continue to be penalized in the lemmy post feeds.
  1. Leave it up to the discretion of the individual community mods
  • Pros: self-determination and community based approach (i.e. only applied when needed)
  • Cons: potentially inconsistent approach to down voters across the instance

Feel free to come up with more options, but these are the three main alternatives I could come up with.

We are interested to get your thoughts on the topic so we can come up with a policy for the instance. Please leave your comments below on your preferred option and the reasons for your choice.

Edit: apparently community mods can't currently see the voting breakdown in Lemmy, only instance admins can, so this adds further complexity to the issue.

view more: next ›