4) People who openly call for violence, property destruction, or other illegal behavior There is literally NEVER a reason to do this. If violence and/or property destruction become necessary, why would you put it in writing?! - ThreadSky

laurajedeed.bsky.social • 3 days ago

4) People who openly call for violence, property destruction, or other illegal behavior

There is literally NEVER a reason to do this. If violence and/or property destruction become necessary, why would you put it in writing?!

Comments

eyepatchguy.bsky.social•2 days ago

Why put it in writing when you can simply post helpful and completely unrelated pictures of Nintendo’s most beloved characters

laurajedeed.bsky.social•3 days ago

We KNOW the Trump regime is going after people for domestic terrorism. Encouraging people to advocate for violence or property destruction online is a great way to take someone out of the fight for absolutely no gain

laurajedeed.bsky.social•3 days ago

Again: the people doing these things are PROBABLY NOT FEDERAL AGENTS. They probably are doing these things because they understand how high the stakes are and desperately want things to succeed

It doesn't matter. These types of actions destroy solidarity, and we have to shut them down immediately

abracadocious.bsky.social•2 days ago

Folks who call for violence — if not a fed initially — can be turned into informants. Lots of tough talkers who fold when they are shown the full consequences of their actions.

morganmghee.bsky.social•3 days ago

Russian backed bots, trolls and influencers are still on the payroll and hard at work. With the previous goal of dividing the nation in its win column, the new goal is to divide the Democratic party. Don't fall for the new breed of maga. Voting in absolute unity is crucial to defending democracy.

redtutel.bsky.social•1 day ago

So…a lot of posts on social media are damaging to the movement

I had a feeling, but seeing it all laid out blows my mind

jwatte.bsky.social•2 days ago

You're arguing for shutting down people who want to get things down?
Isn't that what a double agent would do?

(Or, wait, am _I_ the double agent for casting doubt? This is hard! Glad someone else takes care of it.)

laurajedeed.bsky.social•2 days ago

I'm arguing for shutting down people who call for violence on the Internet, because as I said above, there is literally NEVER a reason to do that, even if violence were to become necessary for some reason

laurajedeed.bsky.social•3 days ago

If you encounter these ideas in the wild, some things you can do (from least to most aggressive):

*Calmly point out that the statement seems counterproductive and explain why

*Ask for evidence of serious accusations

*Call them out. Establish a norm of not putting up with that shit

*Block them

faineg.bsky.social•2 days ago

I’m ethering them on main because it amuses me and I figure that it’s helping set a social norm of “fuck this shit”

laurajedeed.bsky.social•2 days ago

Cannot tell you how much I've enjoyed watching you do that today

faineg.bsky.social•2 days ago

I’m glad you approve because I love playing with my food

jaredparker.bsky.social•2 days ago

I appreciate this. Generally I think it’s best practice to just block on Bluesky and move on but you and others have real reach and can actually do some good by setting the appropriate tone of “this shit doesn’t have to be tolerated”

skywitches.net•2 days ago

* Mute them

Also an option. Mutes aren’t public; if the people pulling these tactics are professionals on a fishing expedition, they can’t tell *you’ve* muted them without escalating to directly targeting you.

laurajedeed.bsky.social•2 days ago

The reason I personally opt for a block instead of a mute is because I don't want them using COINTELPRO-style tactics on my threads even if I can't see them. It allows them to piggyback on this account to get the word out

When this account was smaller, I was a lot more inclined towards muting

laurajedeed.bsky.social•2 days ago

I also have the dubious advantage of having already pissed this faction off, they can't get more angry at me than they already are. I survived efforts to drive me off the Internet once, and I'm prepared to survive them again

Totally get why others would opt for mute, and your point is well taken

laurajedeed.bsky.social•3 days ago

I have a medium account that gets decent engagement. If someone persists in COINTELPRO-style behavior, they're getting blocked eventually -- not because I'm uninterested in discussion or because I think they're a bad person, but because I'm not going to provide a platform for that shit

laurajedeed.bsky.social•3 days ago

The left is tolerant in ways the right can never be. It's our greatest strength, but can also be used against us. There are certain types of bad behavior we're really bad at calling out, especially if someone is using left-coded jargon and concepts to perform it

betterceo.bsky.social•1 day ago

Tolerance is a social contract. When the contract is broken via intolerance, the response is not intolerance, but self-defense.

digitaldraco.bsky.social•2 days ago

👆 👆 👆

I have seen this weaponized SO MANY TIMES.

It’s been used to excuse everything from online bullying and harassment to personal physical and emotional abuse to social manipulation.

Folks need to be more savvy.

laurajedeed.bsky.social•3 days ago

I cannot emphasize enough that IT DOES NOT MATTER WHY SOMEONE IS DISRUPTING A MOVEMENT

Calling out someone for using COINTELPRO-style tactics isn't the same as calling them a fed. It's just pointing out that what they're doing is so good at destroying movements that the FBI literally weaponized it

mercurywoodrose.bsky.social•2 days ago

Because actual left-wing people in this country are 99%not ideologues or fanatics. The number of fanatical marks is Leninists is vanishingly small. and they have no political power, but the entire network of right wing political actors is entirely ideologically driven they are completely intolerant.

somanymonkeys.bsky.social•2 days ago

Probably not a fed, but also the last person you want to engage with. If you think you may at some point become involved in any protest action that could result in your arrest, assume the real feds will comb through your entire social media history for anything to bring enhanced charges.

vyakunin.bsky.social•2 days ago

there are a few acts of violence that would produce a lot of gain actually

It's like panic: not good, except for the cases, where it's good

laurajedeed.bsky.social•2 days ago

And there is NEVER A REASON TO CALL FOR IT ON THE INTERNET. Not ever. No matter the circumstances. We could be in the middle of an active insurrection and it would still be fucking stupid

laurajedeed.bsky.social•2 days ago

I'm not a pacifist, I'm someone who's not going to go to jail for stupid reasons

vyakunin.bsky.social•2 days ago

there are possible consequences for both people who call for it and for those who act. If you take those into account, you are free to do whatever.

There are some people and some causes, that the cause justifies some prison time for that person (e.g. Navalny, Mandela). Don't take it away

coyoteden.bsky.social•2 days ago

4 is the most dangerous by far.

Blocking people who say those things is not enough, as far as anyone conducting surveillance is concerned they are still in the thread.

When you see it here, report it before you block. Bluesky does label or remove content and users who incite violence.

coyoteden.bsky.social•2 days ago

If something violent does happen, there will be a law enforcement target on everyone else and the platform as a whole.

Don’t allow that risk.

This is *especially* important considering law-abiding non-citizens are being deported for things they have said online or who they associate with.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply