I can see that. If you’re a hateful or bigoted person and you tell people about that then they like you less usually, so by not telling people about your trump support you would lose less friends

he carrier is a protoss air unit in StarCraft, it has many interceptor drones that it houses which scale outward to attack the enemy.

who cares about this? I mean if it’s something he’s still into yeah but teenagers will take lots of photos that are not to be taken seriously

Sounds like the CCP approach to twain with the "but a ‘kingdom’ in the past had this territory so we are entitled to it.

The CCP is also very interested in all this

There is an idea that may help this, if it were built and then also used. it’s a form of group decision making based on fluid data that solidifies as more data comes in.

One of the main aspects is that comments and things are compared to others to find how similar they are, something may present itself differently but be the same discussion. This method of identifying each ‘argument’ and ‘rebuttal’ goes hand in hand with declaring definitions so that conversations can’t be flipped around by a bad actor. There’s a big write up of the way it can be used to combat disinformation but as far as I know it’s just the outline of how such a system would work, no one has built the system.

It’s kind of similar to voting sites like reddit but goes a lot farther in defining ways things work, and works so ostracize trolls and the like. but as it would require something no one online would ever go for, being in one way ‘tied’ to your offline person, that I don’t see it ever being a mainstream thing. Of course the accounts people would be using would be in no way identifiable unless selfdoxed they would still be like voter registration in that a real person had to be there once, and all things that person does online are here tied to them so that trolls and things show clearly over time. It’s really designed to be mostly a niche discussion platform engine for people in the same hobby or interest.

I disagree in the sense that I think voting is useful but just up/down is not. A consensus engine that can judge each aspect of a statement alone and in a group can be used to find what is misleading, dishonest, and the like as well as what is simply untrue or lies.

Yes, bring us the consensus engine

the old subreddit r/aBetterWorld is an idea that would help you exactly in this instance if it were not just an idea