Posted by: LateForLunch ®
03/24/2023, 16:25:19
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
'Looks like the rest of the country is catching up with the conservative viewpoint on this issue. The Reps worked-over that Cringe-Tok CEO like hunting dogs on a Guinea Fowl.
For those who may not know, the term "cringe" is a commonly used put-down on social media - it's a superlative negative sort of like "epic fail" or "weak" or the dreaded "lame" popular mostly with younger people.
It's good to be able to communicate with the youngsters in terms they more-easily understand. Ihavenoname has brought a little of that here, so thanks for that!!
I've communicated with him a little on PM and he's an interesting person. Nonetheless, he came here to Right Minds (heh) because that's where all of the interesting people end up eventually. Although I think I may be the exception to that rule. heh
Modified by LateForLunch at Fri, Mar 24, 2023, 16:40:09
|
|
Posted by: Russ Walden ®
03/26/2023, 19:54:02
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
LFL,
So far, no one can provide a coherent reason for banning TikTok:
* It's a product of China. Hell! So is my Ladyfriend and I don't want to see her banned. * It collects intelligence. -- Has anybody noticed that it's a social media site? If you had all the intelligence collected on FaceBook and TikTok, it would lower your IQ by at least 5 points. * China could collect the intelligence gathered on TikTok -- See above. * The White House is in favor of it -- If you had all the intelligence collected on FaceBook and TikTok and could infuse it into the "White House," you would raise its collective IQ by 10 points.
This whole thing is nothing but a gigantic distraction.
We should stop sending money to Ukraine and let the gov't buy TikTok. That would destroy it forever.
Regards, Russ
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
03/26/2023, 21:31:03
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
The term "triangulating" refers to the Alinskyite principle of balancing policy decisions based on input from (1) public opinion polling, (2) the wishes of the White House and (3) the wishes of Congress. It is an election year ploy to convince "moderate" voters that the White House (et al) are not really as dangerous and radical as they have been in the first three years of the term. That sort of tactic is BTW, David Axelrod and James Carville's specialty. From that perspective, allowing the Xiden administration to get away with appearing to be concerned about something like this is the price of actually taking action to stop TikTok. It's not a cut and dried issue, but I doubt that there will be a public rational dialectic on its nuances. Public opinion is not favorable toward the PRC, so this may be somewhat influenced by lingering resentment from the Wuhan Flu catastrophe.
Modified by LateForLunch at Sun, Mar 26, 2023, 21:33:48
|
Posted by: Russ Walden ®
03/27/2023, 11:23:12
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
LFL,
re: Xiden administration to get away with
appearing to be concerned about something like this is the price of
actually taking action to stop TikTok.
Stop TikTok from doing what?
The site reportedly has 150 million users in the US. That is considerably more than support "Biden" policies. Maybe "Biden" (whoever that is) should start posting on TikTok to garner support for his/its policies. I still think it is a major distraction program.
Regards, Russ
|
Posted by: Ihavenoname ®
03/26/2023, 20:12:16
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
That alone isn't a strong and convincing reason, even if I wanted it banned.
From my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong), banning CringeTok would apply mainly to government offices. Private citizens can still use it at free will, despite my disapproval of such usage.
I do see your point that this whole thing could be a distraction.
But hey, I still live a decent and stable life by not using CringeTok (and other social media platforms whenever possible). At least I'll focus on NOT following the footsteps of others who choose to indulge themselves into this toxic trend. That's all an individual can really do regarding this situation.
If CringeTok is banned, I'll be glad! But the damage has been done already, as you've pointed out.
Modified by Ihavenoname at Sun, Mar 26, 2023, 20:29:32
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
03/26/2023, 21:48:45
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
It could be a good start as we all hoped welfare reform would. But as we have seen with welfare reform, what is done may be undone. So whether a long-term trend of reigning in or banning destructive social media companies may be established to replace the free-for-all that seems to be favoring leftists in the licentiousness of content and the capriciousness of licensing requirements for social media, remains to be seen.
|
Posted by: Ihavenoname ®
03/24/2023, 18:38:51
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
I can't believe that even my former high school is using it!
And I hope that WeeChat gets put onto the no-fly list as well (basically a clone of WhatsApp).
But nonetheless, we're making progress!
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
03/24/2023, 23:49:52
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
Now there are emerging concerns about evidence the Big Guy may be playing for the other team in some ways. Xiden et al seem to be violating the spirit of a thousand laws, even if not the letter. Cue:Teebone (Barry Hirsh): "STINK!!"
Modified by LateForLunch at Sat, Mar 25, 2023, 00:04:15
|
Posted by: Ihavenoname ®
03/27/2023, 00:36:51
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
As I've stated before, TikTok, Facebook, and others like it are all equally bad. I do not see one of them worse than the others. They are one and the same thing under different names.
Modified by Ihavenoname at Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 00:38:16
|
Posted by: LateForLunch ®
03/27/2023, 15:22:59
Author Profile Mail author Edit
|
Th posted above sums up the rational POV. So now we only have to induce government to do something effective but not destructive with (wait for it) UNEXPECTED CONSEQUENCES.
Modified by LateForLunch at Tue, Mar 28, 2023, 03:03:32
|
|
|
