I’m the super paranoid guy about all of this stuff and this exact same thing occurred to me
Why are there a few different changes to sub and site policy connected with the concept of “misinformation”, but somehow skirting around the type of misinformation which it seems is the most pressing issue by far? I.e. accounts which are devoted to posting misinformation?
Honestly I thought the vegan cat food thing was handled semi ok. But surely that’s not the more pressing thing, to justify big team meetings and huge changes to policy and writing misinformation stuff into the legal side and user agreement.
Seemed an important changes to me as well, but I guess they had the MBFC bot thing happening at the same time and wanted to hit two birds with one stone? Not sure to be honest
![[Meme] Maybe the discussion will be different this time compared to the ten others? (Edit: obligate, not mandate)](https://i.imgflip.com/920tpl.jpg){kind=link}
I’m the super paranoid guy about all of this stuff and this exact same thing occurred to me
Why are there a few different changes to sub and site policy connected with the concept of “misinformation”, but somehow skirting around the type of misinformation which it seems is the most pressing issue by far? I.e. accounts which are devoted to posting misinformation?
Honestly I thought the vegan cat food thing was handled semi ok. But surely that’s not the more pressing thing, to justify big team meetings and huge changes to policy and writing misinformation stuff into the legal side and user agreement.
Right?
You’re spot on, I think. There are several accounts entirely devoted to pushing agendas in bad faith that go unbanned, yet this?
Seemed an important changes to me as well, but I guess they had the MBFC bot thing happening at the same time and wanted to hit two birds with one stone? Not sure to be honest