How does anyone know how the algorithm is bending perception of
people's posts?

I want a social network that shows a chronological list of posts from
people I choose to follow. Is that so hard?

Sort of like a BBS? ;) I am not certain why that is so difficult but it apparently is. I also like things in chronological order.

--- BgNet 1.0á12 - moe's tavern * 1-502-875-8938 * moetiki.ddns.net:27

MIKE POWELL wrote to POINDEXTER FORTRAN <=-

Sort of like a BBS? ;) I am not certain why that is so difficult but
it apparently is. I also like things in chronological order.

You can't make as much money selling ads when people don't see directed
posts. FaceTwitter can sell ads by saying we'll target your ads at 2nd
amendment, furry wearing Firefly fans in the midwest, create an ad
stream, and make more money than if they couldn't target ads.

I'm sure there's some editorial direction happening there - boosting
posts on one side of a political argument, dampening the other side's
posts, etc.

Interesting because there were so many arguments about Section 230 of
the Communications Decency Act, which grants online platforms immunity
from user-posted content - as long as they make a good-faith effort in
restricting offensive material.

It used to be that if a platform could argue that they didn't (or by
nature of the amount of content, couldn't) exert any editorial control
over their content, they could be found not liable, that they had
common carrier status. Cubby vs. Compuserve (1991) was a case that
resonated with BBSes back then.

We responded by not deleting anything. :)






--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

I'm sure there's some editorial direction happening there - boosting
posts on one side of a political argument, dampening the other side's
posts, etc.

I am also sure of that. Which side may depend some on which platform.
There was a special on PBS a couple of years back about how (mostly)
TikTok was shadow banning people, not so much about politics (but some)
and more about being too old, too dark, and a few other things.

I believe it is much more likely that "the algorithms" are responsible for misinforming the public, more so than any foreign actors.

--- BgNet 1.0á12 - moe's tavern * 1-502-875-8938 * moetiki.ddns.net:27

Hit send too soon.

Interesting because there were so many arguments about Section 230 of
the Communications Decency Act, which grants online platforms immunity
from user-posted content - as long as they make a good-faith effort in
restricting offensive material.

It used to be that if a platform could argue that they didn't (or by
nature of the amount of content, couldn't) exert any editorial control
over their content, they could be found not liable, that they had
common carrier status. Cubby vs. Compuserve (1991) was a case that
resonated with BBSes back then.

IMHO, the algorithm is more than capable of editorial control and
exercises a level of it high enough that most social media platforms
should no longer be immune.

Their money will likely continue to make them so, though.
--- BgNet 1.0á12 - moe's tavern * 1-502-875-8938 * moetiki.ddns.net:27

No, we just had to deal with Russian bots on twitter influencing a US election.

The Russian bit there is not really necessary as I have doubt they
were the only ones. If you don't believe that social media companies do
it themselves, that it will happen forever as long as we have social
media, that other countries (China, North Korea, Iran) and persons in
our own country were involved, and that all of this only influences
people against your side (but not the other), I heard there is a bridge
for sale... one you are quite familiar with... that I can help you buy.

Just wire me a few thousand dollars and we will get started.
--- BgNet 1.0á12 - moe's tavern * 1-502-875-8938 * moetiki.ddns.net:27

Re: Re: Mastodon - Wich Serve
By: MIKE POWELL to POINDEXTER FORTRAN on Mon Jan 26 2026 08:26 am

The Russian bit there is not really necessary as I have doubt they were the

---
þ Synchronet þ Aneto

Re: Re: Mastodon - Wich Serve
By: MIKE POWELL to POINDEXTER FORTRAN on Mon Jan 26 2026 08:26 am

The Russian bit there is not really necessary as I have doubt they were the only ones.

Just have an urgent desire to state that "Russian bots" are russian not cuz of "Big big moscow influence" (even tho sometimes its true), but becuz russians/ru-netizens are mostly careless about cybercrime, everyone is a pirate, every second one would be in jail by several internet laws if they would have lived in EU or US, so yeah, Russian bots are russian cuz russians provide such services more often rather than anything else.
---
þ Synchronet þ Aneto

The Russian bit there is not really necessary as I have doubt they were the only ones.

Just have an urgent desire to state that "Russian bots" are russian not cuz o "Big big moscow influence" (even tho sometimes its true), but becuz russians/ru-netizens are mostly careless about cybercrime, everyone is a pirate, every second one would be in jail by several internet laws if they would have lived in EU or US, so yeah, Russian bots are russian cuz russians provide such services more often rather than anything else.

Yes, but I seriously doubt that "Russian bots" are the only bots involved.
China also has state-sponsored hackers and bots. So does North Korea. I suspect Iran also has them. The USA probably has them, too.

And I have no doubt they all have a desire to meddle in our elections.

--- BgNet 1.0á12 - moe's tavern * 1-502-875-8938 * moetiki.ddns.net:27