Dude, are you new to Caitlin's substack? Read some of her articles (if you need context) behind this one. Knowing is NEVER enough. These things have to be REPEATED in multiple different ways so as to sink into the minds of people - because people NEVER learn (either from experiences or from history).
Hence, find multiple ways to get your message across REPEATEDLY - which is what Caitlin is doing.
And you know this how? What data analysis have you performed? Do you have access to Substack's data analytics? Do you not understand the concept of "word of mouth" messaging and ripple effects? Or of heightened personal agency based on being motivated/inspired by reading something and spreading the word at every chance you get?
Do you think ideas stay in echo chambers? Do you not understand that ideas have real implications in the real world? What makes you think this Substack is an echo chamber? Have you spent some time in this substack or gone over the comments sections to understand the makeup of its subscribers.
Interesting that you are able to make an "echo chamber" evaluation without examining (or spending time) in the substack (or reading Caitlin's articles).
Not everything we say or do is based on objective data, sorry if that's how you function, I just don't qualify what I say as objective if it isn't. What I said still stands, what your answer asks that matters in my opinion is if this place we are at (the comment section of this post) is an echo chamber or not. I think it mostly is. Like all of substack and social media in general almost (it would have to be actively fought to prevent one from only evolving in an echo chamber, and we know that's not how most people use social media, they just let the algorithm direct their feed).
You are entitled to your opinions (as everyone is), but without evidence (data), your claim has little merrit. One could make an argument that "every grouping" is potentially an echo chamber - starting from the smallest unit (family) and extending outwards towards larger and larger groups - relatives, friend circles, workplace, etc. etc.
Political parties can be echo-chambers. Religions can be echo-chambers. The word "echo-chambers" loses its meaning unless one brings objectivity into their analysis.
Like I said before - READ Caitlin's articles. She attacks BOTH Republicans AND Democrats. She is an equal-opportunity objective analyzer. There are people from ALL spectrums that read Caitlin's substack - from far-right to far-left, from Empire-haters to Empire-lovers.
Your statement of "echo-chamber" has little merit. If you want to know what a real echo-chamber is, look at Substacks of "Anti-Vaxxers", etc. to understand the difference.
Addendum: I should add - there are also serious/intense echo-chambers on the "Pro-Vaxx" and Pro-Mandate side of things, not just the Anti-Vaxx side.
Special sale for Mr. I Elect Trumps™ -> Enroll in Trolling Degree from Trump University. Free meal plan (serving cats and dogs courtesy of JD Vance) provided as a signing bonus!
I feel sorry for the kind of life you must have that you spend your free time "trolling" with your old skills. Instead, it may behoove you to enroll in Trump's "trolling" degree program and learn some new strategies. Who knows, maybe the two of you could crack misogynist jokes and talk about controlling women's bodies (your favorite pet-peeve).
the cheapo fuckhead chokaski strikes again. subscribe properly chokaski before attempting to police the forum cheapskate. and even then learn to keep your censoring piehole shut.
I hear Trump University still has some open spots for their "Trolling" degree. Hurry, Mr. I Elect Trumps™ -> don't miss out on this opportunity! Your savior Trump will appreciate your effort!
Dude, are you new to Caitlin's substack? Read some of her articles (if you need context) behind this one. Knowing is NEVER enough. These things have to be REPEATED in multiple different ways so as to sink into the minds of people - because people NEVER learn (either from experiences or from history).
Hence, find multiple ways to get your message across REPEATEDLY - which is what Caitlin is doing.
Hmmm and who is reading this but the choir? We all know activism is virtual these days but come on ...
And you know this how? What data analysis have you performed? Do you have access to Substack's data analytics? Do you not understand the concept of "word of mouth" messaging and ripple effects? Or of heightened personal agency based on being motivated/inspired by reading something and spreading the word at every chance you get?
Oh I get the word of mouth and spreading the good word, but that doesn't happen in echo chambers 😕.
Do you think ideas stay in echo chambers? Do you not understand that ideas have real implications in the real world? What makes you think this Substack is an echo chamber? Have you spent some time in this substack or gone over the comments sections to understand the makeup of its subscribers.
Interesting that you are able to make an "echo chamber" evaluation without examining (or spending time) in the substack (or reading Caitlin's articles).
Not everything we say or do is based on objective data, sorry if that's how you function, I just don't qualify what I say as objective if it isn't. What I said still stands, what your answer asks that matters in my opinion is if this place we are at (the comment section of this post) is an echo chamber or not. I think it mostly is. Like all of substack and social media in general almost (it would have to be actively fought to prevent one from only evolving in an echo chamber, and we know that's not how most people use social media, they just let the algorithm direct their feed).
You are entitled to your opinions (as everyone is), but without evidence (data), your claim has little merrit. One could make an argument that "every grouping" is potentially an echo chamber - starting from the smallest unit (family) and extending outwards towards larger and larger groups - relatives, friend circles, workplace, etc. etc.
Political parties can be echo-chambers. Religions can be echo-chambers. The word "echo-chambers" loses its meaning unless one brings objectivity into their analysis.
Like I said before - READ Caitlin's articles. She attacks BOTH Republicans AND Democrats. She is an equal-opportunity objective analyzer. There are people from ALL spectrums that read Caitlin's substack - from far-right to far-left, from Empire-haters to Empire-lovers.
Your statement of "echo-chamber" has little merit. If you want to know what a real echo-chamber is, look at Substacks of "Anti-Vaxxers", etc. to understand the difference.
Addendum: I should add - there are also serious/intense echo-chambers on the "Pro-Vaxx" and Pro-Mandate side of things, not just the Anti-Vaxx side.
"Substack's data analytics" - 🤣🤡
chokaski the self-applied tech whiz (as in taking the whiz) has not a tiniest idea what it mumbles.
Special sale for Mr. I Elect Trumps™ -> Enroll in Trolling Degree from Trump University. Free meal plan (serving cats and dogs courtesy of JD Vance) provided as a signing bonus!
so who's the asslicker chokaski, make sure you lick back. perfect 69 you poodles form here 😉🤣
I feel sorry for the kind of life you must have that you spend your free time "trolling" with your old skills. Instead, it may behoove you to enroll in Trump's "trolling" degree program and learn some new strategies. Who knows, maybe the two of you could crack misogynist jokes and talk about controlling women's bodies (your favorite pet-peeve).
the cheapo fuckhead chokaski strikes again. subscribe properly chokaski before attempting to police the forum cheapskate. and even then learn to keep your censoring piehole shut.
I hear Trump University still has some open spots for their "Trolling" degree. Hurry, Mr. I Elect Trumps™ -> don't miss out on this opportunity! Your savior Trump will appreciate your effort!
Trying not to feed the trolls here, but where did you take it that there was some censoring going on here?
Noble attitude. Also useful to know some context before chiming in.
Care to explain/elaborate what you mean there?
Really? You need explanation for that?
In such a case ask chokaski as chokaski is the forum's chief everything, eager to explain the explainable and more.
Well, you could explain what you meant at least?