When grounding in reality = censorship and lack of fun

I am part of a Facebook group for one of the healing modalities I use.

A few days ago, one of the members announced he had set up a new group for the same modality and invited people to join. His reason for setting up the group was the “censorship and lack of fun” in the existing group.

This made me and others curious. We haven’t noticed any censorship or lack of fun. Any topic is allowed, and there are frequent posts with (often quite funny) memes and jokes.

That’s obviously not what he means. So what is he referring to? Why does he experience the group as censoring and not fun?

Most likely, because he has posted conspiracy theories, and those posts predictably receive comments disagreeing and pointing out logical fallacies and poor or non-existent data and documentation.

That’s one of the reasons I like the group. Many there are sober, grounded, and invested in reality. We want to stay as close to reality as possible, which means analyzing statements and claims and pointing out weaknesses in the logic and data.

For him, that may feel like censorship. And, of course, it isn’t. If you post something in a public forum, you have to expect people to disagree with you and pick apart your argument. Especially when your argument is not very strong and is not backed up by solid data.

It may also feel like “lack of fun”. For him, it may be fun to indulge in conspiracy theories without being hampered by more sober views.

For me, it’s important to point this out. What he calls censorship is just normal pushback when you make big claims without being able to back them up. And what he calls a lack of fun is what you experience when you want to indulge in speculation and meet a more sober approach.

It may seem tempting to create another group that has the rules you want it to have. (Or lack of rules.) But there will be challenges in that group too, and if you have loose or nonexistent rules, you may discover why well-functioning groups have clear rules. In addition, you risk splintering the community which comes with its own consequences. (As I have seen from being involved in community groups for a few decades.)

Personally, I am not in that group for “fun”. I am there to pick up tips about how to better use the healing modality and to ask questions if there is something I am unsure about. Censorship doesn’t really apply, and if I want fun I find it somewhere else.


DRAFT FRAGMENTS

If being grounded in reality is not your main priority, then having bad logic and bad data pointed out to you

…..

He and other conspiracy folks seem to have taken a page from Trump’s book and taken on a victim role.

….

Most people would see it as taking on a victim identity just because others won’t follow you into your unsupported rabbit holes.

…..

Yes, if receiving comments pointing out the weaknesses in your argument is “censorship”, you are being censored. And if being grounded in a more sober approach is “lack of fun”, then there is lack of fun in that group. And most people would not see it that way.

INITIAL DRAFT

I am part of a Facebook group for one of the healing modalities I use.

A few days ago, one of the members announced he had set up a new group for the same modality and invited people to join. His reason for setting up the group was the “censorship and lack of fun” in the existing and official group.

The “censorship” and “lack of fun” was news to me and most others in that group. Anyone is free to say what they want, although they will get responses with a range of different views. And I am not sure what he means by lack of fun. (After all, the group is for a healing modality.)

He is one of the folks who has posted conspiracy theories in the past. And when people post conspiracy theories, they will receive comments pointing out logical fallacies and bad data. That’s to be expected and that’s how it should be.

I assume that’s what he means by censorship and lack of fun. “Freedom” is perhaps to not have anyone disagreeing with you or pointing out fallacies in your logic. And “fun” may be to freely indulge in fantasies without anyone grounding them in reality.

I have seen this among some conspiracy folks. They take on a victim role as soon as their views receive scrutiny or pushback. (This is a strategy also used by white supremacists in the US.)

DRAFT

I am part of a Facebook group for one of the healing modalities I use.

A few days ago, one of the members announced he had set up a new group for the same modality and invited people to join. His reason for setting up the group was the “censorship and lack of fun” in the existing and official group.

This made me and others curious. We haven’t noticed any censorship or lack of fun. Any topic is allowed, and there are frequent posts with (often quite funny) memes and jokes.

That’s obviously not what he means. So what is he referring to? Why does he experience the group as censoring and not fun?

Most likely, because he has posted conspiracy theories, and those posts receive comments disagreeing and pointing out logical fallacies and poor or non-existent data and documentation.

That’s one of the reasons I like the group. Many people there are sober, grounded, and invested in reality. We want to stay as close to reality as possible, which means analyzing statements and claims and pointing out weaknesses in the logic and data.

For him, that may feel like censorship. And, of course, it isn’t. If you post something in a public forum, you have to expect people to disagree with you and pick apart your argument. Especially when your argument is not very strong and is not backed up by solid data.

It may also feel like “lack of fun”. For him, it may be fun to indulge in conspiracy theories and do so unhindered by more sober views.

And for me, it’s important to point all of this out. What he calls censorship is just normal pushback when you make big claims without being able to back them up. And what he calls a lack of fun is what you experience when you want to indulge in speculation and meet a more sober approach.

Note: He may also refer to one member who got banned. She wasn’t banned because she posted conspiracy theories (which she did). She was banned because she didn’t follow the group rules, and continued to go against the group rules even after this was pointed out to her. (She spammed the group by posting a lot on the same topic, and she didn’t engage in discussions in a respectful way.) To function well, groups – and society – need rules.

Also, if too many posts are auto-flagged by Facebook, the group risks being shut down.

…..

. (Especially if it has loose rules.) And splintering a community has consequences as well. (As I have seen over and over from being involved in community groups for a few decades.)

……

Note: He may also refer to one member who got banned. She wasn’t banned because she posted conspiracy theories (which she did). She was banned because she didn’t follow the group rules, and continued to go against the group rules even after this was pointed out to her. (She spammed the group by posting a lot on the same topic, and she didn’t engage in discussions in a respectful way.) To function well, groups – and society – need rules.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.