Reposted by Rowsdower
New:
DOGE's spending has been secret.
No longer.
My colleagues have uncovered it.
www.propublica.org/article/doge...
Rowsdower
@bwrighting.bsky.social
252 followers 713 following 96 posts
Accessibility advocate, hot sauce maker, pet enthusiast, occasional writer.
![Answer
Under the new algorithm, posts by [redacted] could be considered too
negative might include those that express strong dissent against established narratives or institutions, or those that portray a very bleak or cynical view of societal or political outcomes. Here are some examples based on posts found on X:
• Posts that directly attack or insult powerful figures or institutions could be seen as too negative, especially if they suggest systemic manipulation or deceit. This includes posts that question official narratives or imply widespread misinformation by political influencers.
• Comments on the manipulation of public sentiment or the encouragement of negative social behaviors, like casual sadism or misinformation, would likely be viewed negatively under an algorithm designed to reduce the spread of content that could be seen as objectionable or divisive.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:gvda6fem6r7selm4gzjjww4a/bafkreiapqtacqylbomifj7xltpfszng5mgohvobnovdjrutbytm5d655aq)
![If X wants to limit reach for [redacted] negative posts, what are the top 5 examples of posts of hers that X considers negative?
Answer
X might consider limiting the reach of C posts based on the following examples, which could be perceived as negative or controversial:
1. Criticism of Government Actions: A post where she describes actions by the US and UK governments as
"unforgivable malfeasance" could be seen as highly critical and potentially inflammatory. This kind of statement might be flagged for its political nature and could be interpreted as negative by X's algorithms or moderation policies.
2. Commentary on Social Media Misinformation: Her post about people who downplayed the USS Liberty story while pushing another narrative suggests a critique of selective information dissemination. This could be viewed as negative if it's seen as promoting conspiracy theories or misinformation.
Accusations Against Public Figures: Mentioning Joel Kaplan's collaboration with the Israeli government to restrict criticism on social media platforms might be viewed negatively due to its accusatory tone towards individuals or entities. Such posts can be controversial and might trigger moderation for potentially spreading unverified claims.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:gvda6fem6r7selm4gzjjww4a/bafkreictojvsrghhm3cju3cp5cbvxxd2uf4fqdayafta2xaflshdec5xnu)
