I assume you think you're not in these sections?

And probably a lot of people in those sections say the same about your section, right?

I think nobody's immune. And if anyone is especially vulnerable, it's those who can be persuaded that they have access to insider info. Those who are flattered and feel important when invited to closed meetings.

It's much easier to fool a few than to fool many, so ,private manipulation - convincing someone of something they should not talk about with regular people because they wouldn't understand, you know - is a lot more powerful than public manipulation.

▲

pjc50 21 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> I assume you think you're not in these sections? And probably a lot of people in those sections say the same about your section, right?

You're saying this a lot in this thread as a sort of gotcha, but .. so what? "You are not immune to propaganda" is a meme for a reason.

> private manipulation - convincing someone of something they should not talk about with regular people because they wouldn't understand, you know - is a lot more powerful than public manipulation

The essential recruiting tactic of cults. Insider groups are definitely powerful like that. Of course, what tends in practice to happen as the group gets bigger is you get end-to-end encryption with leaky ends. The complex series of Whatapp groups of the UK conservative party was notorious for its leakiness. Not unreasoable to assume that there are "insiders" group chats everywhere. Except in financial services where there's been a serious effort to crack down on that since LIBOR.

▲

intended 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Would it make any difference to you, if I said I had actual subject matter expertise on this topic?

Or would that just result in another moving of the goal posts, to protect the idea that everyone is fooled, and that no one is without sin, and thus standing to speak on the topic?

▲

vintermann 20 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There are a lot of self-described experts who I'm sure you agree are nothing of the sort. How do I tell you from them, fellow internet poster?

This is a political topic, in the sense that there are real conflicts of interest here. We can't always trust that expertise is neutral. If you had your subject matter expertise from working for FSB, you probably agree that even though your expertise would then be real, I shouldn't just defer to what you say?

▲

NoGravitas 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm not OP, but I would find it valuable, if given the details and source of claimed subject matter expertise.

▲

intended 17 hours ago | parent [-]

Ugh. Put up or shut up I guess. I doubt it would be valuable, and likely a doxxing hazard. Plus it feels self-aggrandizing.

Work in trust and safety, managed a community of a few million for several years, team’s work ended up getting covered in several places, later did a masters dissertation on the efficacy of moderation interventions, converted into a paper. Managing the community resulted in being front and center of information manipulation methods and efforts. There are other claims, but this is a field I am interested in, and would work on even in my spare time.

Do note - the rhetorical set up for this thread indicates that no amount of credibility would be sufficient.

	▲	eudamoniac 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		So basically a reddit mod?