| |
| ▲ | lolc 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | From my read you said something different from what OP said. They voiced that there was a wiping of preference that was noticeable, where you said "it does this all the time." Sure both can describe the same thing, but they don't have to be. Why double down instead of accepting that this time it might be different? | | |
| ▲ | davidmurdoch 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Because this exact conspiracy has been going on since the elections for 2020. And it's well known and documented. Are you essentially asking me why I wouldn't encouFrage a conspiracy theory based on the anecdote of someone who says they hardly use the platform they are suggesting is forcing propaganda/censorship on them? There are polarizing events getting more coverage right now, by far, than anything else in the USA, and HN user infecto is subscribing to the idea that the algorithm isn't going to try to check if these important ongoing events interest them. It's very unlikely that "this time might be different"; the far more likely answer is that this is run-of-the-mill algorithm exploration injection. Infecto replied me I said "you are wrong". I didn't. My original comment was assuring, in good faith, made to let them know that TikTok changing theit FYP feed is normal. They hadn't yet mentioned they already knew about algo resets and that they were leaning in to the conspiracies. Their reply to me was not in good faith, and did not respond to the strongest possible interpretation of what I originally commented. | | |
| ▲ | infecto 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | > There are polarizing events getting more coverage right now, by far, than anything else in the USA, and HN user infecto is subscribing to the idea that the algorithm isn't going to try to check if these important ongoing events interest them. No conspiracy theory here. Long time user of TikTok. The sometimes part is that I am not hooked on it but I do use its regularly. I started using it after being a user on Douyin. Like I already said I have no input on the censorship but just anecdotally to me something’s dis change that was out of the norm for my usage that I never experienced before. If you want to say that’s normal ok but I am suggesting it was out of the norm as a long long time user. Not sure why you are lumping me with a conspiracy theory just sharing a datapoint that something did change weather on purpose or not. Sorry to offend you but please don’t misread and lump me into a conspiracy! I explicitly said I had no opinion or datapoint on the censorship but there was a massive change in the feed. Wild how many hoops you are jumping through here. You continue to call out my own experience as wrong and now pump me into a conspiracy theorist. Nutty. | | |
| ▲ | davidmurdoch 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | > sometimes use tiktok
> use it regularly That's not how these words work. A reasonable person wouldn't think these phrases are interchangeable when taking about something addictive -- in this case TicTok. Someone who "smokes sometimes" and someone who "smokes regularly" are very different groups. This isn't an attack; I understand you now, I'm just trying to get you to see where I was coming from. > Like I already said I ... that I never experienced before. You had not said that yet, you just said I said you were wrong. > this was entirely different and coincided in time with the complaints of censorship. If you think this statement isn't reasonably interpreted as you implying and leaning in to, or in the very least encouraging, this conspiracy theory, then I think you are being disingenuous. I was trying to provide helpful information by giving someone who only "sometimes" uses tiktok some assurance that these changes are typical. | | |
| ▲ | infecto 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Please stop backpedaling and attacking me. You don’t know me and you have not acknowledged the lies you have already used for absolutely no reason. I apologize my words upset you that was not my intent but I am concerned you continue going down this route. You’re reading into my words far deeper than you should. I have used the App for a long time off and on but enough to know something changed whether intentional or not over the last week. I already stated in the very beginning that I have no comment or opinion on the censorship. That’s not my corner of the world but was sharing an anecdote that something most definitely changed in my feed around the same time. Could be related or not but it coincides with the timeline. Even with the timeline similarity it may simply be a bug in the recommendation engine. I was only sharing an anecdote and no it was not exploration injection. The anecdote was just that my experience and saying it follows the same timeline is not suggesting a conspiracy is happening but that yes something happened/broke in the feed and it aligns with my timeline. Please stop attacking me. I have apologized for my words already they carried no ill intent but still amazed how you continue to invalidate my experience while also attacking me. Maybe you should take some of your advice. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | "I said you were right" is not doubling down, and looks like an accurate description of the conversation to me. OP got hostile for no good reason. If it's different, they can talk about how it's different instead of going on the attack against someone that listened and tried to provide information. | | |
| ▲ | infecto 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | No hostility just amazing how I can share a datapoint as a long time user that something did interrupt the feed engine in a negative way and I get told it’s normal when in my experience it’s not. | | |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don't understand. Why is that amazing? Sloppy analogy time: Imagine you came in and said your vacuum cleaner broke and someone said "Yeah, that brand loses suction after six months, it's obnoxious." They're telling you it's normal for that type of vacuum, but they're not calling you wrong, they're trying to agree with you. If your problem is different, go ahead and correct them, but they're not denying your lived experience! (And don't say they should have inferred you knew about that behavior and known you meant this was different. That's too close to expecting someone to read your mind. Especially when your original post didn't mention you were a long time user with enough dedication to notice that.) | | |
| ▲ | infecto 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | I usually try to steer clear from replying to your full time posting but cmon. I am saying this experience has nothing to do with exploration injection. Could I have replied differently, sure but they also are whipping up some wild conspiracy theories and I have no time to be associated with that. | | |
| ▲ | 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > I am saying this experience has nothing to do with exploration injection. Yes. But the guy you're talking to had no way to know that, and you shouldn't have taken insult at what he said. > wild conspiracy theories What? Edit: Also for your first sentence, have we been in an argument or something? But apparently I've made 5 comments a day all-time and 7.6 comments a day in the last year. If that's full time then I need to become a brand promotion contractor ASAP. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | davidmurdoch 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Thanks. Though I do admit that my swipe back at them about "touching grass" was out of line. |
|
|
|
