RE: WE NEED A WILD WEST IN SOCIAL MEDIA... SADLY STEEMIT AIN'T IT.
Interesting topic!
While I fully support freedom of speech, I do not think wild west ALL free flowing opinions will solve the concerns that you have brought up. Why? Lack of regulations, policies or rules (since all free flowing) will lead to chaos and abuse of freedom. I have seen this case many times in my country.
People march along the streets as protest against the government for some petty matters. They blame the government because they do not have this and that. They cause commotion, add to our already killing traffic problem and cause inconveniences to many who are minding their own business. But if you try to dig deeper into what they are fighting for, it boils down to their laziness. And if you tell them about the bigger problem that they bring, their answer is that they are exercising their right to freedom of speech. The heck with their rights and freedom. Causing more trouble to others is abuse of freedom!
There is no difference in social media. If we strike all controlling factors, there will be bigger problems. Instead of striking all controls, the governing body should instead revisit and revise those controls so all legit and humane reasons are considered.
Hmmm. An interesting take. So in regards to your statement
"The heck with their rights and freedom. Causing more trouble to others is abuse of freedom!"
The way I can't help but look at it is as follows. If you feel that others expressing a view or opinion is an inconvenience then what is the root? Somewhere it will be down to a conflict with your ideals and/or what you see as the correct mode of behaving or voicing beliefs or disgruntlement. That mode you see as appropriate is not what is adhered to or is causing inconvenience to others so it's abuse of freedom. I'm sorry but this is flawed logic to an extent. If you were wishing to express an idea in a crowd or as part of one then the other side could just as easily state you are abusing your freedoms as well. I'm not saying people don't act irrationally, or use freedom of speech as an excuse to do irrational things. I'm simply stating that voicing ones views or opinions as long as it is peaceful should be permitted. No matter how much we disagree with it.
The statement you made:
"There is no difference in social media. If we strike all controlling factors, there will be bigger problems. Instead of striking all controls, the governing body should instead revisit and revise those controls so all legit and humane reasons are considered."
Again I disagree. Social media unlike a protest houses opinions and creates a space where there are no bullets, no damaged properties, no harmed bodies. A line is created between the virtual world and the one outside of your front door. IF someone chooses to act irrationally on flawed logic then that is their choice. Asking for more governance to govern what we as human beings should govern ourselves seems.... well, cyclic. We have been begging people to govern for us for centuries and it doesn't work out to well. Vertical collectivism still exist. The Hegelian dialect is still used for purposes of control and division with the population. Person versus person and a benevolent nod from an outside party dictates what occurs and who is right. But abuses of all sorts across a broad range of spectrums still occur. Why is this? Isn't an act of supreme laziness to outsource our morality? To ask others to make decisions and deem which opinions mean what and are legitimate? Is it really that horrifying a concept that we should each take responsibility for our own views and being willing to test their worth against others in an open and transparent non violent environment? Or god forbid have an open dialogue about all things without restraint and see where it goes without an outside party holding controls like an impatient parent? Do we really believe ourselves to be children incapable of self management or real self governance? The experiment of absolute free flowing debate without moderation in a non physical environment hasn't happened yet. Others expressing their point of view causing pressure isn't an abuse of freedom. It's a biproduct of freedom itself. Every ecosystem around us evolves on the basis of pressure. Pressure begets growth. Now are people lazy? Yep. If given the choice many tend to be. Belief in a need to be governed and outsourcing personal responsibility for generations can do that. It's a biproduct of governance by outside parties. I do appreciate your comment and can see where you're coming from. But I'm by no means eager or do I feel that human growth should be stifled simply because we still believe in the myth that we need governance or an outside party to judge the worth of what people say. I could be wrong. Perhaps human beings aren't that mature. Perhaps a world where a selected few decide what can be said and can't be said should be the model. Perhaps we really do need to clutch our blankets and put our thumbs in our mouths and cry for moderation because what some one SAID online upset us. Dunno. But what I can say is that for 10,000 years of human beings begging for governance it hasn't worked out terribly well.