Channel Apps
11 months ago
scott@loves.tech
In the early days of the internet, we used to have this thing called a joke. You would casually say something that was obviously so false it would be impossible, and people would laugh over the shear absurdity of it. 

Now, everyone takes everyone else literally, and we have this weird situation where people tell a joke and other people think they were being serious. 

What is even odder is that some of the people who take things literally repeat those jokes as fact because they don't realize the original absurd statement was a joke.
10 months ago
atomsk@hub.netzgemeinde.eu
In order to have real high quality humor you need a strong in-group. Because sarcasm, and most importantly self-sarcasm, is a crucial component of it. The weaker a group becomes the less dissent can it afford, even in the form of jokes. Both mainstream and "safe alternative" social media platforms have been banning people for jokes for more than a decade now.
You can see the same effect irl in failing countries that turn ultra petty oppressive the more the central authority loses power.
10 months ago
scott@loves.tech
Good point. If you are part of the group, there is usually an assumption that you mean well, and other people in the same group will give often you the benefit of the doubt. Whereas outsiders are often seen as distrusted, suspect, and inferior to group members. "Insiders are smart. Outsiders are idiots." That sort of thinking.

A perfect example is when someone in the group says something, and someone outside the group says the same exact thing. You will often see people agree with insider, and attack the outsider, even if they said the exact same words.

So, I can see that happening with jokes too. If an outsider is assumed to be an idiot, then their statement would not be a joke, but instead be some stupid delusion. Whereas if an insider said the same thing, they must be mocking the outsiders who are idiots, so it is funny.

So, some of that may be in play too.
10 months ago
scott@loves.tech
@Sebastian Taile
You can see the same effect irl in failing countries that turn ultra petty oppressive the more the central authority loses power.

I have found that there are three types of people (although #1 and #2 can switch places):

1. Oppressors.
2. The oppressed that want to oppress others themselves.
3. People who truly want to end oppression.

The problem is that even if #1 and #2 swap places, you wind up with a situation where the new boss is the same as the old boss. Just a new oppressor in a long line of oppressors, perhaps with different groups being oppressed this time. The cycle of abuse and violence continuing on until they eventually get overthrown by the people they oppress when then become the new oppressors.

That is why you see a lot of ultra petty oppressiveness when the central authority loses power. Group #2 sees their chance to seize power and become the new oppressors. Of course, they don't look at it that way. "It is justice," they say. But if they are acting just like the oppressors, what does that make them?

And these people can't take a joke because you are either with them or you are against them. And if you are an enemy, anything you say can and will be used against you, even if you meant well.