Loading…
8
Hot take: old forum threads beat facebook groups for conspiracy talk
I used to hang out on a little forum in 2011 called Above Top Secret and the debates there felt way more thought out than anything I see now. People would post a claim about JFK or chemtrails and you'd get 40 replies with links and timelines instead of just yelling. Last week I watched two guys in a facebook group go at it for 200 comments about the moon landings and nobody brought up a single source. The old format forced you to slow down and type out your reasoning, which weeded out half the junk before it even posted. Am I the only one who misses when a good thread could go 12 pages deep without someone's cousin jumping in with a meme?
1 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In1 Comment
king.jordan18d ago
Man, you nailed it with the "forced you to slow down" part and I want to push that even further. On those old forums you had to actually build a case before you hit post, and if you got something wrong, somebody would quote your exact words three pages later and take it apart piece by piece. That fear of getting quoted kept everyone sharper, because your dumb take stuck around with your username attached forever. Facebook groups are built for speed and feelings, so the second someone drops a link the algorithm buries it under twenty reactions and nobody ever reads past the first line. The old thread format also let a conversation breathe for weeks, so a guy could come back with new info and the whole debate would shift instead of dying in an hour. We basically traded depth for convenience and I'm not sure most people even noticed what got lost.
10