Well put.

Thx. It’s always challenging to try to think out loud in English (hence why I try to do it, and why I also try to post on my blog in English too)

Everybody thought I was being a schizo. Fair though.

I did not. I hesitated between two options concerning those posts of yours :

• Either you were making it uselessly difficult for people to understand you because you were losing control over your ‘weapon’ and even maybe even your projected smart tactic. Which is OK, the only persons that never fail are the not that never do anything.
• Or you were just… too serious about it. Against that, there is not much one can do.

But I certainly did not mind your project of creating some… disruption.

Maybe you can see I’m not much of fan of shocking readers. I consider a gift that anyone is kind enough to spend their time reading what I write.

Following that logic, I will much rather invite them, if I manage to, to get a taste of a sometimes different point of view than (try) to slap them in the face, or kick them in the ass. I don’t think violence is a very efficient tool, in most situations.

It’s a bit like a few people silently downvoting my post. I mean, I see them as people trying to say they don’t agree with me (which is OK) but that are also so shy they can’t say in what manner they don’t agree. Which makes them disagreeing rather useless as

1. I really don’t mind people disagreeing with me. It’s even a good sign, at least if we want to live in a free society, to be aware we’re not all sharing the same views and values and we can all express our opinions.
2. If anyone wants help me understand why their think I’m mistaken, or why I need to change my mind on something I said I need to hear actual arguments. I need facts to consider and to discuss. Not applause or booing (is that a word?). I’m not a performer doing his show, I share my ideas and opinions no matter how clumsy or stupid they are, or are not.

The herds (or artificial social cliques) you just defined are literally being aligned.

I will first need to check how it’s defined in the context of the site you linked to. But how I would understand it (as them being instrumentalized and polarized) I think the question we need to ask is two folds: by whom and, much harder to answer, for what purpose?

I would also be tempted to say the only way to try to find an answer to those questions is by comparing with other similar situations. How crowds (notice how they’re almost always angry) are regularly used to silent difficult opponents. How they are used to create distraction from what is really at stake. But like I said, I will need to read your link first.

That’s one of the still living parts of the internet you mentioned, and I’d recommend a visit if you’re still looking

I am, today more than ever.

Thx for sharing the link. I’ll read it.