DiscussMormonism.com

https://phys.org/news/2019-11-conspirac ... DwkTGl0M0U

Our aim was to find out the main differences between users who post in r/conspiracy (a subreddit dedicated to conspiracy theories) and other Reddit users.

Using a technique called sentiment analysis we examined what users said, and where they said it, during the months before their first post in r/conspiracy.

We compared these posts to those of other users who started posting on Reddit at the same time, and in the same subreddits, but without going on to post in r/conspiracy.

We then constructed a network of the subreddits through which r/conspiracy posters traveled. In doing so, we were able to discover how and why they reached their destination.

Good article, Mak. Thanks for posting it.

Doesn't everyone self-select?

Dr. Shades wrote:Doesn't everyone self-select?

Sure, to some extent. I think the point of the paper is that people don't just wander in to online conspiracy forums and get sucked into conspiracy theories. "Conversion" to a conspiracy theory happens by some other mechanism, then they seek out online conspiracy forums. So, say, if I'm a parent and I don't want my kids getting sucked into conspiracy theories, trying to prevent them from, say, reading r/conspiracy will probably be ineffective. Likewise, removing conspiracy theorist forums from social media is likely to be an ineffective strategy to keep people from becoming conspiracy theorists.

Okay, thanks.

But weren't conspiracy theorists the ones who uncovered Operation Paperclip and the Tuskeegee Experiments?

If so, remind me again why conspiracy theorists are bad?

Dr. Shades wrote:Okay, thanks.

But weren't conspiracy theorists the ones who uncovered Operation Paperclip and the Tuskeegee Experiments?

If so, remind me again why conspiracy theorists are bad?

Conspiracies exist, but the sort of people who get labeled conspiracy theorists tend not to be the ones to uncover them. Conspiracy theory strongly connotes belief in fanciful plots.

I feel like you're being defensive of conspiracy theorists here because you are into a variety of conspiracy theories yourself.

Dr. Shades wrote:Okay, thanks.

But weren't conspiracy theorists the ones who uncovered Operation Paperclip and the Tuskeegee Experiments?

If so, remind me again why conspiracy theorists are bad?

Because they're wrong almost all of the time. The examples you mentioned aren't really conspiracy theories. When there are hundreds and even thousands of people involved, the truth is bound to get out, which means people can start connecting the dots that actually exist.

Conspiracy theorists who get a bad rap are the ones who imagine dots where none exist.

EAllusion wrote:I feel like you're being defensive of conspiracy theorists here because you are into a variety of conspiracy theories yourself.

Sources for the enquiring mind?

- Doc

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:

EAllusion wrote:I feel like you're being defensive of conspiracy theorists here because you are into a variety of conspiracy theories yourself.

Sources for the enquiring mind?

- Doc

The board's search engine was broken for data purposes, so it's hard to get the deep cuts. He is/was a 911 truther, for one. That one probably is easy to find in his posting history.

I notice they conveniently left off Mormon Discussions and Sic et Non. How deep does this conspiracy go?