The trouble is that "worse society" is defined by the preferences of the speaker, not the aggregate preferences of everyone in society including the thousands (millions?) of users contently using Twitter in ways the speaker dislikes.
>The trouble is that "worse society" is defined by the preferences of the speaker, not the aggregate preferences of everyone in society including the thousands (millions?) of users contently using Twitter in ways the speaker dislikes.
Yeah, and what's the issue with that?
The very idea behind a "society" is that its members take certain decisions about whats OK and what's not. Not everybody has to agree, but everybody can try to convince society for what he thinks it's best or what should be stopped.
That "millions are doing it" is also not an argument. 2/3 of Americans did smoke, and yet it's now banned in most public places and looked down upon. Thousands of businesses did "seggregation" too.
What Alex does is start a discussion and voice his dislike and wish for X to stop. He doesn't rule over anybody, and doesn't force people to stop X with violence.
I don't see how that's problematic at all. If my ideal society is different from that of most other people, it still doesn't mean I'm not entitled to my own opinion.
I'm not suggesting that he's not entitled to his opinion and to voice it. I just think that it's a poor justification for action, and it's also slightly troubling for someone to earnestly desire a service with which millions of people are happy to disappear because it would make that one person happy.
