Why didn't twitter add a warning label to this MSNBC tweet?

rojo wrote:

Precious Roy wrote:

You need to learn the difference between IFR and CFR. ...

MSNBC is clearly using CFR.

No I don't . MSNBC does.

They are clearly using CFR and they are using it incorrectly. The # of projected deaths coming in a herd immunity scenario must be based off of IFR.

Daniel Son wrote:

Also, you’re a joke. Why don’t you focus more on the false information being spread ON YOUR OWN WEBSITE

I'd be happy to.

Unlike twitter and unlike facebook if you believe there is something that needs to be taken down, you can pick up the phone and call us. Do this right now. 844-538-7786. Hit ext 3 and you'll be ringing my cell phone. Good luck getting the founder of twitter on the line.

Please call me and me what posts need to come down and I'll look into it.

10/10

Listen to Gault and your brother. The Covid talk is tiresome.

Rojo, are your "membership" enrollments and coaching requests lower than you might expect? This is why. You sound like a crazy person and foster an environment on this forum that attracts crazy people. No one wants to do anything to financially support you directly, because this is what you represent.

Working Stiff wrote:

Rojo, are your "membership" enrollments and coaching requests lower than you might expect? This is why. You sound like a crazy person and foster an environment on this forum that attracts crazy people. No one wants to do anything to financially support you directly, because this is what you represent.

Sounds about right.

appleswan. wrote:

Although this was completely unfounded, Twitter ignored it. Honestly they wouldn't have the time to take a fair look if that's the standard they set.

There is a difference between unfounded and false. The MSNBC statement is simply false by anyone who understands statistics, admittedly which is a small percentage of the population.

A CNN reporter made a similar tweet but once he/she was given the facts similar to what I have given her, they deleted the tweet.

Working Stiff wrote:

Rojo, are your "membership" enrollments and coaching requests lower than you might expect? This is why. You sound like a crazy person and foster an environment on this forum that attracts crazy people. No one wants to do anything to financially support you directly, because this is what you represent.

Please tell me what I represent. I'm serious. Again, please give me a call. I hate when people talk about what I represent but they can't give a concrete example of what's wrong. We've devoted a TON of resources to trying to get better and quicker at moderating in recent years. Yet we get vague complaints or the from L O who was complaining about about posts that our moderators actually deleted.

What I represent is free thought and open debate. I'm one of the few people who enjoys watching MSNBC and listening to Rush Limbaugh. It disgusts me that people now can go throughout their day and live in their silors whether it's Fox News/Rush Limbaugh or MSNBC/NY Times. I want people to actually think about things an d not be a slave to the robots or group think.

I don't think if one is pro-life that means they have to be pro-tax cuts or if they are pro-capitalism that they need to be anti-enviornment or if one thinks racism is a real problem in this country that they have to want to defund the police.

When I a major news organzation vastly over exaggerating the worst-case scenario for Covid-19 by a factor of roughly 400%, it disturbs me. The lack of understanding of basic statistics isn't doing us any favors in this country.

But the reality is, most people - left or right - can't admit any mistakes. One of the reasons why I love Jonathan Gault is he's open minded. This is a weird analogy but when I took him to the Baltimore - New England football game and his team got trounced, he was able to sit there an objectively analyze the game. I remember there was some officiating call that was up for debate and unlike your typical sports crazed person, he turned to me and said, "***" I can't remember what but it was very much against his team.

MSNBC screwed up her big time. So has twitter. That doesn't mean fox news or facebook doesn't screw up more. I just asked the question.

What disturbs me is so many left-leaning people can't just come on here and say, "Rojo, you are right. They

Now don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying people on the left are unique in this regard. Plenty of people on the right are like this. But please focus on what I'm talking about please.

I know you likely think I'm way right wing but there is a reason why I dind't vote for John McCain or Donald Trump.

rojo wrote:

What disturbs me is so many left-leaning people can't just come on here and say, "Rojo, you are right. They

Now don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying people on the left are unique in this regard. Plenty of people on the right are like this. But please focus on what I'm talking about please.

Rojo, you are right. They

I’m totally focused on what you are talking about.

Working Stiff wrote:

Rojo, are your "membership" enrollments and coaching requests lower than you might expect? This is why. You sound like a crazy person and foster an environment on this forum that attracts crazy people. No one wants to do anything to financially support you directly, because this is what you represent.

Nope

Because social media is attempting to sway the election the other way this time. Everyone complains about the Russians pushing for Trump, and yet Democrats completely ignore the $200 million ActBlue is getting from untraceable, unemployed donors.

You acting like you don't know what I'm talking about is silly.

This is a running website! And you represent it. Your name cannot be removed from this website's reputation.

However clear you think you sounded on your post, it was not clear. It was convoluted, over-complicated, and sounded like the rantings of a crazy person trying to convince people of a grand conspiracy. When you link things, it's always either extremely sketchy or obviously hardcore right wing. Any time your not talking about running, that's how you sound. That's what you represent on these boards and that's the type of thing you attract. This is where you can come and discuss crazy conspiracies. Wouldn't "excellent running related content analysis" be a better reputation to have? The most common thing people say about this site is "if you can weed through all the crazy there's actually some decent running content buried in there".

I'm not going to call you directly. I've listened to your podcast. You sound crazy there too whenever the topic isn't running. It's all Gault can do to not just call you a nut job while he's trying to keep you on topic.

Keep it to running and do what you can to decrease the amount of conspiracy nonsense on your boards if you'd like to improve your site's reputation and get more business for your very good running related stories and products. The other stuff here is loony and makes most normal people feel uncomfortable.

This is what the Alt Left presents. Try to silence any voices who goes against the narrative. It's going to get ugly your ilk will predictably blame it on President Trump.

Joggergal wrote:

So if we accept your figure of .6 percent then we allegedly have 1,290,00 deaths. Any strategy that results in that would be OK as long as Donald gets re-elected. That likely would be the true feelings of most of Donald’s supporters.

Yeah like how .6% of Swedens population died in their March to herd immunity. Oh wait it was only .06%. Who cares a factor of ten is close for fear mongering when it comes to COVID. There is no Scientific information to support anywhere close to .6% IFR. Just misinformation and incorrect models created by a variety of sources.

Scientific Observer wrote:

This is what the Alt Left presents. Try to silence any voices who goes against the narrative. It's going to get ugly your ilk will predictably blame it on President Trump.

Yeah man. Hoping to get my Soros direct deposit in a few business days. This niche running website has been a big target of ours for a long time. You my friend, are not crazy. It's all real!

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

Joggergal wrote:

So if we accept your figure of .6 percent then we allegedly have 1,290,00 deaths. Any strategy that results in that would be OK as long as Donald gets re-elected. That likely would be the true feelings of most of Donald’s supporters.

Yeah like how .6% of Swedens population died in their March to herd immunity. Oh wait it was only .06%. Who cares a factor of ten is close for fear mongering when it comes to COVID. There is no Scientific information to support anywhere close to .6% IFR. Just misinformation and incorrect models created by a variety of sources.

Can you not read? Learn how to read. Rojo is the one who used the figure so take it up with him.

Working Stiff wrote:

Scientific Observer wrote:

This is what the Alt Left presents. Try to silence any voices who goes against the narrative. It's going to get ugly your ilk will predictably blame it on President Trump.

Yeah man. Hoping to get my Soros direct deposit in a few business days. This niche running website has been a big target of ours for a long time. You my friend, are not crazy. It's all real!

Scientific Onserver is a nut job and not very bright. The reason some of you on the right are annoying is because you are so stupid.

+1.

I wish this weren’t the case but it is.

Rojo is great. Not in the sense that he's right. In the sense that he is honest. He could easily keep quiet as to not get bashed by you overly critical people but he would rather say what he feels. That is a very respectable trait. He replies to everybody and I can tell he's trying. How do y'all expect one person to know everything? This is why he posts. For a different perspective.

Leftists are trying too dern hard to win this election and are being very scummy in regards to "fact checking" information and we saw their fascist tendencies through BLM org/movement. Sure Trump has fascist tendencies but the facts are that he is far less destructive than a lot of the left-wing movements that most leftists refuse to condemn. Right wingers are more open to ideas. I just got blocked by two leftists on social media for having a different opinion.

Just be clear. Is Let's Run asking how to hold a business accountable to the immense amount of terrible misinformation they allow to be published by their users? Even in the case of platform like tweeter what is probably impartial for practical purposes?

My mind is blown!

I agree with you Rojo, it should get a warning label. These people have got to be numerically illiterate.