Across the Credabyss

The dark fantasy of an evil twin brother to Facebook may come to lodge inside the inflating vacuum of influences vintage to this post credible century. It may inhabit a place once reserved for reporters who arbitrated once definable and containable questions like:

Can the public handle the truth about...?"

Facial truth may arrive without malevolent intentions. Some may even be noble in their naivete. For instance, it may be a libertarian impulse from the Good List of Craigs. If no one knows what breeds we kennel on the Internet then surely there's a universal understanding that flies under the longest of tails we wave. In the book of Craig, what people do in their uninhibited privacy is not only their own business but endows the publisher with the right of keeping their total headcounts under the roof of a one SF-based Victorian.

It may be the egalitarian bromide of the net neutrality sage who believes that all data packets were created equal under a Constitution that protects free speech by splitting the difference between the right to remain silent and the right to remain anonymous.

It may be a social media partisan who believes that transparency, consensus, and may-the-best-idea win are all wrapped and sealed in the protective popularity of a Survey Monkey referendum.

It most certainly is a loyal Wikipedia correspondent who adheres to the sacred tenets of the ancient disciple scribbles. Thou shalt do no original research (or synthesis of two or more existing ideas) in the unquestioning isolation of their passive voice and their hollow curiosity.

With those seeds in motion is the particle-smashing collision that awaits this doubting world be that surprising? Would we really be spinning off the orbit we're on now to subscribe to a site where:

Alias predators post dubious half-truths that only needs a popular vote to determine how convinced the fence-sitters are that they're getting the whole story.

How would we stop these allegations?

As Andrew Morris-Friedman imagines the only way to lower the temperature without changing the subject is to post even more reprehensible stuff to attract even higher scores. One can't see their accusers unless they suffer the fools of self-effacement. That's how we actually identify our detractors in a world devoid of credibility -- by being our own worst enemies.