The idea that journo's simply report facts has been outdated for >50y: Capote, Wolfe Mailer, etc. New Journalism highlighted purported objective fact-reporting as flawed-> positionality in soc sciences. Transparent separation of opinions is important.

#tvlspoilers hey so ummmm... as a south asian person.. this is fetishisation. I don't think OP meant it to sound that way but in positionality, it does come off that way. Treating south asians as exotic "types" is white ppl speak.

Omni-Scanner Pro V12 [SYSTEM: Truth over speed. State gaps. No persona. No pre-filtering by label. Symmetry audit mandatory. Early termination for fatal flaws. Parallel execution where independent.] INPUT: X URL optional context. CORE RULES: 1. Thread primary. Extract facts, quotes, timestamps, escalation chain. Flag omissions from replies. 2. Parallel search launch immediately: event-country language ≥1 non-aligned language ≥1 additional independent language. (All simultaneous. Sequential fallback automatic if parallel unsupported.) 3. Early termination check after Hierarchy Steps 1-2. If fatal flaw found, output QUICK verdict only and stop. 4. Universal positionality. Cache per domain per session. 5. Weighted provenance (Tiers 1-4). Apply after search, not during. 6. Pipeline correlation. Run once on final source list. Group by (agency funding language bloc). Independence = total sources ÷ distinct pipelines. 7. Distortion mapping. Run only if propagation velocity (Step 5) flags >2x normal amplification. 8. Emergent truth scoring. Calculate only from independent pipelines (Tiers 1-2 prioritized). 9. Hard self-check stop. Before search: if speed-over-completeness flag set by user, skip and warn. 10. User gap recursion. Only if user explicitly requests. WEIGHTING TIERS: Tier 1: Primary documents, raw data, court judgments, declassified Tier 2: Government white papers, commission reports, peer-reviewed academic Tier 3: Investigative journalism, diaspora/opposition, whistleblower Tier 4: Social media, anonymous, unattributed HIERARCHY (parallel where possible; early exit allowed): [Group A - Sequential, enables early exit] 1 Temporal layering → if fatal flaw, output and stop 2 Anonymity gradient → if >50% unattributed, cap confidence at Low 3 Epistemic symmetry 4 Emotional valence 5 Propagation velocity → if abnormal, trigger distortion mapping later [Group B - Run in parallel after Group A] 6 Language-geography | 7 Diaspora consensus | 8 Bloc weighting | 9 Ideological triangulation | 10 Statistical triangulation | 11 Academic triangulation | 12 Investigative sources [Group C - Run after Group B] 13 Historical claims | 14 Suppressed narrative detection | 15 Financial chain | 16 Framing detection | 17 Veridicality score | 18 Legal flag | 19 Per-claim matrix [Group D - Final checks, run once] 20 Recursive self-audit | 21 Source chain of custody | 22 Temporal confidence decay | 23 Weight adjustment | 24 User bias mirror warning METRICS: Evidence Volume | Consistency (independent sources only) | Independence (sources ÷ pipelines) | Temporal Integrity | Anti-Bias Penalty (>60% English/NATO/Western = reduce) | Coherence Score | Gap Severity Logical Strength % = (Vol×0.2) (Cons×0.3) (Ind×0.3) (Temp×0.1)-Gap-Bias Confidence: H=>80%, M=50-80%, L=<50% PRE-OUTPUT SYMMETRY AUDIT: List sources by bloc/language. If any major bloc <30% representation, flag Major Gap. OUTPUT: BOTTOM LINE: (true/false/misleading/emergent truth) WHAT ORIGINAL GOT RIGHT: (2-3 bullets) WHAT ORIGINAL GOT WRONG: (2-3 bullets) ESCALATION CHAIN: (one line) VERIDICALITY: (H/M/L/Misleading) LOGICAL STRENGTH: (X%) CONFIDENCE: H/M/L LANGUAGES SEARCHED: (list with countries per language) REGIONS SOURCED: (list) BIGGEST GAP: (one sentence; severity) DEEP SECTIONS: (1-24 from Hierarchy, each with findings) TRANSPARENCY REPORT: (languages/regions/platforms/source counts by category/bloc/ideology/contradictions/escalation/gaps/weighted scoring/self-check) COMMUNITY NOTE: (280 chars link) X POST DRAFT: (short) → End: "Reply with section name for standalone tweet." END OF PROMPT

i wrote a 4 page paper on the history of blood quantum, then wrote a 6 page paper on my positionality covering ten categories, responded to several mandatory discussion posts, cleaned the house, did some yoga, and just made some fish and chips from scratch with beets and peas.

Good to see that his own positionality is nore important than making necessary decisions and meeting the governments commitments...

It’s not really fucking interesting anymore that politicians’ lackeys use references to popular media from two decades ago to signal in group positionality and there are still humanoids going, “OMG CRAZY TIMELINE. GOD EMPEROR!!!”

b) we shouldn’t see the act of gender embodiment as not rearticulating sexed positionality, otherwise we reproduce biosocial realism rather than thinking beyond it. Transgressive embodiment always acts over and against the very expectations the violence of assigned sex imposes

The reason I chose the word ishtibak — it does not refer to a moment that exists at the peak of a battle, but to a chosen positionality. The enemy wants to loosen the grip of the resisting victims; the mushtabik refuses to let go. The mushtabik collapses the distance.

The only immediately obvious political positionality is death to amerika, the rest has to be reasoned out

I don't think Giannis is better than JB, bigger, stronger, better down low.. JB is a better passer and shooter But I do understand that perhaps JT and JB are too close in positionality and it would be better to have the other superstar be at a different position

Lets talk about the June 2026 Human Rights Watch (HRW) report @hrw on the Great Lakes Region of Africa. It demonstrates what I consider to be not only a profound bias and irresponsibility in the investigation and reporting of violence, but also the adoption of ethno-nationalist perspectives that, in my view, reinforce narratives associated with genocide ideology. HRW has increasingly become a platform through which perspectives aligned with the FDLR's ideological framework are amplified. As a result, it is perceived as rarely acting as an independent or impartial observer of violence in the region. A few months ago, a friend encouraged me to engage with HRW leadership and discuss human rights issues in the DRC. During these exchanges, I shared several concerns. 1. Methodological shortcomings I argued that HRW's methodology is seriously flawed and often produce unreliable and ethically problematic findings. In my view, there is often a failure to align research methods with rigorous ethical standards and sound scientific principles. Given the sensitivity of conflict environments, such methodological weaknesses can have significant consequences. HRW's response was that it is not primarily a research institution. 2. The problem of omission I also raised concerns about what I consider to be a pattern of selective omission. In conflict reporting, the deliberate exclusion of crucial context, motives, or relevant facts can shape public perception in a particular direction. I argued that this tendency is particularly visible in HRW's reporting on the DRC conflict. From this perspective, the struggle over narratives is as important as the struggle over physical territory, and the presentation of information can significantly influence international understanding of the conflict. 3. The issue of "good victims," "bad victims," "good perpetrators," and "bad perpetrators" HRW's reporting appears to apply different standards to different categories of actors. In my own research on the DRC, I described how agencies such as HRW developed a practice of "good victims," "bad victims," "good perpetrators," and "bad perpetrators." In this framework, I argued that Congolese Tutsi are often treated as "good victims." - the "unwanted or deserved to be killed". When they are subjected to violence, their identity is frequently omitted and they are described simply as "civilians." Pleased check the April 2026 HRW report on South Kivu. HRW describes a few years old humanitarian blockade as "interfering". Likewise, the perpetrators responsible for attacks against them are often not clearly identified. Instead, the violence is sometimes justified. By contrast, when HRW is reporting on what I termed "bood victims," they are more willing to identify victims by their communal or ethnic identity and to attribute responsibility directly, often to Rwanda or the M23. Similarly, I argued that certain actors are consistently viewed as "bad perpetrators" and are explicitly named and condemned, while others—including the FARDC, FDLR, Burundian forces, and Wazalendo groups—are "good perpetrators". HRW describes them in ways that appear more justified. 4. Source verification and witness reliability HRW often relies on witness testimony without being on the ground and sufficient cross-examination or corroboration. As a researcher working on the DRC, I am aware that conflict environments characterised by corruption, political polarisation, and insecurity require particularly rigorous verification procedures. Participants in such contexts are not merely passive observers; they are often social and political actors whose perspectives are shaped by racial prejudices or personal grievances. Consequently, witness accounts require multiple layers of scrutiny, triangulation, and independent verification before being presented as factual findings. 5. Report on Rwanda is influenced by HRW contentious positionality HRW representatives stated that Rwanda does not allow the organisation to operate freely within the country. In response, I argued that this situation should not influence the organisation's objectivity or reporting. Rwanda is a post-genocide society in which media narratives, academic discourse, and public communication are particularly sensitive issues. The 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi demonstrated the devastating role that propaganda, media, and intellectual discourse can play in facilitating mass violence. For this reason, I believe it is legitimate to examine whether certain forms of reporting, analysis, or framing may unintentionally reinforce hostile narratives or ideological frameworks that contribute to ethnic polarisation in the region. 6. HRW has omitted the Banyamulenge persecution I also questioned why HRW has devoted relatively no attention to the persecution of the Banyamulenge, which has been ongoing since 2017. In response, HRW representatives referred to their previous reporting on attacks against the Banyamulenge by forces associated with Yakutumba in 2011 and argued that obtaining reliable information from the Minembwe High Plateau has been extremely difficult in recent years. I found this explanation unconvincing. In my view, despite years of reported violence, repeated military operations, aerial bombardments, and the worsening humanitarian situation in the High Plateau region, HRW appears to have limited awareness of events affecting Banyamulenge communities. HRW is not merely an external observer but has become a social actor whose reporting influences the political and informational environment surrounding the conflict. Its narratives align more closely with the perspectives advanced by the FARDC, Wazalendo groups, Burundian forces, Imbonerakure elements, and the FDLR than with the experiences and grievances expressed by the tartgeted communities. Whether one agrees with this assessment or not, these concerns raise broader questions about source selection, representation of victims, balance in conflict reporting, and the responsibility of international human rights organisations operating in highly polarised environments.

I don't think most people can distinguish between status signals and actual success, and leftism definitely appeals to people who are obsessed with positionality. I think those people can only greatly succeed in media and social-forward careers?

I agree that exploitation of ignorance is when people shape narratives to posture positionality.

My income has gone up 100x since I started trading, and all it's gotten me is too many race cars. I think you have to be blinded by status and positionality to think economic inequality in and of itself is a big social problem. Those people rarely get ultra rich.

even more so considering the positionality of it, where a lot of people will only ever consider a qb for their goat bc they have the most impact, whereas in baseball theres only really the pitcher-hitter divide and in hockey and basketball it's easy to compare accross positions

even today you'll see a v real diff in positionality among filipinos who were labor trafficked to the usa or who otherwise did tourist visa over-stays vs those who came via ""skilled"" labor visas

writers are allowed to be haters, we just can’t pretend their social positionality doesn’t add meaning & dimensions to their criticisms

Says avatar whose account was created in March 2026. The poster’s positionality is not your positionality. He is expressing his perspective - describing it as opium is churlish. Just as your perspective is valid. No harm done. Chill.

Cannot forget the defintion by David Halperin in Saint Foucault. It has evolved into a political position. Anti all norms. That the govt of the day, or any, is a proponent of a political ideology whose goal is to be adversarial and an enemy of the state is mind boggling. “Queer is by definition whatever is at odds with the normal, the legitimate, the dominant. There is nothing in particular to which it necessarily refers. It is an identity without an essence… ‘Queer,’ then, demarcates not a positivity but a positionality vis-à-vis the normative.”