3 ms·

>>> "You will change the atmosphere by yelling "fire" in a crowded theater and once it's done, there is no going back." >>> "Posturing language exists to make

>>> "You will change the atmosphere by yelling "fire" in a crowded theater and once it's done, there is no going back." >>> "Posturing language exists to make a claim to credibility. It serves a real purpose and is used in an instrumental way, for the purpose of conducting business on the terms of those who use it." >>> "enabling their threats to be real to some degree." >>> "There is no reason to deny him the possibility of simply being a bad human being who is in need of careful monitoring by society." Do you realize what you're advocating here? Also, referencing "fire in a crowded theater" is usually looked upon as a canary for those who don't know what they're talking about in regards to free speech

ossreality 11y ago
I sure don't? Mind not being cryptic? Are we really going to have this stupid god damn conversation again? Threatening speech is not protected. Acting like a fucking jackass might be protected speech but it doesn't protect you from the forum of public opinion. Ironically, pretty much everytime I see someone whining about free speech, they're talking about it non-governmental contexts... the ultimate irony of you telling others they don't know what they're talking about. If you're a jerk to people and then backpeddle with "it's a joke", you're still a jerk, and you're still not welcome in any space I curate. edit: And now elsewhere you're calling people unempathic for being upset with him. Dude, he might have been raised by narcissists but at some point you have to take responsibility for how you act. He's repeatedly done very unstable, aggressive things. If he's not actually slightly sociopathic, he's a huge asshole and I literally can not for the life of me imagine why you'd be vaguely defending him.
- pdeuchler 11y ago
  we don't jail people for being "slightly sociopathic" "assholes", we jail them for breaking the law. Attempting to construe someone's unrelated speech, even as sociopathic as it may come off, as justification for jailing them (remember, for securities fraud) is terribly dishonest and a very dangerous slippery slope. Also, by the way, threatening speech is technically protected under the first amendment [1]. Dunno why you brought up the government/public opinion topic. Here's a lawyer, something I am not, on the matter, although I think we're devolving from my initial point: [0] https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackneyed-apologia-for-censorship-are-enough/ https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackne... [1] https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackneyed-apologia-for-censorship-are-enough/ https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackne... To address my empathy comment, I think it's in very poor taste to declare someone "sociopathic" (i.e. shades of mentally ill) if you're not a doctor, close friend/family member, or otherwise licensed professional. Doubly so to make such a judgement based off a small sampling of online commentary. We should all strive to be empathetic and employ a principle of charity when making such judgements, especially before we know the facts.
  - ossreality 11y ago
    So it's a great thing that the SEC investigation began over a year ago. >Doubly so to make such a judgement based off a small sampling of online commentary. Just because you're ignorant about Martin doesn't mean the rest of us are. I just am absolutely aghast at you keeping this up. Just go Google him, read a couple articles and get over it. Stop acting like this is some secret accusation that you don't have the evidence for. >Dunno why you brought up the government/public opinion topic. Because "Free speech" has fuck all to do with anything being discussed in this thread? Unless you're really saying that this investigation that began before he was ever in the news is about "silencing" Martin. Seriously, do you know a single thing about him or his company? I'm sorry I said he was slightly sociopathic. Let me rephrase "He has, on multiple occasions, acted similarly to how classic sociopaths act". ...... yeah, everyone cool now? >We should all strive to be empathetic and employ a principle of charity when making such judgements, especially before we know the facts. And I should empathize with The Westboro Baptist Church and try to "understand" them instead of just investing in efforts that oppose them, eh? I'm tired of this "you have to tolerate intolerance or you're just as bad" and all this other hand-wavey bullshit that is completely pointless. I know everything I need to know to conclude that Martin is a disreputable person that I wouldn't be caught dead with. I think he has a huge ego and treats people very poorly. There are plenty of examples of all of these things.
gglitch 11y ago
I don't think I'm following, other than the implication that chipsy is ignorant about free speech. For the sake of discussion, why not spell out your concerns?

ossreality 11y ago

I sure don't? Mind not being cryptic? Are we really going to have this stupid god damn conversation again? Threatening speech is not protected. Acting like a fucking jackass might be protected speech but it doesn't protect you from the forum of public opinion. Ironically, pretty much everytime I see someone whining about free speech, they're talking about it non-governmental contexts... the ultimate irony of you telling others they don't know what they're talking about. If you're a jerk to people and then backpeddle with "it's a joke", you're still a jerk, and you're still not welcome in any space I curate. edit: And now elsewhere you're calling people unempathic for being upset with him. Dude, he might have been raised by narcissists but at some point you have to take responsibility for how you act. He's repeatedly done very unstable, aggressive things. If he's not actually slightly sociopathic, he's a huge asshole and I literally can not for the life of me imagine why you'd be vaguely defending him.

pdeuchler 11y ago
we don't jail people for being "slightly sociopathic" "assholes", we jail them for breaking the law. Attempting to construe someone's unrelated speech, even as sociopathic as it may come off, as justification for jailing them (remember, for securities fraud) is terribly dishonest and a very dangerous slippery slope. Also, by the way, threatening speech is technically protected under the first amendment [1]. Dunno why you brought up the government/public opinion topic. Here's a lawyer, something I am not, on the matter, although I think we're devolving from my initial point: [0] https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackneyed-apologia-for-censorship-are-enough/ https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackne... [1] https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackneyed-apologia-for-censorship-are-enough/ https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackne... To address my empathy comment, I think it's in very poor taste to declare someone "sociopathic" (i.e. shades of mentally ill) if you're not a doctor, close friend/family member, or otherwise licensed professional. Doubly so to make such a judgement based off a small sampling of online commentary. We should all strive to be empathetic and employ a principle of charity when making such judgements, especially before we know the facts.
- ossreality 11y ago
  So it's a great thing that the SEC investigation began over a year ago. >Doubly so to make such a judgement based off a small sampling of online commentary. Just because you're ignorant about Martin doesn't mean the rest of us are. I just am absolutely aghast at you keeping this up. Just go Google him, read a couple articles and get over it. Stop acting like this is some secret accusation that you don't have the evidence for. >Dunno why you brought up the government/public opinion topic. Because "Free speech" has fuck all to do with anything being discussed in this thread? Unless you're really saying that this investigation that began before he was ever in the news is about "silencing" Martin. Seriously, do you know a single thing about him or his company? I'm sorry I said he was slightly sociopathic. Let me rephrase "He has, on multiple occasions, acted similarly to how classic sociopaths act". ...... yeah, everyone cool now? >We should all strive to be empathetic and employ a principle of charity when making such judgements, especially before we know the facts. And I should empathize with The Westboro Baptist Church and try to "understand" them instead of just investing in efforts that oppose them, eh? I'm tired of this "you have to tolerate intolerance or you're just as bad" and all this other hand-wavey bullshit that is completely pointless. I know everything I need to know to conclude that Martin is a disreputable person that I wouldn't be caught dead with. I think he has a huge ego and treats people very poorly. There are plenty of examples of all of these things.

gglitch 11y ago

I don't think I'm following, other than the implication that chipsy is ignorant about free speech. For the sake of discussion, why not spell out your concerns?