7 ms·

That is a very US-centric view of free speech. In many other (developed, democratic) countries, a lot of the shit 8chan does would be viewed as incitement to vi

That is a very US-centric view of free speech. In many other (developed, democratic) countries, a lot of the shit 8chan does would be viewed as incitement to violence, hate speech, and/or invasion of privacy. The absolutist conception of free speech in the US is an outlier.

Simon_says 9y ago
If those activities are crimes in a country, then prosecute the crime. It shouldn't be up to a random middle-man like Patreon to be judge and jury and make those (sometimes very difficult) decisions. It's akin to my grocery deciding to not sell me an apple because I'm a suspected murderer. There are better and more formalized methods to deal with violations of social norms.
- Retric 9y ago
  This is a little more direct of a connection. If a someone shows up and orders 5 tons of ammonium nitrate in December and want's it shipped to Washington DC that's very much a reason to decline and possibly contact law enforcement even as a private citizen. Similarly, free speech has never been an invitation to say anything in any way at any time.
- btym 9y ago
  >It's akin to my grocery deciding to not sell me an apple because I'm a suspected murderer. In this analogy, you're probably suspected of fruit-related crimes. Patreon isn't obligated to enable criminal behavior.
_delirium 9y ago
Even in the U.S. most corporate-run platforms are fairly restrictive, many more restrictive than Patreon. Speech on commercial platforms has a completely different set of norms in the U.S. than speech in government-controlled or public spaces. This has actually caused Patreon trouble in the past, because on some axes they're less restrictive than U.S. corporate norms, which has caused friction with other companies they deal with who want them to restrict their userbase more. For example they've had trouble with Paypal over allowing not-porn-but-still-NSFW Patreons on the platform, which violates Paypal's no adult content policy. I believe they worked around that by allowing those users to stay on Patreon but restricting them to take only CC payments and not Paypal payments.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
specialist 9y ago
It's a very libertarian (puerile) view of free speech. The rest of us understand principles like civility, that your rights stop where mine begin, don't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater, balancing rights and responsibilities, and that hatespeech is a form of assault.
- coredog64 9y ago
  Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater and immediate incitement of violence are not allowed in the US either.
  - syshum 9y ago
    >>Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater Actually you likely can https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time-to-stop-using-the-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-quote/264449/ https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-tim... https://www.popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackneyed-apologia-for-censorship-are-enough/ https://www.popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-ha...
    - thaaddd 9y ago
      I'm glad it's not just me that immediately thinks of popehat when I see "fire in a crowded theater"
  - Mindless2112 9y ago
    An example of speech that is actually illegal in the U.S. -- saying "[The President] ought to be killed. It is a wonder some one has not done it already. If I had an opportunity, I would do it myself." [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_the_President_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_the_President_of_t...
    - isostatic 9y ago
      Sending a few messages along the lines of "Hang yourself, jump off a building, stab yourself I don't know there's a lot of ways" and "All you have to do is turn the generator on and you will be free and happy" Is also illegal http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40817255 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40817255
jaredklewis 9y ago
It's not even a US-centric view of speech; it's just absolutist internet nonsense. The US, like other countries, has a very complex set of case laws that govern speech. Though hate speech is basically protected, incitement is illegal. Doxing in and of itself is not usually illegal, but on the Internet doxing is usually done as a part of some scheme to blackmail, threaten, or harass someone, all of which are criminal. US speech laws are less restrictive than the laws in many European countries, but to paint them as just some sort of carte-blanche is not correct.
rmc 9y ago
In some ways, US cultural norms over sex, or nudity are incredibly restrictive. To some US corps, nazi apologism is OK and a defending it a vital part of free speech. But female nipples are the worst thing ever and must be banned.

Simon_says 9y ago

If those activities are crimes in a country, then prosecute the crime. It shouldn't be up to a random middle-man like Patreon to be judge and jury and make those (sometimes very difficult) decisions. It's akin to my grocery deciding to not sell me an apple because I'm a suspected murderer. There are better and more formalized methods to deal with violations of social norms.

Retric 9y ago
This is a little more direct of a connection. If a someone shows up and orders 5 tons of ammonium nitrate in December and want's it shipped to Washington DC that's very much a reason to decline and possibly contact law enforcement even as a private citizen. Similarly, free speech has never been an invitation to say anything in any way at any time.
btym 9y ago
>It's akin to my grocery deciding to not sell me an apple because I'm a suspected murderer. In this analogy, you're probably suspected of fruit-related crimes. Patreon isn't obligated to enable criminal behavior.

_delirium 9y ago

Even in the U.S. most corporate-run platforms are fairly restrictive, many more restrictive than Patreon. Speech on commercial platforms has a completely different set of norms in the U.S. than speech in government-controlled or public spaces. This has actually caused Patreon trouble in the past, because on some axes they're less restrictive than U.S. corporate norms, which has caused friction with other companies they deal with who want them to restrict their userbase more. For example they've had trouble with Paypal over allowing not-porn-but-still-NSFW Patreons on the platform, which violates Paypal's no adult content policy. I believe they worked around that by allowing those users to stay on Patreon but restricting them to take only CC payments and not Paypal payments.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

specialist 9y ago

It's a very libertarian (puerile) view of free speech. The rest of us understand principles like civility, that your rights stop where mine begin, don't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater, balancing rights and responsibilities, and that hatespeech is a form of assault.

coredog64 9y ago
Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater and immediate incitement of violence are not allowed in the US either.
- syshum 9y ago
  >>Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater Actually you likely can https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time-to-stop-using-the-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-quote/264449/ https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-tim... https://www.popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackneyed-apologia-for-censorship-are-enough/ https://www.popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-ha...
  - thaaddd 9y ago
    I'm glad it's not just me that immediately thinks of popehat when I see "fire in a crowded theater"
- Mindless2112 9y ago
  An example of speech that is actually illegal in the U.S. -- saying "[The President] ought to be killed. It is a wonder some one has not done it already. If I had an opportunity, I would do it myself." [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_the_President_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_the_President_of_t...
  - isostatic 9y ago
    Sending a few messages along the lines of "Hang yourself, jump off a building, stab yourself I don't know there's a lot of ways" and "All you have to do is turn the generator on and you will be free and happy" Is also illegal http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40817255 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40817255

jaredklewis 9y ago

It's not even a US-centric view of speech; it's just absolutist internet nonsense. The US, like other countries, has a very complex set of case laws that govern speech. Though hate speech is basically protected, incitement is illegal. Doxing in and of itself is not usually illegal, but on the Internet doxing is usually done as a part of some scheme to blackmail, threaten, or harass someone, all of which are criminal. US speech laws are less restrictive than the laws in many European countries, but to paint them as just some sort of carte-blanche is not correct.

rmc 9y ago

In some ways, US cultural norms over sex, or nudity are incredibly restrictive. To some US corps, nazi apologism is OK and a defending it a vital part of free speech. But female nipples are the worst thing ever and must be banned.