8 ms·

I agree. This is ridiculous and hypocritical. People somehow seriously claim that the authors should hide what community they represent, hide the unintended di

I agree. This is ridiculous and hypocritical. People somehow seriously claim that the authors should hide what community they represent, hide the unintended discriminatory effects of the policy changes, and not be so emotional about losing their livelihoods, because it makes them feel uncomfortable to read an emotional appeal in an open letter.

zoul 9y ago
I don’t want people to “hide what community they represent”, but I also don’t want them to use that fact as a bargaining chip instead of arguments.
- danharaj 9y ago
  Part of a negotiation is stating which parties are involved and what their considerations are.
rootlocus 9y ago
> People somehow seriously claim that the authors should hide what community they represent, Starting the letter with "We’re writing you today both as adult creators and concerned individuals about free, legal, expression." seems to show the community they represent is "Adult creators and concerned individuals about free, legal, expression". > hide the unintended discriminatory effects of the policy changes, They shouldn't hide it, but they should at least show some evidence for it. > and not be so emotional about losing their livelihoods, They can be emotional all they want, but it's maybe not the best argument to change a company's policy. If it's masquerading as an argument, then it's emotional blackmail. > because it makes them feel uncomfortable to read an emotional appeal in an open letter. I don't mind emotional appeals when they actually make sense.
- Certhas 9y ago
  Do you have any evidence that: > "Adult creators and concerned individuals about free, legal, expression" on patreon are not whom this letter claims they are? If so you are accusing the letter of lying, without any evidence yourself. What level of evidence would the adult content creators have to bring to the table to satisfy your demands? Representative scientific surveys? Why will you not take their word for whom they are? Do you somehow know that community better? Do you not think it prima facie plausible that LGBT, PoC, disabled, etc... are over represented among the most vulnerable of the content creators? (which is the only thing the letter claims) Because by Jove, that's a damn plausible claim if I've ever heard one.

zoul 9y ago

I don’t want people to “hide what community they represent”, but I also don’t want them to use that fact as a bargaining chip instead of arguments.

danharaj 9y ago
Part of a negotiation is stating which parties are involved and what their considerations are.

rootlocus 9y ago

> People somehow seriously claim that the authors should hide what community they represent, Starting the letter with "We’re writing you today both as adult creators and concerned individuals about free, legal, expression." seems to show the community they represent is "Adult creators and concerned individuals about free, legal, expression". > hide the unintended discriminatory effects of the policy changes, They shouldn't hide it, but they should at least show some evidence for it. > and not be so emotional about losing their livelihoods, They can be emotional all they want, but it's maybe not the best argument to change a company's policy. If it's masquerading as an argument, then it's emotional blackmail. > because it makes them feel uncomfortable to read an emotional appeal in an open letter. I don't mind emotional appeals when they actually make sense.

Certhas 9y ago
Do you have any evidence that: > "Adult creators and concerned individuals about free, legal, expression" on patreon are not whom this letter claims they are? If so you are accusing the letter of lying, without any evidence yourself. What level of evidence would the adult content creators have to bring to the table to satisfy your demands? Representative scientific surveys? Why will you not take their word for whom they are? Do you somehow know that community better? Do you not think it prima facie plausible that LGBT, PoC, disabled, etc... are over represented among the most vulnerable of the content creators? (which is the only thing the letter claims) Because by Jove, that's a damn plausible claim if I've ever heard one.