4 ms·

Surely you see the difference between the "sounds crazy" of predicting a market collapse, and the "sounds crazy" of saying we should deport or execute all Musli

by beat 8y ago

Surely you see the difference between the "sounds crazy" of predicting a market collapse, and the "sounds crazy" of saying we should deport or execute all Muslims (as a for example).

zepto 8y ago
If the difference is so obvious, why do we need to censor?
- wsy 8y ago
  The difference between food and waste is also obvious, still we bring the waste to the garbage can. Also, nobody censors. A distributor decided not to distribute the stuff anymore.
  - remarkEon 8y ago
    This “well it’s not really censorship if it’s not the government” point is useless, shallow, and ultimately meaningless. Your garbage analogy (no pun intended) fails on its face because in that case the government is explicitly telling you what is trash and what is recycling; what is compost and what requires special disposal. This idea begets that we have agreed to outsource what is and isn’t “allowed” to be said in the public space (and these are public spaces) to private corporations that absolutely do have their own agenda and objectives. Are we as a society ready to do that? Who watches the Watchmen?
    - beat 8y ago
      A business deciding how its facilities are used isn't censorship. If I go to a movie theater, buy a ticket, and then start shouting at the audience about how Jews control Hollywood, they'll throw me out. If I mail a dick pic to the newspaper and demand they publish it, they will not. Are you saying these things are censorship? Certainly, they're about businesses limiting "free speech". To use a closer analogy, Tumblr recently banned "adult content", including nudity. This affected friends of mine. Is that censorship? Ok, so why can Patreon not decide what is and is not an acceptable use of its platform?
      - zepto 8y ago
        Sure, fine, let’s look at it that way. But then we have to accept that these businesses are responsible for everything they allow. We can hold them responsible for any copyright violations and defamation they carry since according to you they ‘decided it was acceptable use’.
remarkEon 8y ago
Sure I can. But that isn’t the point. Should we not even be allowed to discuss a hostile immigration policy because it “sounds crazy”? That in and of itself sounds crazy to me.
- voidpointercast 8y ago
  of course you should be able to discuss it, just in the correct medium for it. If Patreon doesn't want you, bypass it and create your own, or donate directly to the individual. However, with how much dishonest argumentation and outright lying that has been going on in recent years, being forced to accept everyone's speech, equally is farcical at best!
  - remarkEon 8y ago
    Okay. Which correct mediums? And which correct payment processors, while we’re on the subject? The argument that you’re being “forced” to hear arguments you don’t want to hear is equally as farcical. Just, like, turn off your screen man.
  - PavlovsCat 8y ago
    > being forced to accept everyone's speech We're talking about mobs that hound people online, instead of simply not clicking on the content they don't like. So you tunred it on its head exactly, directly after complaining about dishonest argumentation. And anyone who thinks clicking a button is "honest argumentation", is really just betraying how they're using a phrase they heard others take seriously. You don't even know what it is. This thread is littered with the proof of those unable and unwilling to argue, and they honestly think they can force this, heh.

by beat 8y ago

Surely you see the difference between the "sounds crazy" of predicting a market collapse, and the "sounds crazy" of saying we should deport or execute all Muslims (as a for example).

zepto 8y ago

If the difference is so obvious, why do we need to censor?

wsy 8y ago
The difference between food and waste is also obvious, still we bring the waste to the garbage can. Also, nobody censors. A distributor decided not to distribute the stuff anymore.
- remarkEon 8y ago
  This “well it’s not really censorship if it’s not the government” point is useless, shallow, and ultimately meaningless. Your garbage analogy (no pun intended) fails on its face because in that case the government is explicitly telling you what is trash and what is recycling; what is compost and what requires special disposal. This idea begets that we have agreed to outsource what is and isn’t “allowed” to be said in the public space (and these are public spaces) to private corporations that absolutely do have their own agenda and objectives. Are we as a society ready to do that? Who watches the Watchmen?
  - beat 8y ago
    A business deciding how its facilities are used isn't censorship. If I go to a movie theater, buy a ticket, and then start shouting at the audience about how Jews control Hollywood, they'll throw me out. If I mail a dick pic to the newspaper and demand they publish it, they will not. Are you saying these things are censorship? Certainly, they're about businesses limiting "free speech". To use a closer analogy, Tumblr recently banned "adult content", including nudity. This affected friends of mine. Is that censorship? Ok, so why can Patreon not decide what is and is not an acceptable use of its platform?
    - zepto 8y ago
      Sure, fine, let’s look at it that way. But then we have to accept that these businesses are responsible for everything they allow. We can hold them responsible for any copyright violations and defamation they carry since according to you they ‘decided it was acceptable use’.

remarkEon 8y ago

Sure I can. But that isn’t the point. Should we not even be allowed to discuss a hostile immigration policy because it “sounds crazy”? That in and of itself sounds crazy to me.

voidpointercast 8y ago
of course you should be able to discuss it, just in the correct medium for it. If Patreon doesn't want you, bypass it and create your own, or donate directly to the individual. However, with how much dishonest argumentation and outright lying that has been going on in recent years, being forced to accept everyone's speech, equally is farcical at best!
- remarkEon 8y ago
  Okay. Which correct mediums? And which correct payment processors, while we’re on the subject? The argument that you’re being “forced” to hear arguments you don’t want to hear is equally as farcical. Just, like, turn off your screen man.
- PavlovsCat 8y ago
  > being forced to accept everyone's speech We're talking about mobs that hound people online, instead of simply not clicking on the content they don't like. So you tunred it on its head exactly, directly after complaining about dishonest argumentation. And anyone who thinks clicking a button is "honest argumentation", is really just betraying how they're using a phrase they heard others take seriously. You don't even know what it is. This thread is littered with the proof of those unable and unwilling to argue, and they honestly think they can force this, heh.