3 ms·
You're right, it isn't banning. How would you describe it? If we are to raise a banner against this person's effect on their area, we need to have a precise wor
by sukuriant 16y ago
You're right, it isn't banning. How would you describe it? If we are to raise a banner against this person's effect on their area, we need to have a precise word that not only describes what's going on, but also reflects to the reader the strength of the defender's stance.
- Jach 16y agoWhy do we need a banner? Is the cause so lost that we must resort to equivalent rhetoric to win the book back to the reading list? And would a banner even be useful? For something nearly equivalent to a banner, how about mailing a bunch of copies of the book to everyone responsible for getting it removed.
- anamax 16y ago> but also reflects to the reader the strength of the defender's stance. I don't know what you're trying to say here. Is it equivalent to "the person making the decision is a bad person and the person objecting is a good person"? If you're claiming that the reason for the decision is bad, shouldn't you argue that point with some specificity? (There are lots of reasons why a decision might be bad - surely you should mention which ones apply.)