3 ms·
>Is this objectionable enough for you? No. Most of it is objectionable to me, but none is objectionable enough to ban discussions around it.
by rndgermandude 8y ago
>Is this objectionable enough for you?
No. Most of it is objectionable to me, but none is objectionable enough to ban discussions around it.
- nullc 8y ago> but none is objectionable enough to ban discussions around it. Where is "ban discussions" around it coming from, certainly it's not something I said. It's also not something that happened here. (The thread was moved to another subreddit with weeks notice, the participants voted on the name, the result was highly promoted, etc.) My view is that there its material that few would want to be around or have their identity associated with. If guests at my home were carrying on about that, I'd politely try to get them to change the subject and failing that get them to leave. ... avoid inviting them in the future, and apologize discretely to my other gusts for having had to endure it. [And pray a fight didn't break out before I could intervene...] Stuff like that.
- striking 8y agoI'm not saying this kind of discussion should be banned for how objectionable it is. I'm saying the fact that the moderators have blessed this comment is objectionable for the many reasons I've put above. By all means, talk about this. But promoting a laundry list of unsubstantiated ideas that are no more than a thin veneer around human rights abuses just strikes me as... irrational.