6 ms·

Their tolerance has reached such an impressive level that they have banned slightly less than half the country.

q3k 7y ago
Such is the effect of fighting against the paradox of tolerance [1]. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
nl 7y ago
It explicitly says: You can still participate if you do in fact support the administration, you just can’t talk about it here.
- masonic 7y ago
  That's like saying, "you can still support the right to abortion in our area, you just can't have one here... so, you see, we are mostly pro-choice."
  - nl 7y ago
    Well, no. The parent post claimed they had banned half the country. They haven't - they have banned a particular topic of conversation. On a knitting website. It seems more akin to the old "don't talk about politics or religion in polite company".
  - happytoexplain 7y ago
    You can't have an abortion in many places that are run by pro-choice people. It would be inappropriate.
elygre 7y ago
According to the announcement, they ban behavior. The “slightly less than half the country” can still use the site.
adamch 7y ago
18% of the USA voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 election, which is slightly less than 1% of the international population. I have no stats about the popularity of the Trump administration in the knitting community. But I suspect it is a somewhat fringe view.
jMyles 7y ago
Having traveled the country by land for years and discussed this topic frequently, intentionally, and occasionally awkwardly with at least a thousand people, I think that you are not even in the ballpark of correct when you surmise that "slightly less than half the country" supports this administration (or any in my lifetime, with the exception of the brief period following September 11, 2001). The man received about 62,984,828 votes in 2016 out of 330 million people. As an empirical matter, this perhaps demonstrates that a little more than 18% supported him at that time - much more than "slightly" less than half. There is every reason to believe that, since that time, his support has further waned. I'm not giving an opinion one way or another on the wisdom of precluding particular content. But I think that it is wildly out of step with reality to suggest that "slightly less than half the country" support the government at all, much less this particularly unpopular and ineffectual leader.
- mc32 7y ago
  No one counts elections like that. Not when Dems win and not when Repubs win. It’s disingenuous but it looks good when making a point. Even Saddam or my Kim never got 75% even when they state they received 99% of the vote. It would be very unusual for a US pol to get over 50% of the raw population of their district.
  - jMyles 7y ago
    > Even Saddam or my Kim never get 75% even when they state they received 99% of the vote. I think I need you to more clearly state the point you are making. Are you suggesting that the published elections totals for Trump, Saddam, and Kim understate the popularity of each of them? I have never heard any reasonable person suggest that the elections in Iraq during Saddam's rule, nor any election in the history of the DPRK, are a basis for any particular conclusion about the popularity of those leaders or about how elections might be used to gauge the popularity of leaders.
  - threatofrain 7y ago
    But this person is talking about language to ballpark American sentiment, not how you think people count electoral power.
TomK32 7y ago
Ravelry users can found around the globe, also their users tend to be more female than the general population.
gshdg 7y ago
They’ve banned discussion topics, not people.

q3k 7y ago

Such is the effect of fighting against the paradox of tolerance [1]. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

nl 7y ago

It explicitly says: You can still participate if you do in fact support the administration, you just can’t talk about it here.

masonic 7y ago
That's like saying, "you can still support the right to abortion in our area, you just can't have one here... so, you see, we are mostly pro-choice."
- nl 7y ago
  Well, no. The parent post claimed they had banned half the country. They haven't - they have banned a particular topic of conversation. On a knitting website. It seems more akin to the old "don't talk about politics or religion in polite company".
- happytoexplain 7y ago
  You can't have an abortion in many places that are run by pro-choice people. It would be inappropriate.

elygre 7y ago

According to the announcement, they ban behavior. The “slightly less than half the country” can still use the site.

adamch 7y ago

18% of the USA voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 election, which is slightly less than 1% of the international population. I have no stats about the popularity of the Trump administration in the knitting community. But I suspect it is a somewhat fringe view.

jMyles 7y ago

Having traveled the country by land for years and discussed this topic frequently, intentionally, and occasionally awkwardly with at least a thousand people, I think that you are not even in the ballpark of correct when you surmise that "slightly less than half the country" supports this administration (or any in my lifetime, with the exception of the brief period following September 11, 2001). The man received about 62,984,828 votes in 2016 out of 330 million people. As an empirical matter, this perhaps demonstrates that a little more than 18% supported him at that time - much more than "slightly" less than half. There is every reason to believe that, since that time, his support has further waned. I'm not giving an opinion one way or another on the wisdom of precluding particular content. But I think that it is wildly out of step with reality to suggest that "slightly less than half the country" support the government at all, much less this particularly unpopular and ineffectual leader.

mc32 7y ago
No one counts elections like that. Not when Dems win and not when Repubs win. It’s disingenuous but it looks good when making a point. Even Saddam or my Kim never got 75% even when they state they received 99% of the vote. It would be very unusual for a US pol to get over 50% of the raw population of their district.
- jMyles 7y ago
  > Even Saddam or my Kim never get 75% even when they state they received 99% of the vote. I think I need you to more clearly state the point you are making. Are you suggesting that the published elections totals for Trump, Saddam, and Kim understate the popularity of each of them? I have never heard any reasonable person suggest that the elections in Iraq during Saddam's rule, nor any election in the history of the DPRK, are a basis for any particular conclusion about the popularity of those leaders or about how elections might be used to gauge the popularity of leaders.
- threatofrain 7y ago
  But this person is talking about language to ballpark American sentiment, not how you think people count electoral power.

TomK32 7y ago

Ravelry users can found around the globe, also their users tend to be more female than the general population.

gshdg 7y ago

They’ve banned discussion topics, not people.