5 ms·

Your definition of "free speech" includes not taking action against truly malicious and slanderous and manipulative people like Alex Jones? And there is no "wh

by Aelius 7y ago

Your definition of "free speech" includes not taking action against truly malicious and slanderous and manipulative people like Alex Jones? And there is no "who draws the line‽" argument here, Jones exists miles beyond what is ever ok.

whatshisface 7y ago
>And there is no "who draws the line‽" argument here That's exactly the argument, not everybody thinks Alex Jones went too far. In fact, I bet a lot of people who listen to Alex Jones would find something you supported to be miles beyond what is ever OK. That's part and parcel of living in a diverse, cosmopolitan society. Sometimes, other people's opinions are miles beyond OK, but that's still okay. ;)
- Aelius 7y ago
  You seem to be willfully ignoring the demonstrable harm he causes. You're promoting a false balance. You're saying "Alex Jones robbed a bank, other people eat their coworkers' lunch, so who are we to judge?" Absolute nonsense.
  - SamReidHughes 7y ago
    If demonstrable harm is your standard, please just announce you don't believe in free speech and move along. Everybody advocating for the wrong stance on politics creates demonstrable harm.
    - Aelius 7y ago
      Free speech means he can say (edit) legally protegted speech* on his own platform. No company is obligated to provide that platform for him. When judging a company for what content they decide they don't want to host, spinning "vimeo banned Alex Jones" as negative is ridiculous. Edited: he can't actually say whatever he wants even on his own platform. There's actually a lawsuit against him right now. Too many internet folk don't actually know what "free speech" means and I should not validate such ignorance.
      - will4274 7y ago
        Actually, free speech is an ethical concept, not a legal concept. The first amendment is a legal concept. Free speech means means enabling the free exchange of ideas. Free speeches as a concept applies to private platforms and organizations too, it just isn't mandated by law.
  - dang 7y ago
    Would you please not take HN threads further into flamewar? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
lone_haxx0r 7y ago
> And there is no "who draws the line‽" argument here, Jones exists miles beyond what is ever ok. Popular media exists miles beyond what is ever ok. Do you want to ban those too?
sequoia 7y ago
The courts can draw this line & determine these distinctions, and they are doing just this right now. Jones is currently being sued by some Sandy Hook parents. It turns out we don't need to rely on Youtube of Vimeo to be the ultimate arbiters of this issue, and the system may just be working in this case.

by Aelius 7y ago

whatshisface 7y ago

>And there is no "who draws the line‽" argument here That's exactly the argument, not everybody thinks Alex Jones went too far. In fact, I bet a lot of people who listen to Alex Jones would find something you supported to be miles beyond what is ever OK. That's part and parcel of living in a diverse, cosmopolitan society. Sometimes, other people's opinions are miles beyond OK, but that's still okay. ;)

Aelius 7y ago
You seem to be willfully ignoring the demonstrable harm he causes. You're promoting a false balance. You're saying "Alex Jones robbed a bank, other people eat their coworkers' lunch, so who are we to judge?" Absolute nonsense.
- SamReidHughes 7y ago
  If demonstrable harm is your standard, please just announce you don't believe in free speech and move along. Everybody advocating for the wrong stance on politics creates demonstrable harm.
  - Aelius 7y ago
    Free speech means he can say (edit) legally protegted speech* on his own platform. No company is obligated to provide that platform for him. When judging a company for what content they decide they don't want to host, spinning "vimeo banned Alex Jones" as negative is ridiculous. Edited: he can't actually say whatever he wants even on his own platform. There's actually a lawsuit against him right now. Too many internet folk don't actually know what "free speech" means and I should not validate such ignorance.
    - will4274 7y ago
      Actually, free speech is an ethical concept, not a legal concept. The first amendment is a legal concept. Free speech means means enabling the free exchange of ideas. Free speeches as a concept applies to private platforms and organizations too, it just isn't mandated by law.
- dang 7y ago
  Would you please not take HN threads further into flamewar? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

lone_haxx0r 7y ago

> And there is no "who draws the line‽" argument here, Jones exists miles beyond what is ever ok. Popular media exists miles beyond what is ever ok. Do you want to ban those too?

sequoia 7y ago

The courts can draw this line & determine these distinctions, and they are doing just this right now. Jones is currently being sued by some Sandy Hook parents. It turns out we don't need to rely on Youtube of Vimeo to be the ultimate arbiters of this issue, and the system may just be working in this case.