5 ms·

I think this shows the danger that anyone who posts under their real name faces. Make a bad joke, or hold a wrong opinion, and you can find yourself out of work

I think this shows the danger that anyone who posts under their real name faces. Make a bad joke, or hold a wrong opinion, and you can find yourself out of work.

tptacek 7y ago
Freedom of association is a hell of a drug.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- samantohermes 7y ago
  People aren't always rational or benevolent in their association choices.
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    They still get to make those choices.
- quotemstr 7y ago
  It's interesting that the people who cite "freedom of association" as a justification for canceling people don't believe in freedom of association in other contexts, e.g. with respect to so-called "retalation" against corporate activists, which is just a company using its freedom of association. Freedom for me, but not for thee. I don't respect principles wielded selectively and as weapons.
  - tptacek 7y ago
    I don't know what you're talking about but also don't know how you can coherently make an argument that people both have freedom of association and can't "cancel" people. Is "cancellation" simply what you call it when people exercise their freedom in a way you don't approve of?
    - spookthesunset 7y ago
      You are wasting your time debating with people who use terminology like “cancel culture” or “SJW”. They aren’t interested in arguing in good faith. If it was any other forum, I’d suggest simply mock them and move on. Here, you are best just downvoting and moving on. If this forum wanted to avoid getting overrun by these people, they’d ban them. People who use terminology like “SJW” are toxic and spread like cancer, pushing away people interested in actual debate or intelligent conversation.
      - quotemstr 7y ago
        If Jesse Singal is your idea of a person who isn't "arguing in good faith" and who should be mocked, you're pretty far outside the mainstream. https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/on-cancel-culture-the-new-republic https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/on-cancel-culture-the-new... > pushing away people interested in actual debate or intelligent conversation. It's fascinating how "actual debate" and "intelligent conversation" mean, to you, avoiding words that you don't like. The most parsimonious explanation for the spread of these terms is that an increasing number of people intensely dislike the things to which these words refer --- and that every day they're less afraid of being called "toxic" for criticizing our culture of censorship and pitchfork mobs.
        spookthesunset 7y ago
        No thanks, homeboy. I’m not gonna dance. You can go defend your alt-right words like “virtue signaling”, “SJW”, “cancel culture”, and all the other toxic trash you spew somewhere else, thanks.
        tptacek 7y ago
        We probably agree about most of this stuff, but the way you're putting this is not helping.
        spookthesunset 7y ago

I think this shows the danger that anyone who posts under their real name faces. Make a bad joke, or hold a wrong opinion, and you can find yourself out of work.

tptacek 7y ago

Freedom of association is a hell of a drug.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
samantohermes 7y ago
People aren't always rational or benevolent in their association choices.
- ceejayoz 7y ago
  They still get to make those choices.
quotemstr 7y ago
It's interesting that the people who cite "freedom of association" as a justification for canceling people don't believe in freedom of association in other contexts, e.g. with respect to so-called "retalation" against corporate activists, which is just a company using its freedom of association. Freedom for me, but not for thee. I don't respect principles wielded selectively and as weapons.
- tptacek 7y ago
  I don't know what you're talking about but also don't know how you can coherently make an argument that people both have freedom of association and can't "cancel" people. Is "cancellation" simply what you call it when people exercise their freedom in a way you don't approve of?
  - spookthesunset 7y ago
    You are wasting your time debating with people who use terminology like “cancel culture” or “SJW”. They aren’t interested in arguing in good faith. If it was any other forum, I’d suggest simply mock them and move on. Here, you are best just downvoting and moving on. If this forum wanted to avoid getting overrun by these people, they’d ban them. People who use terminology like “SJW” are toxic and spread like cancer, pushing away people interested in actual debate or intelligent conversation.
    - quotemstr 7y ago
      If Jesse Singal is your idea of a person who isn't "arguing in good faith" and who should be mocked, you're pretty far outside the mainstream. https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/on-cancel-culture-the-new-republic https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/on-cancel-culture-the-new... > pushing away people interested in actual debate or intelligent conversation. It's fascinating how "actual debate" and "intelligent conversation" mean, to you, avoiding words that you don't like. The most parsimonious explanation for the spread of these terms is that an increasing number of people intensely dislike the things to which these words refer --- and that every day they're less afraid of being called "toxic" for criticizing our culture of censorship and pitchfork mobs.
      - spookthesunset 7y ago
        No thanks, homeboy. I’m not gonna dance. You can go defend your alt-right words like “virtue signaling”, “SJW”, “cancel culture”, and all the other toxic trash you spew somewhere else, thanks.
        tptacek 7y ago
        We probably agree about most of this stuff, but the way you're putting this is not helping.
        spookthesunset 7y ago