3 ms·

What equivalency? I mentioned the first thing of which the quoted text reminded me. If cf means "is the same thing again", then I suppose I misused it, and I ca

by dbtx 7y ago

What equivalency? I mentioned the first thing of which the quoted text reminded me. If cf means "is the same thing again", then I suppose I misused it, and I can deal with that-- I don't use it much, I'm a n00b with it. OTOH, everything (every pair of things) is a metaphor and all metaphors eventually break down. If two things have all equivalent properties, then they are the same thing. Maybe I'm merely projecting a position onto those 'other moderators' but it really seemed like someone expects all moderators to go out of their way and forcibly rectify their outdated vocabulary, so now, not even 'they' gets a pass to be used as (making it up as I go) a metapronoun. I don't like it, and neither did JP [find that sort of thing acceptable], and there is everything that I intended to convey when I hit 'add comment'. Is that cleared up? Did I backpedal? I hope I didn't backpedal.

plorkyeran 7y ago
JP's claim that a relatively straightforward and insignificant anti-discrimination law resulted in "compelled speech" was part of a FUD campaign in which he claimed that misgendering students would result in imprisonment. In reality, it does not criminalize anything, does not make using pronouns other than the ones someone prefers hate speech, and doesn't even apply to universities at all. Describing JP as "refusing to roll over and engage in "compelled speech"." is inherently endorsing his position.
- dbtx 7y ago
  > Describing ... is inherently endorsing his position. Well, 'inherently' isn't even necessary... it's a bit obvious that I agreed with his take on a problem... > In reality, it does not criminalize anything ...which you're saying didn't exist. Admittedly, I didn't stay on top of that whole thing, just got wind of it back when I had a FTJ and didn't follow up on it. As a USAian who doesn't even vote I would've had to really want to know how it turned out. So I should probably do some homework. But I did see lots of the Internet start insisting on ${good_behavior} toward ${list_of_protected_statuses} in the meantime, and it was irritating. Those social contracts are also poorly written IMO-- they'll only stop expanding when people stop inventing new ways to be different and stop inventing new ways to be horrible toward those who are different. They are not a solution. Well then offer something better, you'll say. Pull your head completely out of your ass and treat everyone the way you expect to be treated. "I dunno, it's up there pretty far..." --Joe North, after he asked what it would take for us to go back to being friends like a few years before, when we were sort-of-occasionally drinking buddies, so I told him this

by dbtx 7y ago

plorkyeran 7y ago

JP's claim that a relatively straightforward and insignificant anti-discrimination law resulted in "compelled speech" was part of a FUD campaign in which he claimed that misgendering students would result in imprisonment. In reality, it does not criminalize anything, does not make using pronouns other than the ones someone prefers hate speech, and doesn't even apply to universities at all. Describing JP as "refusing to roll over and engage in "compelled speech"." is inherently endorsing his position.

dbtx 7y ago
> Describing ... is inherently endorsing his position. Well, 'inherently' isn't even necessary... it's a bit obvious that I agreed with his take on a problem... > In reality, it does not criminalize anything ...which you're saying didn't exist. Admittedly, I didn't stay on top of that whole thing, just got wind of it back when I had a FTJ and didn't follow up on it. As a USAian who doesn't even vote I would've had to really want to know how it turned out. So I should probably do some homework. But I did see lots of the Internet start insisting on ${good_behavior} toward ${list_of_protected_statuses} in the meantime, and it was irritating. Those social contracts are also poorly written IMO-- they'll only stop expanding when people stop inventing new ways to be different and stop inventing new ways to be horrible toward those who are different. They are not a solution. Well then offer something better, you'll say. Pull your head completely out of your ass and treat everyone the way you expect to be treated. "I dunno, it's up there pretty far..." --Joe North, after he asked what it would take for us to go back to being friends like a few years before, when we were sort-of-occasionally drinking buddies, so I told him this