5 ms·
That's not what's happening. People are being de-platformed for carrying out or inciting harassment and violence. The only thing that's changed is that we've de
by bsanr2 7y ago
That's not what's happening. People are being de-platformed for carrying out or inciting harassment and violence. The only thing that's changed is that we've decided that it's unacceptable to hide behind passive speech when it's obvious to a reasonable observer what you mean to do. E.g., "I heard there might be a fire in this theater!", "My friend says there's a fire in this theater!", "It'd be great if someone yelled 'Fire!' in this theater," might not get you criminally prosecuted, but it's perfectly reasonable for a theater to ban you after the nth time that you've made an alarmist reference to fire on their premises.
- LMYahooTFY 7y ago>hide behind passive speech when it's obvious to a reasonable observer This is so overloaded with subjectivity, and it's the main problem of why regulating speech remains problematic and dangerous. I can apply this statement to anything and validate what I claim is the baseline for objectivity.
- bsanr2 7y agoWell, sometimes subjectivity is necessary. Our systems of justice are loaded with reasonability and community standards tests, because the ultimate arbiter of right or wrong in cases of harassment or morality often is, "Did it make someone feel bad?". I guess that sucks for the people who don't care about making others feels bad, but having to consider what your actions (speech is an action) might mean for others down the line is generally considered prudent. All that's happened now is that that notion's been given teeth.