3 ms·

Nope they shouldn't. Nobody owes anything to anybody because some random wacko liked something they once said or did. And even if you think they should, it's n

by smsm42 7y ago

Nope they shouldn't. Nobody owes anything to anybody because some random wacko liked something they once said or did. And even if you think they should, it's neither yours nor Reddit's business to enforce it.

pjc50 7y ago
So if person X spends years writing about how Jews are an evil conspiracy that run the world, and then someone shoots up a synagogue leaving a manifesto saying "finally I'm going to do something" and citing X, those are totally unrelated?
- leereeves 7y ago
  A motivated investigator can always find extremists to discredit a large group. For example, among Bernie supporters, recently, talking about "an evil conspiracy that runs the world": > if they try to do that [nominate someone other than Bernie at a brokered convention], forget the "political" part of the "political revolution" [1] with thousands of upvotes and no moderator or admin action. And some of the top comments on that post: > If they do that it's time to revolt. > This is a peaceful revolution. If they fight against it, they risk violence. > Okay fine, a socialist revolution it is. > Yeah the convention is a canary. If the canary dies we riot. There's enough evidence of unmoderated site rules violations on that one post to shut down that sub if reddit wanted to. But reddit doesn't want to, they're trying to tip the scales by censoring half of America. 1: https://www.reddit.com/r/WayOfTheBern/comments/f7ap56/plouffe_sanders_in_all_likelihood_is_the_nominee/ https://www.reddit.com/r/WayOfTheBern/comments/f7ap56/plouff...
- smsm42 7y ago
  Likely yes, they are. There were people murdering Jews well before Internet, TV, radio, printing and arguably even written language existed. There still are. Attributing this to a random wacko, without specific casual proof, is likely to be wrong. Of course, in some cases (yes, that case, thankyouverymuch) there's ample proof. In most cases we're dealing with on the Internet, there isn't. And a single reference by a demented individual, without further proof, can't be taken as such. Otherwise you basically pass the control of the moral norms into the hand of demented wackos - the only thing they need to do to ruin anybody is to commit some atrocity and declare they were doing it in your name. Obviously that alone can't be a proof of anything. You need to examine whether they were sincerely inspired by those ideas, where those ideas indeed intend to inspire such reaction (some people are sure TV is full of secret messages telling them to kill the President, that doesn't mean we have to shut down the TV broadcasts) and whether this reaction is something that is inherent in those ideas. Also, there is a myriad of possibilities between "totally unrelated" and "have direct causal link which imparts responsibility". If somebody is on the left politically, is he "totally unrelated" to Lenin and Pol Pot? Not exactly, they probably share some ideas somewhere. Is he responsible for all atrocities Lenin and Pol Pot committed? I don't think many people on the left would agree to that. And here we have direct link between ideology and actions, acknowledged by everybody. You are extending it to actions of insane people which may be just using ideology to dress up their demented impulses - this is even worse distortion. People are responsible for their actions. But if some crazy person mentions somebody in a positive sense, that by itself does not impart responsibility on the person they mention.
- smsm42 7y ago
  And BTW, is we're speaking of t_d, I never seen there anything even close to "how Jews are an evil conspiracy that run the world". I've seen this on other alt-right places (like voat and some gab areas) but never even once on t_d. Of course, I don't spent hours every day reading every comment, so maybe somewhere in the depth of the comment trees there's stuff like that - but on a casual look I can't see anything even remotely like what you describe.

by smsm42 7y ago

pjc50 7y ago

So if person X spends years writing about how Jews are an evil conspiracy that run the world, and then someone shoots up a synagogue leaving a manifesto saying "finally I'm going to do something" and citing X, those are totally unrelated?

leereeves 7y ago
A motivated investigator can always find extremists to discredit a large group. For example, among Bernie supporters, recently, talking about "an evil conspiracy that runs the world": > if they try to do that [nominate someone other than Bernie at a brokered convention], forget the "political" part of the "political revolution" [1] with thousands of upvotes and no moderator or admin action. And some of the top comments on that post: > If they do that it's time to revolt. > This is a peaceful revolution. If they fight against it, they risk violence. > Okay fine, a socialist revolution it is. > Yeah the convention is a canary. If the canary dies we riot. There's enough evidence of unmoderated site rules violations on that one post to shut down that sub if reddit wanted to. But reddit doesn't want to, they're trying to tip the scales by censoring half of America. 1: https://www.reddit.com/r/WayOfTheBern/comments/f7ap56/plouffe_sanders_in_all_likelihood_is_the_nominee/ https://www.reddit.com/r/WayOfTheBern/comments/f7ap56/plouff...
smsm42 7y ago
Likely yes, they are. There were people murdering Jews well before Internet, TV, radio, printing and arguably even written language existed. There still are. Attributing this to a random wacko, without specific casual proof, is likely to be wrong. Of course, in some cases (yes, that case, thankyouverymuch) there's ample proof. In most cases we're dealing with on the Internet, there isn't. And a single reference by a demented individual, without further proof, can't be taken as such. Otherwise you basically pass the control of the moral norms into the hand of demented wackos - the only thing they need to do to ruin anybody is to commit some atrocity and declare they were doing it in your name. Obviously that alone can't be a proof of anything. You need to examine whether they were sincerely inspired by those ideas, where those ideas indeed intend to inspire such reaction (some people are sure TV is full of secret messages telling them to kill the President, that doesn't mean we have to shut down the TV broadcasts) and whether this reaction is something that is inherent in those ideas. Also, there is a myriad of possibilities between "totally unrelated" and "have direct causal link which imparts responsibility". If somebody is on the left politically, is he "totally unrelated" to Lenin and Pol Pot? Not exactly, they probably share some ideas somewhere. Is he responsible for all atrocities Lenin and Pol Pot committed? I don't think many people on the left would agree to that. And here we have direct link between ideology and actions, acknowledged by everybody. You are extending it to actions of insane people which may be just using ideology to dress up their demented impulses - this is even worse distortion. People are responsible for their actions. But if some crazy person mentions somebody in a positive sense, that by itself does not impart responsibility on the person they mention.
smsm42 7y ago
And BTW, is we're speaking of t_d, I never seen there anything even close to "how Jews are an evil conspiracy that run the world". I've seen this on other alt-right places (like voat and some gab areas) but never even once on t_d. Of course, I don't spent hours every day reading every comment, so maybe somewhere in the depth of the comment trees there's stuff like that - but on a casual look I can't see anything even remotely like what you describe.