4 ms·
I'd be more sympathetic to your point if you hadn't said at first (paraphrased) "Alex Jones said this awful thing I disagree with". Therefore you presumably bel
by mythrwy 6y ago
I'd be more sympathetic to your point if you hadn't said at first (paraphrased) "Alex Jones said this awful thing I disagree with". Therefore you presumably believe it's ok he got kicked off of whatever platform, because of _what_ he believes.
You really don't see the moral hazard in that?
- paulgb 6y agoI believe YouTube has the right to remove it whether or not I agree with it, because they don't owe it to anyone to pay their hosting bill.
- mythrwy 6y agoShould a restaurant be able to refuse service to an openly gay couple then in your opinion? What if it offends the other patrons?
- chillwaves 6y agoThere is no law protecting conspiracy theorists.
- mythrwy 6y agoI'm not sure there is a national law requiring businesses to serve gay customers either. I'm just curious how OP feels about that. Besides, who decides who is and who isn't a conspiracy theorist. You? A twitter mob? The government? Some people in San Francisco? The fact that there is apparently such strong disagreement (most of which probably is from people who believe that it is appropriate to use the strong market share of these platforms to mold political discourse) is a bit alarming. No way that ends well.
- chillwaves 6y agoFine, let the court of public opinion decide. Alex Jones is banned from Youtube. People, largely, do not give a shit. Now try banning gay people from a resturant. Good luck with that. And in many jurisdictions it is illegal to discriminate over sexual orientation. There is no such law protecting conspiracy theorists.
- mythrwy 6y agoYour argument is juvenile and fails to address the point
- chillwaves 6y agoAnd your reply is devoid of substance. I think we're done here.
- mythrwy 6y agomy argument has substance and I agree. not worth it.