3 ms·

I’d argue that banning specific goods is useless. shouldn’t dab paraphernalia be sold? Concentrates are legal in various states. If someone wants a $4000 pill

I’d argue that banning specific goods is useless. shouldn’t dab paraphernalia be sold? Concentrates are legal in various states. If someone wants a $4000 pill press they’re going to get it anyway. The idea that somehow this will prevent harm is absurd.

baybal2 6y ago
Yes, such idea is absurd. I can't fathom along what lines they came to the idea of online marketplaces being the ones to blame, or moreover being burdened by the duty to police their markets... The line of thinking of such people is not unlike the ones of communist party. Found one stall in a giant market selling weed? Ban all sellers. Had one illegal BnB in an apartment building? Expunge all renters in the whole apartment block.
- javagram 6y ago
  Not great examples compared to amazon considering amazon is not just renting space to the seller, but also actually sells the illegal merchandise by taking payment and shipping it. It’s more akin to finding it on the shelf at walmart than a stall in a market, or more akin to making your payment for the illegal BnB directly to the landlord’s office. “ Alongside its third-party marketplace, Amazon sells products to consumers directly, and The Markup found it was also selling banned items itself, revealing cracks in the largely automated purchasing system that feeds its massive product catalog.”
- chadash 6y ago
  > Found one stall in a giant market selling weed? Ban all sellers. No one is suggesting this. It’s more like if you find one stall selling weed and then five hundred other stalls selling various illegal things, and then you go to the market manager and tell them and they lazily remove one or two vendors but don’t or any actual resources to work to root out the problem.
- sethherr 6y ago
  It’s more like: a market says we won’t have anyone selling weed, and there are stalls selling weed, and someone says “hey, you’re selling weed even though you say you won’t” And unlike a market, which is generally not owned by a single entity, this market is owned by the richest person in the world, so it certainly has the resources to enforce its policies.

baybal2 6y ago

Yes, such idea is absurd. I can't fathom along what lines they came to the idea of online marketplaces being the ones to blame, or moreover being burdened by the duty to police their markets... The line of thinking of such people is not unlike the ones of communist party. Found one stall in a giant market selling weed? Ban all sellers. Had one illegal BnB in an apartment building? Expunge all renters in the whole apartment block.

javagram 6y ago
Not great examples compared to amazon considering amazon is not just renting space to the seller, but also actually sells the illegal merchandise by taking payment and shipping it. It’s more akin to finding it on the shelf at walmart than a stall in a market, or more akin to making your payment for the illegal BnB directly to the landlord’s office. “ Alongside its third-party marketplace, Amazon sells products to consumers directly, and The Markup found it was also selling banned items itself, revealing cracks in the largely automated purchasing system that feeds its massive product catalog.”
chadash 6y ago
> Found one stall in a giant market selling weed? Ban all sellers. No one is suggesting this. It’s more like if you find one stall selling weed and then five hundred other stalls selling various illegal things, and then you go to the market manager and tell them and they lazily remove one or two vendors but don’t or any actual resources to work to root out the problem.
sethherr 6y ago
It’s more like: a market says we won’t have anyone selling weed, and there are stalls selling weed, and someone says “hey, you’re selling weed even though you say you won’t” And unlike a market, which is generally not owned by a single entity, this market is owned by the richest person in the world, so it certainly has the resources to enforce its policies.