6 ms·
What if you wrote the following? (I'm being serious): "I don't agree with CubsFan that information restriction in the South Side of Chicago is a justifiable way
by keenmaster 6y ago
What if you wrote the following? (I'm being serious): "I don't agree with CubsFan that information restriction in the South Side of Chicago is a justifiable way to reduce the looting downtown, but I think HN is exactly the sort of place that tolerates this exact kind of viewpoint, especially directly underneath a comment that argues the opposite."
- bhupy 6y agoYes, there is nothing wrong with that statement. Arguing in favor of censorship is not the same as censorship. The whole point of free discussion is that you can talk about the philosophical merits of anything, regardless of whether or not the argument itself is "correct". On the flipside, policing other's willingness to engage certain arguments is itself a form of micro-censorship. The pushback is against arguments like "This argument has no place on HN", which is not a useful argument and doesn't address the merits of GP's comment.
- keenmaster 6y agoWe're probably on the same page. We just have a different definition of "tolerate." I swiftly downvoted the comment and hope that others do too, and to me that's not tolerating the comment. I will gladly engage with the comment...by pointing out how insanely wrong and inhumane it is.
- bhupy 6y agoNo disagreements there.