2 ms·

Lobby for Uighurs? You'd have to assume the Chinese hadn't heard of Streisand Effect. As for Tienanmen - okay, but this would require hiring people to follow

by trasz 6y ago

Lobby for Uighurs? You'd have to assume the Chinese hadn't heard of Streisand Effect. As for Tienanmen - okay, but this would require hiring people to follow every individual discussion, to see if the subject is being followed according to the official rules or not. It doesn't seem realistic.

duxup 6y ago
> okay, but this would require hiring people to follow every individual discussion The bans happened, Zoom said the request came from the Chinese government. How the Chinese government chose to do so really doesn't matter at that point does it? Same goes for the Streisand Effect... they're doing it none the less.
- trasz 6y ago
  The Streisand Effect scenario only applies if you assume they are doing this to silence down Uighurs. It doesn't matter if they contacted those folks due to their involvement with religious extremist groups, which also matches the problems experienced by their family members back in China. As for the bans - we don't know why they happened. Claims it's related to discussing Tienanmen are just that - claims.
  - duxup 6y ago
    " due to their involvement with religious extremist groups" You keep saying this, I've no reason to assume that's the reason they contacted them. "we don't know why they happened." Would that apply to winnie the poo and similar things? I'm don't get this hand waving around 'we don't' really know why'.... is that supposed to make it ok?
    - trasz 6y ago
      Sure you have no reason to believe the extremist thing, but then, the explanation you've proposed leads to the Streisand Effect. I find the former easier to believe. As for "Winnie" - that's much easier, you can just grep for the phrase. The "we don't know why" basically means we can't assume things, especially in this case, where there's a fundamental language barrier and ongoing propaganda war.

2 ms·

Lobby for Uighurs? You'd have to assume the Chinese hadn't heard of Streisand Effect. As for Tienanmen - okay, but this would require hiring people to follow

by trasz 6y ago

duxup 6y ago
> okay, but this would require hiring people to follow every individual discussion The bans happened, Zoom said the request came from the Chinese government. How the Chinese government chose to do so really doesn't matter at that point does it? Same goes for the Streisand Effect... they're doing it none the less.
- trasz 6y ago
  The Streisand Effect scenario only applies if you assume they are doing this to silence down Uighurs. It doesn't matter if they contacted those folks due to their involvement with religious extremist groups, which also matches the problems experienced by their family members back in China. As for the bans - we don't know why they happened. Claims it's related to discussing Tienanmen are just that - claims.
  - duxup 6y ago
    " due to their involvement with religious extremist groups" You keep saying this, I've no reason to assume that's the reason they contacted them. "we don't know why they happened." Would that apply to winnie the poo and similar things? I'm don't get this hand waving around 'we don't' really know why'.... is that supposed to make it ok?
    - trasz 6y ago
      Sure you have no reason to believe the extremist thing, but then, the explanation you've proposed leads to the Streisand Effect. I find the former easier to believe. As for "Winnie" - that's much easier, you can just grep for the phrase. The "we don't know why" basically means we can't assume things, especially in this case, where there's a fundamental language barrier and ongoing propaganda war.