4 ms·

I can read quite clearly between the lines of your comment, but I’m still having trouble finding where in my comment I said that users calling for violence on s

I can read quite clearly between the lines of your comment, but I’m still having trouble finding where in my comment I said that users calling for violence on social media should be exempt from sanctions if they’re left-leaning.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
> we take whatever measures we have to to get rid of it for the greater good of society Justifying around the "greater good" is so obviously fraught and subjective. And since the workers in tech are overwhelmingly liberal, they will undoubtedly bias policies of mass communication platforms to disallow opposition. Oddly enough people so concerned with minority representation will steam-roll minorities when they make blind "greater good" majoritarianism the norm. And nowadays the definition of "harm" has been trivialized so far that really practically anything is a target.
spoonjim 6y ago
Also, beware the false equivalence between smashing a store window and stealing some crap vs. actually attacking a human being. They will use the word "violence" to describe both, rather than get into a definition war with them, just keep the distinction clear.
- gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
  > beware the false equivalence between smashing a store window and stealing some crap vs. actually attacking a human being Ok so I guess economic circumstances can never be oppressive. So if a thieve steals all your stuff and you starve...that's not violence!
  - spoonjim 6y ago
    Here is a curated selection of the logical failures in your two line comment: * saying that economic circumstances are "oppressive," then trying to draw this to "violence" * a claim that if a thief steals all of your stuff, you "starve" -- please give an example of one person who "starved" because BLM looters stole their stuff * implying that being in a situation where you are "starving" is the same as actually being violently attacked, i.e. shot, stabbed, bludgeoned, etc.
    - nec4b 6y ago
      >>* a claim that if a thief steals all of your stuff, you "starve" -- please give an example of one person who "starved" because BLM looters stole their stuff You are 100% sure that nobody who lost a job because his place of work was destroyed in riots is not starving? Not everybody is so privileged to have enough savings to support himself after loosing a job.
      - spoonjim 6y ago
        Of course I'm not 100% sure of that, but there is a long sequence of events between smashing a window and getting to that outcome, unlike bashing a guy's face in with a crowbar where the consequence is guaranteed within milliseconds. The two acts are not equal and attempts to equate them are either idiotic or in bad faith.
        nec4b 6y ago
        Once upon a time in Germany there was a special night, it was called "Crystal Night"[1]. It got it's name because of all the glass from the smashed windows lying on the ground. There were some people arguing that it was violence, but some said that those people were either idiotic or arguing in bad faith. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht
        kemayo 6y ago
        I'd have gone with the hundreds of Jews murdered that night and subsequent tens of thousands sent to concentration camps in the aftermath as the important violence there, honestly.
        cycrutchfield 6y ago
        No, but think of the property that was destroyed!
        nec4b 6y ago
- h_anna_h 6y ago
  I really do not think that most willing to smash a bunch of windows would hesitate to attack you if you stand between them and said windows.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
    That's a strange view to hold. For most people there's a significant cognitive difference between being willing to destroy objects and being willing to attack people.
    - h_anna_h 6y ago
      We are not talking simply about destroying objects but about a specific act of vandalism that often happens during rioting.
      - johnchristopher 6y ago
        Attacking a human being, smashing a window, and attacking a human being in order to smash the window behind him are three very different things.
        h_anna_h 6y ago
        I never claimed otherwise.
        johnchristopher 6y ago
        > I really do not think that most willing to smash a bunch of windows would hesitate to attack you if you stand between them and said windows. Unless I misunderstood it this statement implies that a window smashing person would as well attack another humane being. It's not true. These acts are different, require different motivations and a different mentality/personality traits to follow through.
        6y ago
- lenkite 6y ago
  You mean like this: https://www.cleveland19.com/story/32814897/men-chant-black-lives-matter-before-viciously-attacking-white-victims/ https://www.cleveland19.com/story/32814897/men-chant-black-l...
  - spoonjim 6y ago
    Yes, that is what I am talking about. That is actual violence.
bobbobb54444 6y ago
I don’t give a fuck about your comment, I care about the reality of the situation you fucking mongoloid

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago

> we take whatever measures we have to to get rid of it for the greater good of society Justifying around the "greater good" is so obviously fraught and subjective. And since the workers in tech are overwhelmingly liberal, they will undoubtedly bias policies of mass communication platforms to disallow opposition. Oddly enough people so concerned with minority representation will steam-roll minorities when they make blind "greater good" majoritarianism the norm. And nowadays the definition of "harm" has been trivialized so far that really practically anything is a target.

spoonjim 6y ago

Also, beware the false equivalence between smashing a store window and stealing some crap vs. actually attacking a human being. They will use the word "violence" to describe both, rather than get into a definition war with them, just keep the distinction clear.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
> beware the false equivalence between smashing a store window and stealing some crap vs. actually attacking a human being Ok so I guess economic circumstances can never be oppressive. So if a thieve steals all your stuff and you starve...that's not violence!
- spoonjim 6y ago
  Here is a curated selection of the logical failures in your two line comment: * saying that economic circumstances are "oppressive," then trying to draw this to "violence" * a claim that if a thief steals all of your stuff, you "starve" -- please give an example of one person who "starved" because BLM looters stole their stuff * implying that being in a situation where you are "starving" is the same as actually being violently attacked, i.e. shot, stabbed, bludgeoned, etc.
  - nec4b 6y ago
    >>* a claim that if a thief steals all of your stuff, you "starve" -- please give an example of one person who "starved" because BLM looters stole their stuff You are 100% sure that nobody who lost a job because his place of work was destroyed in riots is not starving? Not everybody is so privileged to have enough savings to support himself after loosing a job.
    - spoonjim 6y ago
      Of course I'm not 100% sure of that, but there is a long sequence of events between smashing a window and getting to that outcome, unlike bashing a guy's face in with a crowbar where the consequence is guaranteed within milliseconds. The two acts are not equal and attempts to equate them are either idiotic or in bad faith.
      - nec4b 6y ago
        Once upon a time in Germany there was a special night, it was called "Crystal Night"[1]. It got it's name because of all the glass from the smashed windows lying on the ground. There were some people arguing that it was violence, but some said that those people were either idiotic or arguing in bad faith. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht
        kemayo 6y ago
        I'd have gone with the hundreds of Jews murdered that night and subsequent tens of thousands sent to concentration camps in the aftermath as the important violence there, honestly.
        cycrutchfield 6y ago
        No, but think of the property that was destroyed!
        nec4b 6y ago
h_anna_h 6y ago
I really do not think that most willing to smash a bunch of windows would hesitate to attack you if you stand between them and said windows.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  That's a strange view to hold. For most people there's a significant cognitive difference between being willing to destroy objects and being willing to attack people.
  - h_anna_h 6y ago
    We are not talking simply about destroying objects but about a specific act of vandalism that often happens during rioting.
    - johnchristopher 6y ago
      Attacking a human being, smashing a window, and attacking a human being in order to smash the window behind him are three very different things.
      - h_anna_h 6y ago
        I never claimed otherwise.
        johnchristopher 6y ago
        > I really do not think that most willing to smash a bunch of windows would hesitate to attack you if you stand between them and said windows. Unless I misunderstood it this statement implies that a window smashing person would as well attack another humane being. It's not true. These acts are different, require different motivations and a different mentality/personality traits to follow through.
        6y ago
lenkite 6y ago
You mean like this: https://www.cleveland19.com/story/32814897/men-chant-black-lives-matter-before-viciously-attacking-white-victims/ https://www.cleveland19.com/story/32814897/men-chant-black-l...
- spoonjim 6y ago
  Yes, that is what I am talking about. That is actual violence.

bobbobb54444 6y ago

I don’t give a fuck about your comment, I care about the reality of the situation you fucking mongoloid