7 ms·

To me, this sounds a lot like "both sides, both sides". Politics is going to be messy. There's a lot of fait-accompli-as-fiat. But while there are two parties,

by txru 6y ago

To me, this sounds a lot like "both sides, both sides". Politics is going to be messy. There's a lot of fait-accompli-as-fiat. But while there are two parties, there is no inherent need for the parties to be symmetrical. There is no equivalent person on the left to Giuliani, because he's meaningfully facilitated illegal insurrection against a peaceful transition, while in power. I hear things like this, and I think it would be great if corporate policy in general were appeal-able to the government the banned person resides in. People get put into corporate jails and excluded from service wrongly all the time. That's a conversation I'm willing to have. But the like of Bannon and Giuliani have just been fleeing from platform to platform as their detestable ideas and statements finally catch up with the strong stomachs of advertisers. The government shouldn't be overriding private corporations who make an ethical objection in the face of boycott, without a very clearly laid out due-process.

S_A_P 6y ago
Maybe there isnt. You could be right, but I was speaking in broad strokes. You cant say there arent bad faith actors on the left. I honestly dont care if there is someone on the left that is equivalently 'bad'. And trying to find those people illustrates my point. Again, I think Rudy G and Steve B are generally wrong and myopic. The point Im trying to make is that just because we differ in political leaning/opinion we cant let media/twitter/social media/ state actors amplify this. I have 5 kids(3 step and 2 natural) and I cant even get them to agree so how the ** do we expect the population in general to get there? We are all different, and not only is that ok its awesome.
- txru 6y ago
  There are bad-faith actors on the left. This isn't just kids disagreeing though, this is one of your boys helping push the mom out of the house so the boys get preferential treatment. It is acceptable in times like these for people to make an ethical stand.
  - S_A_P 6y ago
    This is also the kind of thing we need to be able to talk about without getting caught in our feelings. I generally am just lamenting that this is where we are.
    - txru 6y ago
      Yes, I'm very sad. This is a hard time. All the best to you and your family.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- jancsika 6y ago
  > we cant let media/twitter/social media/ state actors amplify this. I'd strongly suggest taking a harder look at the systems like HN, and consider how-- for example-- the posting speed it encourages works against you in this respect. E.g., what made you write "equivalent person on the left" since that turns out not to be a relevant detail to you? I think the system here-- like Twitter et al-- encourages posting too quickly in this context. Sure, it works great if I'm just complaining from memory about the SVG spec or something. If I get it wrong, someone will call out the error and I can double-check the spec and confirm the mistake. But it's a royally bad idea wrt large political issues like this one. Instead, the entire system should go slower in general, encouraging one to reflect on their current knowledge and current blind spots before finalizing a post. That process could even be piecemeal over the period of days. A UI could easily be designed that makes it an enjoyable process to slowly build a post out of more meaningful little "lego-like" blocks. To me there's a frightening disconnect here on HN. A significant portion of the users know about or perhaps even work on dark patterns like recommendation algos where one can fairly accurately predict the number of users who will fall down into conspiracy rabbit holes. Yet with HN's opaque posting/sorting/scoring system that knowledge goes down the memory hole; for some reason "personal responsibility" always seems to stand in for any serious attempt at analyzing the system. Edit: clarification
  - MrMan 6y ago
    I see alot of resort to calls for "critical thinking" which any FB employee knows is no antidote to marketing or propaganda.
berneezy3 6y ago
Can you point me to a source on how Giuliani "meaningfully facilitated illegal insurrection against a peaceful transition"? I can't name democrats who facilitated ilegal insurrection in regards to this past election, but I can name democrats who facilitated illegal insurrection against their own communities after the George Floyd incident. The democrats who refused to call out rioting and looting (as a separate incident from the peaceful protesting), those who called for the short-sighted defunding of police departments in cities with high crime (look up the uptick in shootings and murder in NYC after the city removed $1 billion from the police department) have meaningfully facilitated illegal insurrection in their own communities, in my opinion. I agree that Bannon does make egregious comments, but I tend to think the media blows his comments out of proportion. Due to his military background, he often uses war analogies, which make for the detestable quotes you mention. For example, in the Fauci "head-on-a-pike" comment that he made, it was clear to me that he was not suggesting for folks to literally murder Fauci. He was suggesting for an example to be made out of Fauci by removing him from power. It's similar to when athletes say they want to "kill" the opposing teams. Regardless of this, I agree with you that comments such as the one I mentioned are in bad taste. On the other hand, left-leaning celebrities who posted picture depicting Trunp's dead body (e.g. Snoop Dogg) did not seem to face similar consequences from big tech.
- modo_mario 6y ago
  > those who called for the short-sighted defunding of police departments in cities with high crime (look up the uptick in shootings and murder in NYC after the city removed $1 billion from the police department) This is facilitating illegal insurrection? And NYC is your example... Surely this could have nothing to do with covid and the whatever else but a 112% increase in shootings must be the consequence of a budget cut of a bit more than 1%.... Have you perhaps considered who it is that is registering this uptick in crime and drawing the connections? Why it was the insanely high to begin with. Like what? Do their janitors earn a million yearly? Not having a slightly less mindblowing budget is not meaningfully facilitating illegal insurrection it's slightly more sane fiscal policy
  - berneezy3 6y ago
roenxi 6y ago
> To me, this sounds a lot like "both sides, both sides". When one side is being banned for not meeting a standard, "both sides, both sides" is an extremely valid argument.
- zanellato19 6y ago
  Not it isn't. Not when that standard is not inciting violence and white supremacy.

by txru 6y ago

S_A_P 6y ago

Maybe there isnt. You could be right, but I was speaking in broad strokes. You cant say there arent bad faith actors on the left. I honestly dont care if there is someone on the left that is equivalently 'bad'. And trying to find those people illustrates my point. Again, I think Rudy G and Steve B are generally wrong and myopic. The point Im trying to make is that just because we differ in political leaning/opinion we cant let media/twitter/social media/ state actors amplify this. I have 5 kids(3 step and 2 natural) and I cant even get them to agree so how the ** do we expect the population in general to get there? We are all different, and not only is that ok its awesome.

txru 6y ago
There are bad-faith actors on the left. This isn't just kids disagreeing though, this is one of your boys helping push the mom out of the house so the boys get preferential treatment. It is acceptable in times like these for people to make an ethical stand.
- S_A_P 6y ago
  This is also the kind of thing we need to be able to talk about without getting caught in our feelings. I generally am just lamenting that this is where we are.
  - txru 6y ago
    Yes, I'm very sad. This is a hard time. All the best to you and your family.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
jancsika 6y ago
> we cant let media/twitter/social media/ state actors amplify this. I'd strongly suggest taking a harder look at the systems like HN, and consider how-- for example-- the posting speed it encourages works against you in this respect. E.g., what made you write "equivalent person on the left" since that turns out not to be a relevant detail to you? I think the system here-- like Twitter et al-- encourages posting too quickly in this context. Sure, it works great if I'm just complaining from memory about the SVG spec or something. If I get it wrong, someone will call out the error and I can double-check the spec and confirm the mistake. But it's a royally bad idea wrt large political issues like this one. Instead, the entire system should go slower in general, encouraging one to reflect on their current knowledge and current blind spots before finalizing a post. That process could even be piecemeal over the period of days. A UI could easily be designed that makes it an enjoyable process to slowly build a post out of more meaningful little "lego-like" blocks. To me there's a frightening disconnect here on HN. A significant portion of the users know about or perhaps even work on dark patterns like recommendation algos where one can fairly accurately predict the number of users who will fall down into conspiracy rabbit holes. Yet with HN's opaque posting/sorting/scoring system that knowledge goes down the memory hole; for some reason "personal responsibility" always seems to stand in for any serious attempt at analyzing the system. Edit: clarification
- MrMan 6y ago
  I see alot of resort to calls for "critical thinking" which any FB employee knows is no antidote to marketing or propaganda.

berneezy3 6y ago

Can you point me to a source on how Giuliani "meaningfully facilitated illegal insurrection against a peaceful transition"? I can't name democrats who facilitated ilegal insurrection in regards to this past election, but I can name democrats who facilitated illegal insurrection against their own communities after the George Floyd incident. The democrats who refused to call out rioting and looting (as a separate incident from the peaceful protesting), those who called for the short-sighted defunding of police departments in cities with high crime (look up the uptick in shootings and murder in NYC after the city removed $1 billion from the police department) have meaningfully facilitated illegal insurrection in their own communities, in my opinion. I agree that Bannon does make egregious comments, but I tend to think the media blows his comments out of proportion. Due to his military background, he often uses war analogies, which make for the detestable quotes you mention. For example, in the Fauci "head-on-a-pike" comment that he made, it was clear to me that he was not suggesting for folks to literally murder Fauci. He was suggesting for an example to be made out of Fauci by removing him from power. It's similar to when athletes say they want to "kill" the opposing teams. Regardless of this, I agree with you that comments such as the one I mentioned are in bad taste. On the other hand, left-leaning celebrities who posted picture depicting Trunp's dead body (e.g. Snoop Dogg) did not seem to face similar consequences from big tech.

modo_mario 6y ago
> those who called for the short-sighted defunding of police departments in cities with high crime (look up the uptick in shootings and murder in NYC after the city removed $1 billion from the police department) This is facilitating illegal insurrection? And NYC is your example... Surely this could have nothing to do with covid and the whatever else but a 112% increase in shootings must be the consequence of a budget cut of a bit more than 1%.... Have you perhaps considered who it is that is registering this uptick in crime and drawing the connections? Why it was the insanely high to begin with. Like what? Do their janitors earn a million yearly? Not having a slightly less mindblowing budget is not meaningfully facilitating illegal insurrection it's slightly more sane fiscal policy
- berneezy3 6y ago

roenxi 6y ago

> To me, this sounds a lot like "both sides, both sides". When one side is being banned for not meeting a standard, "both sides, both sides" is an extremely valid argument.

zanellato19 6y ago
Not it isn't. Not when that standard is not inciting violence and white supremacy.