8 ms·

> It seems to seriously scare some folks that there are places where they cannot deplatform whoever they want for anything. If it's really possible for "some f

> It seems to seriously scare some folks that there are places where they cannot deplatform whoever they want for anything. If it's really possible for "some folks" to deplatform "whoever they want" "for anything", why is this power not available to me or anyone I know? I know it's glib, but... come on folks. The anti-anti-anti-cancel-culture hyperbole is officially out of control. It should be possible to have a legitimate conversation of whether or not Lorenz is correct about Andreesen, and whether or not the accusation constitutes behavior that should be condemned, without resulting to this kind of culture war screaming. If you really want good journalism, do you really believe the stuff you quoted from Greenwald qualifies? "Stasi notebooks", really?

vorpalhex 6y ago
As Greenwald points out, these journalists work at major outlets and have huge followings which they can use - and have used - to shut down speech. Cancel culture is real and we must not allow it to be tolerated. I've been told that I'm "problematic" and should reconsider blogging... because I recommended a $40 pair of hair shears. Greenwald is being a bit melodramatic, but his substance isn't wrong. A reporter lied and attempted to slam a public figure - and if it wasn't for that conversation being widely heard she likely would of seriously harmed his reputation with her lie.
- newacct583 6y ago
  > A reporter lied and attempted to slam a public figure That... seems kinda spun. The source material isn't so damning. Taylor Lorenz was on the call, and tweeted: "@pmarca just openly using the r-slur on Clubhouse tonight and not one other person in the room called him on it or saying anything" Then later when she was corrected that it wasn't Andreessen but someone else, replied: "Thanks for clarifying that it was Felicia saying that word, rather than Marc as many in the room heard it. I hope you can understand how some people in the room felt hearing it" I mean, as I (someone who reads and values Lorenz's work) read it, she was offended (more, it seems, at the casual use of "retarded" going unchallenged than at the specific speaker), and tweeted about it, but made a mistake in attribution which she recognized (while pointing out that her original offense was that the word wasn't challenged). And Greenwald wrote like 1000 words to go after her. And his essay, not her tweet, is at the top of HN right now. So... who's cancelling who here?
  - da_big_ghey 6y ago
    Retarded is not a slur. Never was. People keep picking arbitrary words and saying they're "offensive", but there's no reason why. I have heard kids call each other "mentally challenged" and "developmentally delayed", I kid you not. Younger kids have trouble pronouncing those, so maybe that's something? Anyway, I refuse to partake in the euphemism treadmill.
    - arpa 6y ago
      I found it ironic that in screenshot it says both "r-word" and "DeepFuckingValue". Zeitgeist, i guess.
    - kenjackson 6y ago
      Retarded can definitely be used as a slur. And, in general, you don’t need to be offended for a word to be offensive to others.
      - vorpalhex 6y ago
        I was at some point describing a friend and used the word "gypsy". Another friend got very upset at me and went on a long rant about how the word is offensive and wrong and I should be ashamed for using it. I used gypsy because it's the title the person I was describing used. It's how they asked to be referred to, and as it's their literal blood heritage, I'm going to refer to them however they want to be referred to. This happens today with words like "transsexual" - there are people very offended by that phrase and there are people who self-label using that phrase and want to be called that. If we as a species are going to continue down a path of globalization where we have a lot of different cultures and communities around us, we're going to have to understand a word is not verboten universally. There's a difference between someone not wanting to be called retarded and taking offense anytime the word itself is used - even in non-derogatory contexts.
    - germinalphrase 6y ago
      My Midwestern upbringing was certainly peppered with people using ‘retard’ as a slur, so... mileage may vary?
- quantified 6y ago
  > “We can stay retarded longer than you can stay solvent.” ... has vast complexity? It’s good, and better if you’re baked out of your gourd. But a tad melodramatic.
eitland 6y ago
> "Stasi notebooks", really? Hyperbole is a well known tool in writing. Here it is obvious that he is using it and it resonates with many of the readers. I say he used it well. When is hyperbole wrong? IMO most often when it isn't obvious. If a normally capable but uninformed reader actually believe it to be true word-by-word then it is missing its mark. I might feel more strongly about this than you since a bunch of my friends has been on the receiving end of some major abuse of power by journalistic powerhouses around here.
betwixthewires 6y ago
>It should be possible to have a legitimate conversation of whether or not Lorenz is correct about Andreesen, and whether or not the accusation constitutes behavior that should be condemned. You don't give equal weight to blatant lies. There's no legitimate conversation to be had on this topic other than to point out the blatant lies, attempted character assassination based on fabrication, and complete abandonment of any shred of journalistic integrity or standards. You don't give legitimacy to clear malevolent liars by arguing their points as if they are valid.

vorpalhex 6y ago

As Greenwald points out, these journalists work at major outlets and have huge followings which they can use - and have used - to shut down speech. Cancel culture is real and we must not allow it to be tolerated. I've been told that I'm "problematic" and should reconsider blogging... because I recommended a $40 pair of hair shears. Greenwald is being a bit melodramatic, but his substance isn't wrong. A reporter lied and attempted to slam a public figure - and if it wasn't for that conversation being widely heard she likely would of seriously harmed his reputation with her lie.

newacct583 6y ago
> A reporter lied and attempted to slam a public figure That... seems kinda spun. The source material isn't so damning. Taylor Lorenz was on the call, and tweeted: "@pmarca just openly using the r-slur on Clubhouse tonight and not one other person in the room called him on it or saying anything" Then later when she was corrected that it wasn't Andreessen but someone else, replied: "Thanks for clarifying that it was Felicia saying that word, rather than Marc as many in the room heard it. I hope you can understand how some people in the room felt hearing it" I mean, as I (someone who reads and values Lorenz's work) read it, she was offended (more, it seems, at the casual use of "retarded" going unchallenged than at the specific speaker), and tweeted about it, but made a mistake in attribution which she recognized (while pointing out that her original offense was that the word wasn't challenged). And Greenwald wrote like 1000 words to go after her. And his essay, not her tweet, is at the top of HN right now. So... who's cancelling who here?
- da_big_ghey 6y ago
  Retarded is not a slur. Never was. People keep picking arbitrary words and saying they're "offensive", but there's no reason why. I have heard kids call each other "mentally challenged" and "developmentally delayed", I kid you not. Younger kids have trouble pronouncing those, so maybe that's something? Anyway, I refuse to partake in the euphemism treadmill.
  - arpa 6y ago
    I found it ironic that in screenshot it says both "r-word" and "DeepFuckingValue". Zeitgeist, i guess.
  - kenjackson 6y ago
    Retarded can definitely be used as a slur. And, in general, you don’t need to be offended for a word to be offensive to others.
    - vorpalhex 6y ago
      I was at some point describing a friend and used the word "gypsy". Another friend got very upset at me and went on a long rant about how the word is offensive and wrong and I should be ashamed for using it. I used gypsy because it's the title the person I was describing used. It's how they asked to be referred to, and as it's their literal blood heritage, I'm going to refer to them however they want to be referred to. This happens today with words like "transsexual" - there are people very offended by that phrase and there are people who self-label using that phrase and want to be called that. If we as a species are going to continue down a path of globalization where we have a lot of different cultures and communities around us, we're going to have to understand a word is not verboten universally. There's a difference between someone not wanting to be called retarded and taking offense anytime the word itself is used - even in non-derogatory contexts.
  - germinalphrase 6y ago
    My Midwestern upbringing was certainly peppered with people using ‘retard’ as a slur, so... mileage may vary?
quantified 6y ago
> “We can stay retarded longer than you can stay solvent.” ... has vast complexity? It’s good, and better if you’re baked out of your gourd. But a tad melodramatic.

eitland 6y ago

> "Stasi notebooks", really? Hyperbole is a well known tool in writing. Here it is obvious that he is using it and it resonates with many of the readers. I say he used it well. When is hyperbole wrong? IMO most often when it isn't obvious. If a normally capable but uninformed reader actually believe it to be true word-by-word then it is missing its mark. I might feel more strongly about this than you since a bunch of my friends has been on the receiving end of some major abuse of power by journalistic powerhouses around here.

betwixthewires 6y ago

>It should be possible to have a legitimate conversation of whether or not Lorenz is correct about Andreesen, and whether or not the accusation constitutes behavior that should be condemned. You don't give equal weight to blatant lies. There's no legitimate conversation to be had on this topic other than to point out the blatant lies, attempted character assassination based on fabrication, and complete abandonment of any shred of journalistic integrity or standards. You don't give legitimacy to clear malevolent liars by arguing their points as if they are valid.