> The message might have drawn racist comments on Twitter or Facebook, but this was the world’s biggest professional social network — one where people had to us

> The message might have drawn racist comments on Twitter or Facebook, but this was the world’s biggest professional social network — one where people had to use their real names and list their employer. What was the worst they would say? > “This statistic is crap and from a questionable source,” Poe’s law is in full effect here. If you’re going to post a stat you should be ready to fire back at anyone responding like this, telling them, and everyone reading, why your sources/stats are legit. Not quietly reporting them for racism and hoping their comment is hidden. It should be seen as a chance to cement your position, yet this is a response as if those nutty CCP-referencing comments are a danger to your position. To the sort that would be inclined to agree with such replies, attempts at “censorship” only weakens your position. It doesn’t matter if the objections are just dog whistles, this sort of refusal - or inability - to confront them is what forms the groundwork for anti-liberal rhetoric. Snowflake, censor, etc, you’re earning the labels. If you only post a view where everyone will accept it without question, you’ve set out from the start to accomplish nothing but momentary, smug self-satisfaction.