4 ms·
arbitrary: "based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system." None of these are by personal whim, there is clearly a process/system i
by dlp211 6y ago
arbitrary: "based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system."
None of these are by personal whim, there is clearly a process/system in place to determine whether an episode should stay.
unreasonable: "not guided by or based on good sense" and "beyond the limits of acceptability or fairness." Sorry, I just don't see how these decisions could be considered unreasonable. You may disagree with the moral sense of why they are doing this, you may disagree that that is good sense, but that would be best, your opinion, not some empirically correct point of view.
- roenxi 6y ago> there is clearly a process/system in place to determine whether an episode should stay. Which system are you thinking of? There is probably just a content moderation group that makes aye/nay calls. A system is something like judicial review of police actions, or that strange independent review council that Facebook is setting up. Spotify's 'system' is going to boil down to someone making arbitrary calls. There isn't a science to it. > Sorry, I just don't see how these decisions could be considered unreasonable. Millions of people endorse Joe Rogan, he is a benchmark of what acceptability means. Joe Rogan talking about something is almost definitely marking it as something that is a matter of interest to the public and a legit topic of conversation. He is far more qualified to decide what is and isn't acceptable to his audience and the public discourse than Spotify, some random corporation filled with people who passed a job interview. Censoring his content is unreasonable by default, unless Spotify has a really compelling argument.