5 ms·

I think they were referring to the removal, almost a week after January 6th, of Trump videos and the suspension of uploads to his YouTube account. It looks like

I think they were referring to the removal, almost a week after January 6th, of Trump videos and the suspension of uploads to his YouTube account. It looks like the newest videos on there are from 7 months ago. YouTube deletes Trump video and suspends new uploads: A new video on the president’s account violated YouTube policy on inciting violence. https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2021/1/12/22218757/youtube-trump-account-video-deleted-uploads-suspension-indefinite https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2021/1/12/22218757/you...

krapp 5y ago
Either way, Youtube didn't ban him, which contradicts the premise that they were just looking for an excuse to ban him because they loathed him. If that were the case, his content wouldn't exist on the platform anywhere. It doesn't seem like much of a slippery slope if it goes down then comes back up again.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  How has it came back up again? Are you saying that some social media site that banned Trump has since unbanned him?
- serf 5y ago
  >It doesn't seem like much of a slippery slope if it goes down then comes back up again. once a precedent is set, a transient acceptance of the action is established as a prior act. you don't re-cork that genie, that's the whole idea of the slippery slope argument. forever-more when YouTube considers an action towards something it can always now be said .. "Well in the case of X we did Y." The 'slippery slope' isn't referring to the actions committed themselves, it's referring to a pattern of acceptance and renormalization that occurs after which biases the decision-making group into further actions of a similar vein.
  - Serenacula 5y ago
    I do feel compelled to point out that the slippery slope argument is in fact a type of fallacy. Like, if you look up a list of fallacies there it is, the "slippery slope argument".

krapp 5y ago

Either way, Youtube didn't ban him, which contradicts the premise that they were just looking for an excuse to ban him because they loathed him. If that were the case, his content wouldn't exist on the platform anywhere. It doesn't seem like much of a slippery slope if it goes down then comes back up again.

josephcsible 5y ago
How has it came back up again? Are you saying that some social media site that banned Trump has since unbanned him?
serf 5y ago
>It doesn't seem like much of a slippery slope if it goes down then comes back up again. once a precedent is set, a transient acceptance of the action is established as a prior act. you don't re-cork that genie, that's the whole idea of the slippery slope argument. forever-more when YouTube considers an action towards something it can always now be said .. "Well in the case of X we did Y." The 'slippery slope' isn't referring to the actions committed themselves, it's referring to a pattern of acceptance and renormalization that occurs after which biases the decision-making group into further actions of a similar vein.
- Serenacula 5y ago
  I do feel compelled to point out that the slippery slope argument is in fact a type of fallacy. Like, if you look up a list of fallacies there it is, the "slippery slope argument".