8 ms·

4chan is light years beyond the point where people just posted "Hitler did nothing wrong" to piss off the righteous. People acting like hateful idiots for fun

4chan is light years beyond the point where people just posted "Hitler did nothing wrong" to piss off the righteous. People acting like hateful idiots for fun eventually brought actual hateful idiots. This brought people who like to spread their ideas to actual hateful idiots.

blueflow 4y ago
Convince me you are not just othering them.
paskozdilar 4y ago
Responsibility to the responsible. There's no difference between idiots in churches and idiots on 4chan - both are idiots, both eat up whatever bullcrap is served to them, and both are harmful to society. And neither means that churches or 4chan are bad in themselves. We must be careful before starting to excuse idiots for their idiotic behavior based on "bad influence". Society is a complex mechanism, and censorship inevitably brings unforseen consequences. Human mind is also complex, and anti-social behavior can sometimes be traced back to early-childhood traumas. Does that mean we should ban free parenting and raise infants in government-approved facilities?
- praptak 4y ago
  Umm, false dichotomy? Blame the medium, blame the idiots - these are not mutually exclusive. Also, there's a huge gap between supporting censorship and condemning those who amplify harmful messages.
  - paskozdilar 4y ago
    Why should people posting somewhere be responsible for actions of other people reading their posts?
    - praptak 4y ago
      Same reason you are responsible for shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. Because they know the other people will act on it.
      - shitlord 4y ago
        People often use "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater" as an example alluding to the Schenck case without realizing it was overturned.
      - paskozdilar 4y ago
        Erroneous argument - shouting "fire" in a crowded theater has a direct, predictable consequence of people acting on it. Posting stuff on the internet does not.
- w4ffl35 4y ago
  hail satan
  - paskozdilar 4y ago
    :)

blueflow 4y ago

Convince me you are not just othering them.

paskozdilar 4y ago

Responsibility to the responsible. There's no difference between idiots in churches and idiots on 4chan - both are idiots, both eat up whatever bullcrap is served to them, and both are harmful to society. And neither means that churches or 4chan are bad in themselves. We must be careful before starting to excuse idiots for their idiotic behavior based on "bad influence". Society is a complex mechanism, and censorship inevitably brings unforseen consequences. Human mind is also complex, and anti-social behavior can sometimes be traced back to early-childhood traumas. Does that mean we should ban free parenting and raise infants in government-approved facilities?

praptak 4y ago
Umm, false dichotomy? Blame the medium, blame the idiots - these are not mutually exclusive. Also, there's a huge gap between supporting censorship and condemning those who amplify harmful messages.
- paskozdilar 4y ago
  Why should people posting somewhere be responsible for actions of other people reading their posts?
  - praptak 4y ago
    Same reason you are responsible for shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. Because they know the other people will act on it.
    - shitlord 4y ago
      People often use "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater" as an example alluding to the Schenck case without realizing it was overturned.
    - paskozdilar 4y ago
      Erroneous argument - shouting "fire" in a crowded theater has a direct, predictable consequence of people acting on it. Posting stuff on the internet does not.
w4ffl35 4y ago
hail satan
- paskozdilar 4y ago
  :)