5 ms·

I don't understand how your question relates to my point. The compromise position is that you tolerate people's personal definitions and words, e.g., you would

I don't understand how your question relates to my point. The compromise position is that you tolerate people's personal definitions and words, e.g., you would not demand they be punished for having or using them. I'm not saying there is some legal "grounds" you could use to bar somebody from being intolerant of what you say or think, you just asked what a compromise position would be, and tolerance is one and it's what the progressive position was for a long time.

slg 4y ago
Ok, I’m glad we agree that the Babylon Bee should stop complaining about how other people define these words.
- throwawaylinux 4y ago
  We don't agree on that. Pretty disingenuous and infantile that you claim that's the conclusion of my comment now, wasn't it? Do you want to actually have a conversation about this or just come up with some vapid "gotcha"? It's fundamental to democracy and a healthy public discourse that people be allowed to voice their opinions including disagreements. It's quite extremist to believe that people who disagree with us must stop talking about it. That is not what tolerance means. What's the end game? Ban and censor and silence until nobody complains, disagrees, speaks out, or satirizes The Truth™ ?
  - slg 4y ago
    I already said I don't understand your viewpoint. You seem to be saying the Babylon Bee is free to challenge progressives', USA Today's, and Twitter's definitions of these words. However, you also seem to be saying that neither progressives nor Twitter can challenge the Babylon Bee's definition. The everyone should just be tolerant of other people's definitions solution kind of relies on everyone being tolerant of other people's definitions.
    - throwawaylinux 4y ago
      Read what I actually said, instead of making up these infantile strawmen that have nothing to do with what I wrote. You have no cheap "gotcha" here.
      - slg 4y ago
        I already said twice that I didn't understand whatever point you were trying to make. If you "want to actually have a conversation" like you say, you could try either directly addressing my comment or at least rephrasing and expanding on your point. You said everyone should be tolerant of everyone else's definitions. Doesn't everyone include progressive, conservatives, USA Today, Twitter, and the Babylon Bee? If so, aren't you suggesting they should all stop complaining about the definitions the other groups use?
        throwawaylinux 4y ago
        I'm not saying or suggesting any such thing as you insinuate and a really basic reading of what I wrote makes that very clear. If and when you are ready to have a grownup conversation, I'll be here. Until then, snarky content-free "zingers" don't interest me in any way. I literally do not care in the slightest and certainly won't dignify it with a response. Nobody else is reading this or being swayed by these comments, so if you don't want to try to have a constructive and polite conversation just move on. I hear twitter is a great place if you want to bait people with that kind of comment though.
        slg 4y ago
        >I'm not saying or suggesting any such thing as you insinuate and a really basic reading of what I wrote makes that very clear. If and when you are ready to have a grownup conversation, I'll be here. How many times do I have to say that I do not understand what point you are trying to make? I'm not saying that like I think your opinion is bad. I am saying I don't understand how you are applying your principle of tolerance in this situation. Either directly tell me why my summary of your position is wrong or stop playing this "grownup conversation" card. A grownup way to approach this situation would be to actually engage in the conversation rather than repeatedly complaining that I am having this conversation wrong.

slg 4y ago

Ok, I’m glad we agree that the Babylon Bee should stop complaining about how other people define these words.

throwawaylinux 4y ago
We don't agree on that. Pretty disingenuous and infantile that you claim that's the conclusion of my comment now, wasn't it? Do you want to actually have a conversation about this or just come up with some vapid "gotcha"? It's fundamental to democracy and a healthy public discourse that people be allowed to voice their opinions including disagreements. It's quite extremist to believe that people who disagree with us must stop talking about it. That is not what tolerance means. What's the end game? Ban and censor and silence until nobody complains, disagrees, speaks out, or satirizes The Truth™ ?
- slg 4y ago
  I already said I don't understand your viewpoint. You seem to be saying the Babylon Bee is free to challenge progressives', USA Today's, and Twitter's definitions of these words. However, you also seem to be saying that neither progressives nor Twitter can challenge the Babylon Bee's definition. The everyone should just be tolerant of other people's definitions solution kind of relies on everyone being tolerant of other people's definitions.
  - throwawaylinux 4y ago
    Read what I actually said, instead of making up these infantile strawmen that have nothing to do with what I wrote. You have no cheap "gotcha" here.
    - slg 4y ago
      I already said twice that I didn't understand whatever point you were trying to make. If you "want to actually have a conversation" like you say, you could try either directly addressing my comment or at least rephrasing and expanding on your point. You said everyone should be tolerant of everyone else's definitions. Doesn't everyone include progressive, conservatives, USA Today, Twitter, and the Babylon Bee? If so, aren't you suggesting they should all stop complaining about the definitions the other groups use?
      - throwawaylinux 4y ago
        I'm not saying or suggesting any such thing as you insinuate and a really basic reading of what I wrote makes that very clear. If and when you are ready to have a grownup conversation, I'll be here. Until then, snarky content-free "zingers" don't interest me in any way. I literally do not care in the slightest and certainly won't dignify it with a response. Nobody else is reading this or being swayed by these comments, so if you don't want to try to have a constructive and polite conversation just move on. I hear twitter is a great place if you want to bait people with that kind of comment though.
        slg 4y ago
        >I'm not saying or suggesting any such thing as you insinuate and a really basic reading of what I wrote makes that very clear. If and when you are ready to have a grownup conversation, I'll be here. How many times do I have to say that I do not understand what point you are trying to make? I'm not saying that like I think your opinion is bad. I am saying I don't understand how you are applying your principle of tolerance in this situation. Either directly tell me why my summary of your position is wrong or stop playing this "grownup conversation" card. A grownup way to approach this situation would be to actually engage in the conversation rather than repeatedly complaining that I am having this conversation wrong.