4 ms·
It's not random, and no one is being persecuted. It's not retaliation or mocking. People have a right to share information with each other about abusive peopl
by rrwo 4y ago
It's not random, and no one is being persecuted. It's not retaliation or mocking.
People have a right to share information with each other about abusive people or places who should be avoided.
The lists could be campus rapists, or bad drunks, toxic places to work, or a list of towns or businesses that aren't safe for black or queer folk to visit.
Most of these informal lists have been around for decades. For some people, these lists help them to avoid some dangerous people or places.
Are there some people in these lists who don't deserve to be? Probably.
But how are you going to regulate it? It's speech after all.
- roenxi 4y ago> Some poor slob couldn't get a date because he was slandered ... Oh the humanity!!!!!!!!!!!! If you aren't mocking someone, I would advise that you contain your enthusiasm to a single exclamation mark.
- rrwo 4y agoThe lists themselves are not mocking people. But anyone who is angered by the existence of these lists because someone might not deserve to be on them.... is worth mocking. Of all the injustices committed by governments and corporations and even some wealthy people, that ranks pretty low. That people need to share a secret list of powerful members of parliament who have a history of abusing their colleagues isn't what makes you angry?
- roenxi 4y agoIf you are a government, corporation or wealthy person committing injustices - or a powerful MP deservedly on a sex abuse list - I unreservedly condemn you. I also encourage you not to mock people who have been included on such lists from slander.