3 ms·

In this context, it's a rhetorical mistake to even engage _their_ concern. They're talking about circumventing core technical and political principles. Who ca

In this context, it's a rhetorical mistake to even engage _their_ concern. They're talking about circumventing core technical and political principles. Who cares why they're doing it? It's stupid, incompetent and dangerous. Once everyone agrees DNS filtering is just wrong, _then_ we can talk about their problems. Otherwise we're just being held hostage. And if that means fewer people care about copyright, well, it's their job to make people care about copyright for the right reasons. Not because they'll otherwise blow things up.

badclient 15y ago
Once everyone agrees DNS filtering is just wrong, _then_ we can talk about their problems. Your response is a perfect example of why we are failing the communication war. We simply want to get to the technical end: dns filtering is wrong. Meanwhile, the opposition is saying: SOPA means more US jobs. You tell me which idea has a better chance of sticking in the average consumer's mind? A better counter would be something like: SOPA means Americans going to jail for watching a YouTube video. Let them counter with "that's not true!". Well, it is as true as saying SOPA means more jobs.
- chernevik 15y ago
  It's a mistake to get into a shouting match with someone who has the money to shout much louder than you.
  - badclient 15y ago
    Not really sure what you mean by that.
    - chernevik 15y ago
      If we answer their lies with our lies, observers have to sort their way through a huge muddle. At that point, the contest comes down who can get their message out the best. And showbiz has the money, and the interest, to buy a lot more airtime than the SOPA opponents. When you're right, you want to move the argument to principles and facts. You don't want the debate muddled, b/c the more people know the likelier they are to agree with you. (Unless you mean that Youtube really does mean jail? I haven't tracked the less bad parts of the bill so closely.)

badclient 15y ago

Once everyone agrees DNS filtering is just wrong, _then_ we can talk about their problems. Your response is a perfect example of why we are failing the communication war. We simply want to get to the technical end: dns filtering is wrong. Meanwhile, the opposition is saying: SOPA means more US jobs. You tell me which idea has a better chance of sticking in the average consumer's mind? A better counter would be something like: SOPA means Americans going to jail for watching a YouTube video. Let them counter with "that's not true!". Well, it is as true as saying SOPA means more jobs.

chernevik 15y ago
It's a mistake to get into a shouting match with someone who has the money to shout much louder than you.
- badclient 15y ago
  Not really sure what you mean by that.
  - chernevik 15y ago
    If we answer their lies with our lies, observers have to sort their way through a huge muddle. At that point, the contest comes down who can get their message out the best. And showbiz has the money, and the interest, to buy a lot more airtime than the SOPA opponents. When you're right, you want to move the argument to principles and facts. You don't want the debate muddled, b/c the more people know the likelier they are to agree with you. (Unless you mean that Youtube really does mean jail? I haven't tracked the less bad parts of the bill so closely.)