3 ms·

> The material in question will get your channel flagged and demonetized on YouTube. You are claiming that ALL books Republicans have banned contain material t

by nawgz 3y ago

> The material in question will get your channel flagged and demonetized on YouTube. You are claiming that ALL books Republicans have banned contain material that... fails the YouTube TOS, and... this is a gotcha to you? First of all, Republicans cried about Dr Seuss' publishing company pulling their own books, do you remember that? [0] They said this was "cancelling childhood" and other hilarious shit. Then, now, they: * defund libraries [1] * burn books that the government deems contain "inappropriate things" (definitely not a fascist move) [2] * try to make it illegal for teachers to teach about slavery being morally incorrect [3] Your strawman is ridiculous, and you should feel bad. [0]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/dr-seuss-cancel-racism-cartoons-b1812102.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/dr-seuss-c... [1]: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/librarians-say-a-missouri-house-proposal-to-eliminate-library-funding-would-have-devastating-ripple-effects https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/librarians-say-a-misso... [2]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/04/27/tennessee-burning-banned-books/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/04/27/tennessee... [3]: https://msmagazine.com/2021/08/02/texas-republicans-critical-race-theory-erin-zwiener-womens-history-white-supremacy/ https://msmagazine.com/2021/08/02/texas-republicans-critical...

AnimalMuppet 3y ago
> Your strawman is ridiculous, and you should feel bad. I'm pretty sure that this kind of statement is against the site guidelines. Take this kind of posting somewhere else. The rest of your post was OK. Why include this paragraph?
- nawgz 3y ago
  I don't treat bad-faith arguments with respect, why else?
  - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
    Well, site guidelines call for assuming good faith. So if that's how you're going to operate, HN isn't the site for you to do it on. But say you're right. Say it is in bad faith. Do you really expect "and you should feel bad" to have any effect on someone operating in bad faith? For readers who are not the person you're replying to, do you expect it to make them agree with you more? What do you actually think posting something like that is going to achieve?
    - nawgz 3y ago
      Fair questions. > Do you really expect "and you should feel bad" to have any effect on someone operating in bad faith? Of course not. In fact, I expect there to be nothing to do to dispel conservatism and its brand of bad faith. The framing is actually wrong - I wish not to have any effect on anyone, besides telling them I see thru them. I enjoy doing that. > For readers who are not the person you're replying to, do you expect it to make them agree with you more? I expect some people would be entertained, and others, as yourself, displeased. > What do you actually think posting something like that is going to achieve? What do you think posting anything is going to achieve? I'm interested in why you do it, given this framing. For me, online interaction offers a chance for discourse, to learn what others think, to hear rebuttals to your mistakes, and to chuckle at the occasional low blow I wouldn't throw to someone I really know.
infamouscow 3y ago
I think we're discussing two different things. The books I'm referring to are extremely sexual and graphic in nature. And if the content of those books isn't appropriate for YouTube, I don't see any problem with a local government banning that material from schools. That doesn't mean I also believe anything else from team red or team blue. I don't. I find them to be equally repulsive.
- nawgz 3y ago
  > The books I'm referring to are extremely sexual and graphic in nature. And if the content of those books isn't appropriate for YouTube, I don't see any problem with a local government banning that material from schools. Sure, of course pornographic materials don't belong in schools. But this is clearly not the case at all, and is being used as a strawman to drive all sorts of issues, just like I enumerated with sources for you. Do you care to enumerate the sources which can actually show instances of pornographic materials being banned from schools that previously contained them, i.e. not just for show? That would be meaningful. Currently, despite your assertion of enlightened centrism, you talk a lot like a Republican

by nawgz 3y ago

AnimalMuppet 3y ago

> Your strawman is ridiculous, and you should feel bad. I'm pretty sure that this kind of statement is against the site guidelines. Take this kind of posting somewhere else. The rest of your post was OK. Why include this paragraph?

nawgz 3y ago
I don't treat bad-faith arguments with respect, why else?
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  Well, site guidelines call for assuming good faith. So if that's how you're going to operate, HN isn't the site for you to do it on. But say you're right. Say it is in bad faith. Do you really expect "and you should feel bad" to have any effect on someone operating in bad faith? For readers who are not the person you're replying to, do you expect it to make them agree with you more? What do you actually think posting something like that is going to achieve?
  - nawgz 3y ago
    Fair questions. > Do you really expect "and you should feel bad" to have any effect on someone operating in bad faith? Of course not. In fact, I expect there to be nothing to do to dispel conservatism and its brand of bad faith. The framing is actually wrong - I wish not to have any effect on anyone, besides telling them I see thru them. I enjoy doing that. > For readers who are not the person you're replying to, do you expect it to make them agree with you more? I expect some people would be entertained, and others, as yourself, displeased. > What do you actually think posting something like that is going to achieve? What do you think posting anything is going to achieve? I'm interested in why you do it, given this framing. For me, online interaction offers a chance for discourse, to learn what others think, to hear rebuttals to your mistakes, and to chuckle at the occasional low blow I wouldn't throw to someone I really know.

infamouscow 3y ago

I think we're discussing two different things. The books I'm referring to are extremely sexual and graphic in nature. And if the content of those books isn't appropriate for YouTube, I don't see any problem with a local government banning that material from schools. That doesn't mean I also believe anything else from team red or team blue. I don't. I find them to be equally repulsive.

nawgz 3y ago
> The books I'm referring to are extremely sexual and graphic in nature. And if the content of those books isn't appropriate for YouTube, I don't see any problem with a local government banning that material from schools. Sure, of course pornographic materials don't belong in schools. But this is clearly not the case at all, and is being used as a strawman to drive all sorts of issues, just like I enumerated with sources for you. Do you care to enumerate the sources which can actually show instances of pornographic materials being banned from schools that previously contained them, i.e. not just for show? That would be meaningful. Currently, despite your assertion of enlightened centrism, you talk a lot like a Republican