5 ms·

Feel free to explain why an "uncensored library" would have this criteria.

anigbrowl 3y ago
You made the claim. I suggest you back it up instead of trying to redirect. Lots of propaganda tries to wrap itself in the moral mantle of journalism, I am fine with the curators being somewhat opinionated.
LoganDark 3y ago
having criteria for inclusion is not censorship
- DinoDad13 3y ago
  that's all moderation
  - LoganDark 3y ago
    i fail to explain how they differ so you are probably right
- pessimizer 3y ago
  Are you sure? Doesn't it depend on the criteria? What if my criteria is that the author not be Catholic, or that they aren't competing with my son in the pork industry?
  - LoganDark 3y ago
    that depends on whether your definition of censorship is the prevention of speech or prevention of dissemination of speech, whether books count as speech, whether choosing to include existing books in a library counts as speech i think it's fairly common knowledge that preventing the publishing of a book in the first place probably counts as censorship, but considering the nature of this library it becomes pretty fuzzy
- tivert 3y ago
  > having criteria for inclusion is not censorship So if the State of Florida sets a criteria for inclusion for it's library collections of "not gay," then it's not censorship in your mind? "Criteria for inclusion" and "censorship" are the exact same thing, the only difference between them is how the speaker feels about it.
  - LoganDark 3y ago
    i'm not performing censorship by selecting which files i download from the internet, am i? > "Criteria for inclusion" and "censorship" are the exact same thing, the only difference between them is how the speaker feels about it. yes, this is very important, which is exactly why a library like this selecting which works to include is not censorship. now if people intentionally submitted their own works and the library tried to hide or deny the existence of those requests, now that would be censorship i think state libraries are in a slightly different situation. it is definitely fuzzy though
    - tivert 3y ago
      > i'm not performing censorship by selecting which files i download from the internet, am i? Yes, because that's an irrelevant activity to this topic. > yes, this is very important, which is exactly why a library like this selecting which works to include is not censorship. At least in contemporary liberal culture, words like "censorship" and "ban" are frequently used to label "criteria for inclusion" that the speaker disagrees with. > now if people intentionally submitted their own works and the library tried to hide or deny the existence of those requests, now that would be censorship That's one kind of censorship, but not the only kind (see above).
itronitron 3y ago
time and money

You made the claim. I suggest you back it up instead of trying to redirect. Lots of propaganda tries to wrap itself in the moral mantle of journalism, I am fine with the curators being somewhat opinionated.

LoganDark 3y ago

having criteria for inclusion is not censorship

DinoDad13 3y ago
that's all moderation
- LoganDark 3y ago
  i fail to explain how they differ so you are probably right
pessimizer 3y ago
Are you sure? Doesn't it depend on the criteria? What if my criteria is that the author not be Catholic, or that they aren't competing with my son in the pork industry?
- LoganDark 3y ago
  that depends on whether your definition of censorship is the prevention of speech or prevention of dissemination of speech, whether books count as speech, whether choosing to include existing books in a library counts as speech i think it's fairly common knowledge that preventing the publishing of a book in the first place probably counts as censorship, but considering the nature of this library it becomes pretty fuzzy
tivert 3y ago
> having criteria for inclusion is not censorship So if the State of Florida sets a criteria for inclusion for it's library collections of "not gay," then it's not censorship in your mind? "Criteria for inclusion" and "censorship" are the exact same thing, the only difference between them is how the speaker feels about it.
- LoganDark 3y ago
  i'm not performing censorship by selecting which files i download from the internet, am i? > "Criteria for inclusion" and "censorship" are the exact same thing, the only difference between them is how the speaker feels about it. yes, this is very important, which is exactly why a library like this selecting which works to include is not censorship. now if people intentionally submitted their own works and the library tried to hide or deny the existence of those requests, now that would be censorship i think state libraries are in a slightly different situation. it is definitely fuzzy though
  - tivert 3y ago
    > i'm not performing censorship by selecting which files i download from the internet, am i? Yes, because that's an irrelevant activity to this topic. > yes, this is very important, which is exactly why a library like this selecting which works to include is not censorship. At least in contemporary liberal culture, words like "censorship" and "ban" are frequently used to label "criteria for inclusion" that the speaker disagrees with. > now if people intentionally submitted their own works and the library tried to hide or deny the existence of those requests, now that would be censorship That's one kind of censorship, but not the only kind (see above).

itronitron 3y ago

time and money