4 ms·
Eh. Hard to be annoyed about this. It would be quite another thing if they can deplatform critics entirely, but just blocking them? Who cares? Even the policie
by ajkjk 3y ago
Eh. Hard to be annoyed about this. It would be quite another thing if they can deplatform critics entirely, but just blocking them? Who cares?
Even the policies at city-council meetings feel silly. Free speech to me means that you can say whatever you want in the press and in public in general. It doesn't need to guarantee your right to be annoying at a particular venue. When good principles like free speech are distorted into unreasonable and bizarre policies it undermines the principles themselves. It also just undermines the basic idea of government: it's hard to want to support a system that does obviously-silly things all the time because it's too zealous about its own rules.
Indeed, often people who want less government make a point of enforcing rules to the point of absurdity so that people are disenchanted with the rules themselves: obviously if a system seems to work in stupid ways people are more likely to oppose it, yet the actual solution is for it to not work in stupid ways, not to get rid of it.
- psychlops 3y ago> It doesn't need to guarantee your right to be annoying at a particular venue. When good principles like free speech are distorted into unreasonable and bizarre policies it undermines the principles themselves. Some might say that banning speech that is "annoying at a particular venue" is a unreasonable and bizarre policy.
- h2odragon 3y agoMouth off in court and see how the judge explains it to you. Honestly, there's probably court transcripts of judges explaining in clear, reasonable terms exactly why they're silencing somebody. That's the job they supposed to do, after all.
- plagiarist 3y agoNow all you need to do to bring the argument home is to show us why Twitter is the same as a courtroom in session.
- h2odragon 3y agoinsofar as official business is being conducted there, the analogy would hold. there's absolutely no reason that official business should be conducted on twitter; but good luck (a) getting officials to admit error and (b) getting government IT to stand up a comment board and keep it alive under fierce debate.
- ender341341 3y agoIf you're disruptive enough in court it's one of the few reasons you can be tried in absentia in the US.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y agoThe lack of civil discourse grinds my gears. I've seen people phoning into town hall meetings only to launch racial slurs and profanity at a rapid rate and then people cry about freedom of speech. Or when a reporter asks a question and they're told to shut up. People often advocate for freedom of speech yet ignore the ethical responsibility of civil discourse.
- pfdietz 3y ago> but just blocking them? Who cares? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_petition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_petition The government cannot listen to some citizens and not others. It's one of the enumerated rights in the First Amendment.