3 ms·
If your definition and mine doesn’t agree, for loss of livelihood or serious misconduct then would agree there’s no point in discussing further? But three that
by nobodyandproud 2y ago
If your definition and mine doesn’t agree, for loss of livelihood or serious misconduct then would agree there’s no point in discussing further?
But three that comes to mind are Brendan Eich:
Mozilla is far poorer for what happened.
Peter Vlaming is another https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/VlamingDecision.pdf https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/Vlami...
Finally, Katie Herzog https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/02/style/what-is-cancel-culture.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/02/style/what-is-cancel-cult...
- throwawayqqq11 2y agoIs your anecdotal attack on "cancel culture" more then just biased and veiled defense of literature censorship? Why would a rational being turn away from the OP and respond with such? I for one can see similarities between the canceling and the censoring mob.
- nobodyandproud 2y agoI’d say it’s your own bias that sees it as an attack on cancel culture, as opposed to a commentary on the sad state of extremism and intolerance that leads us into hard-left then hard-right swings (and back and forth).