4 ms·
Yes, you just wish to valiantly defend the right to berate someone in a public place, to the extent of dithering over which forms of base harassment you conside
by jarcane 12y ago
Yes, you just wish to valiantly defend the right to berate someone in a public place, to the extent of dithering over which forms of base harassment you consider perfectly within rights apparently.[1]
This is the "freeze peach" argument all over again, and does nothing to dispute my point; it rather demonstrates it quite effectively.
So I ask again, since you're so fond of leading questions: why should the internet be 'special' as regards the consequences of being a twat to other people, be it in public or in private?
Twitter is under no moral, ethical, or legal obligation to allow you to call someone a "despicable whore" on their website.
[1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9002479 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9002479
- nailer 12y ago> Yes, you just wish to valiantly defend the right to berate someone in a public place, No. You're making up a straw man again. The 'freeze peach' thing is childish. In my post you link to - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9002479 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9002479 I said that insults are not harassment according to the Twitter ToS. That is different from condoning harassment. You're probably smart enough to know that, but are trolling. I never said the internet should be special: this is another straw man, and seems to be projecting a little about your own position: you don't have a right not to be insulted in real life, and you don't have one on the internet. > Does nothing to dispute my point That's correct. Based on your behaviour, I very much don't want want to discuss anything with you. You're new here: should probably check out https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html