3 ms·

> You realize in practice this means you are against nearly all public discourse I don't believe this to be the case. IMO due process is scalar not binary, and

by dlss 12y ago

> You realize in practice this means you are against nearly all public discourse I don't believe this to be the case. IMO due process is scalar not binary, and responsible journalism includes many due process protections... for example, the other side of the story has been considered and presented in most news stories, and if the central claim is proven false the story is usually killed. > even more insane, are proposing a stance that linearly scales protection from being mentioned in public with wealth. I didn't mention scale / I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion. > This is simply a restatement of a very old school defense of the strictly hierarchical society. One should know their place and not question or impugn the integrity of their betters. Not at all. I'm saying that before you punish people you should consider the idea that they are innocent and limenting that most of the other commenters don't seem to agree with this position. I'm not sure to what extent you are arguing with me, and to what extent you are arguing with cached thoughts from other discussions. https://squid314.livejournal.com/329561.html https://squid314.livejournal.com/329561.html might help with that.

freshhawk 12y ago
> I didn't mention scale / I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion. I am assuming that the more wealthy someone is the more likely it is for a bad public reputation to impact their livelihood. I was unclear about that. To be more clear the correlation is extremely messy but exists. The rest of it we covered in the other thread (yes, I recognized the username). There is no punishment going on, the person in question is anonymous. We are considering the actions and how unethical they are. You keep saying there is some way this person could be innocent, what could that be? Put your cards on the table, come up with a hypothetical where you were an investor at a business event and you combined an offer of money with making a pass and should be judged to be innocent.

by dlss 12y ago

freshhawk 12y ago

> I didn't mention scale / I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion. I am assuming that the more wealthy someone is the more likely it is for a bad public reputation to impact their livelihood. I was unclear about that. To be more clear the correlation is extremely messy but exists. The rest of it we covered in the other thread (yes, I recognized the username). There is no punishment going on, the person in question is anonymous. We are considering the actions and how unethical they are. You keep saying there is some way this person could be innocent, what could that be? Put your cards on the table, come up with a hypothetical where you were an investor at a business event and you combined an offer of money with making a pass and should be judged to be innocent.