"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." Cardinal Richelieu (Alledgelly) A lesson this generation will have to learn again.
"Give me 280 characters typed by the hand of an honest man, I will find something in them to cancel him." Anon paraphrasing Cardinal Richelieu (Alledgelly)
"Give me Robinhood and a live stream of r/WallStreetBets and I will make Hedge Funds tremble in fear."
I think the long history of events like these, particularly the more recent publicised ones, are going to push lots of communities, and by extension the Internet, to decentralisation. That's good and bad because communities can't be shut down when they shouldn't, and can't be shut down when they should.
I think it's becoming obvious that not being able to shut down bad communities is the lesser evil.
That's a bold statement, you think it's so obvious? Do you think not being able to shut down child pornographic trading communities is a lesser evil than shutting down WSB discord?
> On both Discord and Reddit, wallstreetbets users frequently refer to themselves collectively as “retards” and “autists,” and have been known to deploy the kinds of racial slurs and deliberately offensive language that have become commonplace in 4chan-style posting forums. I read WSB daily for years and cannot recall a single usage of a racial slur. They definitely referred to themselves as autists/retards in a self…
> They definitely referred to themselves as autists/retards in a self-deprecating manner but that's hardly the same thing. I fail to see how 'autist' is any less of a slur than e.g. 'trap' or 'gay', when used in the right (wrong) context. It's not a racial slur, but it's quite certainly a slur.
It's not a slur. It's just part of their humour. Are we into telling people what they can and can't say within their own private groups now?
I'm not sure what your point is. There are appropriate and inappropriate ways to use words. Making fun of the neuro-atypicals is inappropriate, joking with likeminded folks in a community built around such is likely appropriate. You've just that word you are complaining about, should you be banned?
> joking with likeminded folks in a community built around such is likely appropriate. Would you say it is okay for white people to use the n word if there are no Black people around?
Yes. And even with them around. All depends on the context and the willingness to get one's nose bopped.
I would, for example, encourage an actor to use overly offensive expletives, even repeating them ad nauseam in the presence of their fellow actors so they feel more comfortable using such words in a production dealing with racial strife, historical storytelling or what have you.
No word is so beyond the pale it must be Voldemorted.
I think it's becoming obvious that not being able to shut down bad communities is the lesser evil.
That's a bold statement, you think it's so obvious? Do you think not being able to shut down child pornographic trading communities is a lesser evil than shutting down WSB discord?
CP trading chat rooms should be shut down by arresting people creating and selling content in there, not by giving someone the right to shut down any chat room they want by the click of a button. Because if you can shut down CP trading chat rooms by the click of a button, we all know this button will be used mainly to target good causes as CP represents a tiny proportion of people or even criminal activities.
I think it's becoming obvious that not being able to shut down bad communities is the lesser evil.
That's a bold statement, you think it's so obvious? Do you think not being able to shut down child pornographic trading communities is a lesser evil than shutting down WSB discord?
This tired justification of "child pornography", "terrorism" and "hate speech" has been beat to death to ban just about everything these days.
Why not ban cars ? After all both paedos and terrorists use them to carry out their evil, nefarious deeds. They both also use toothpaste.
I think is perfectly fine being un-able to shutdown sites for "social justice". If it ever escalates to being a major criminal problem, a legal case can be filed and it can go through the courts before the ban-hammer falls.
I'm confused, what is the lesson here? That quote seems to get thrown around so often that it can be applied to anytime that anyone gets criticized for anything. The moderator's statement appears to be asking for more help with moderation, not advocating for less moderation or advocating for more hateful behavior to be allowed.
> That quote seems to get thrown around so often that it can be applied to anytime that anyone gets criticized for anything. That's the point. It serves to show the perils of judging people by what they say , particularly if single offence against some perceived norms becomes a standard for punishment. And there's another quote from that same period: "like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children" (Jacques Mallet…
I have to say, that still doesn't mean much to me here. In a real court system, we judge people by their actions and behaviors, sometimes their speech can play into that. I assume that's what the author was referring to. (Apparently the origin of this quote is not clear, but it does seem to come from that same time period) This can't be compared to social media, the only way to judge anyone in the context of a social media platform is by what they say. That's all there is on these platforms, if you take that away, there's nothing left. You are judging someone every time you make a decision whether to like/follow/reply/retweet or not. If your view is that all that doesn't matter and the speech is meaningless, then it follows that any perceived punishments are also meaningless.