ored
In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
41–50 of 146 posts
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#42> when people are using social media for violence, we need to stop them. Is this the same Cameron who criticized Libya when they shut off the Internet against what, in their view, were violent protesters?
They seem like different issues. I don't think the Libyan protestors were looting, burning, attacking & robbing bystanders... In other words, in Libya they had protestors, in the UK they have rioters and mobs. I could have the wrong impression; I live in neither Libya nor the UK. There were also accusations that Libya shut off the internet to mask actions of their armed forces against the protestors. Once again, seem…
in Libya they had protestors, in the UK they have rioters and mobs
In Libya, they also had rioters and mobs, and in the UK, they also have protestors.
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#43> when people are using social media for violence, we need to stop them. Is this the same Cameron who criticized Libya when they shut off the Internet against what, in their view, were violent protesters?
They seem like different issues. I don't think the Libyan protestors were looting, burning, attacking & robbing bystanders... In other words, in Libya they had protestors, in the UK they have rioters and mobs. I could have the wrong impression; I live in neither Libya nor the UK. There were also accusations that Libya shut off the internet to mask actions of their armed forces against the protestors. Once again, seem…
I think shutting down people and social media in places that are looting, stealing, and making the world a worse place... I agree with that. I disagree on taking down social media when it's an organized legal matter. It's hard to make the distinction and not allow the couple people that ruin it for everyone else.
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wasn't a comparison of problems, it was a comparison of solutions to serious problems. Nurturing vs authoritarian.
Different serious problems require different serious solutions. The comparison to Norway isn't useful.
I agree it's not a fair comparison, but I think it's an interesting thought experiment nonetheless. How do you think Norway would have reacted if a situation similar to the UK riots occurred in Norway? Implement more laws and add police, or look deeper to the root causes?
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#45Might as well ban telephones while they're at it. Call in telcom also to discuss their role in the recent riots.
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Misquoting to make your point is antithetical to honest debate. Flagged.
What's the misquote? The parent makes three points ("motivations, determination or moral conviction"), and the middle point is invalid.
I agree with Anigbrowl. The middle point doesn't stand alone and was not meant to. You've gaken it out of contest which is disingenuous. Given your phrasing he claimed with motivation and moral conviction, determination to achieve their goal would have him liking the "rioters" more. Though rioters would doubtfully be the correct word in that case.
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Misquoting to make your point is antithetical to honest debate. Flagged.
What's the misquote? The parent makes three points ("motivations, determination or moral conviction"), and the middle point is invalid.
The correct way to write the quote would have been ">The rioters this week haven't shared the same [...] determination", where the [...] shows you're editing: by implication you're not doing so misleadingly, but the reader gets the chance to check whether they agree.
The problem with your post as you wrote it is that you appeared to be making the claim that the word "same" immediately preceded the word "determination" in the source you were quoting. Which isn't true. This matters not because the difference is important in this case (we all agree it's not), but because people think poorly of you and your arguments when you make false assertions through carelessness (they think you might do it again and it might matter next time).
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#48Right that's the solution.
When there's civil unrest, why try to fix the problem that caused it when you can just stop people from organizing the unrest?
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#49I know half the Internet is going senationalist over this, but please go and actually watch the debate before the knee-jerking spoils this discussion as well. The tone of the debate was actually quite reasonable, and many MPs, including the PM, were vocal about the benefits of social media during this whole sorry affair. Sadly, a lot of people are reading things into it that weren't actually said and then turning the…
> liberal crowd I think when it comes to free-speech, as opposed to things like taxation or healthcare, there's not really a clear "liberal" contingent, just the amorphous civil-liberties contingent. Includes many libertarians, liberals, and anyone else who opposes the state exercising anything even remotely approaching censorship, in any circumstance, whether it's against "nazis" or "rioters" or "terrorists" or whom…
Americans are somewhat unique among English speaking people for not distinguishing between liberalism and leftism. Once you make that distinction, the "amorphous civil-liberties contingent" is liberal by definition.
The culture of internet outrage that involves upvoting these things to the roof does get in the way of understanding and addressing the issue in a reasonable fashion. I don't think it matters especially what specific worldview someone has when they're in that mindset.
Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Different serious problems require different serious solutions. The comparison to Norway isn't useful.
I agree it's not a fair comparison, but I think it's an interesting thought experiment nonetheless. How do you think Norway would have reacted if a situation similar to the UK riots occurred in Norway? Implement more laws and add police, or look deeper to the root causes?
It really isn't an interesting exercise. It's comparing one bombing by one person to thousands of acts of vandalism and theft by thousands of people.
It's fairly self evident that "looking deeper into the root causes" is not going to prevent rioters from destroying private property in the next 24 hours.