Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 333 posts

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#121

Post by SllX »

alar44 wrote: post #84
IAmWorried wrote: post #58

What the actual fuck is wrong with these people? Calling for literal violence against Russians is less dangerous than claiming masks aren't helpful? Is there something here I'm not getting?

Quoted post unavailable.

A Government, even in Western democracies, is a severable and independent set of actors from the people it governs filled with people who have their own agency, view of the world, ambitions and a lot of power.

The Russian Military at least is staffed with people who are obligated to serve and die by their country. That’s part of being a soldier. It’s one thing to sanction a nation for the wars prosecuted by its leaders, but if you vilify the Russian people, you’re playing straight into Putin’s propaganda and frankly they don’t wholly deserve to be vilified either.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#122

Post by jfengel »

adamrezich wrote: post #105
jfengel wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sarcasm is unbecoming, but only because it's a thinly disguised insult. Read that comment as "What you just said was so egregiously stupid that I'm going to show that by pretending that you meant something different". Put that way, it would be clearly inappropriate for HN, so they use sarcasm as a fig leaf. It might be more becoming to say "Many people are dying and I think it's inappropriate to use a generic, vague…

> Sarcasm is unbecoming, but only because it's a thinly disguised insult. Read that comment as "What you just said was so egregiously stupid that I'm going to show that by pretending that you meant something different". this is supposed to be against the rules here on HN. it's not as though I didn't understand what was being communicated.

They are hoping that by not actually putting it that way, they can get away with it. I don't know if they can or not. It's up to the moderators to make that decision of whether it crosses a line.

If it were up to me, I'd tell people that they have to keep far away from the line, and not try to sidle up to it without crossing it. But as you can tell from the many other comments, many people disagree that there should be any moderation at all, and certainly would allow something that isn't explicitly a call for violence.

I am enjoying the irony of discussing the moderation of a nonviolent comment in a thread about relaxed moderation of violent content.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#123

Post by throw_m239339 »

gruez wrote: post #109
throw_m239339 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would imagine the OP is referring to some of the more "Freedom Fries"-esque excesses of Russophobia, like canceling Tchaikovsky from symphony programs, discarding Russian vodka, banning Russian cat breeds from competitions, etc all insignificant compared to the suffering Russia is imposing on Ukraine. Russophobia should be the least of people's worries when Russia is dropping bombs on hospitals full of Ukrainian…

Quoted post unavailable.

No post body was provided.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#124

Post by gruez »

causality0 wrote: post #92
gruez wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hating someone because of their race is not acceptable. Hating someone because they invaded your country and bombed your fleeing women and children is acceptable. But the regulations apply to "Russians and Russian soldiers", not just the invaders. Would you be okay with calls of violence against saudi civilians because of their government's involvement in the 9/11 attacks?

They said the calls for violence against Russian soldiers were allowed because this was being used as a proxy for the Russian military, and said it would not apply to prisoners of war. Again, this is deliberate obtuseness. If a pack of grizzly bears break into my house and I scream "Kill the bears!" I'm obviously not calling for genocide against ursus arctos horribilis.

I find it strange that you accuse me of being "obtuse", but you respond with the most softball examples. What about calls of violence against "russians"? Is "let's find russian nationals in ukraine and lynch them" okay? What about "let's invade russia and kill women children as payback"? I would hope not, but based on a permissive reading of the article it certainly seems allowed.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#125

Post by FpUser »

javert wrote: post #83
yonaguska wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A no fly-zone officially drags NATO into the conflict and WW3 kicks off.

Quoted post unavailable.

>"The only potential caveat is if Russia uses nukes. But that doesn't start World War III"

Of course not. It'll just vaporize millions of people. Pocket change.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#127

Post by FpUser »

djrogers wrote: post #113
javert wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> The only potential caveat is if Russia uses nukes That's a ridiculously huge caveat - especially since the guy in charge appears to be unstable and has already threatened to use them. Triggering Putin would potentially be condemning hundreds of millions of people to death.

It means nothing to keyboard warriors here.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#128

Post by systemvoltage »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #98
systemvoltage wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on Chicago principles, less virtue signaling and more doing, apolitical and completely ruthlessly neutral (like Switzerland), highly capitalistic but also with strong integrity, protect the interest of United States and its allies, straightforward CEOs that don’t speak corporate lingo, work with DoD and DARPA, unwavering support for human rights. Above all, have conviction of their own and not buckle under pres…

You're editing a lot, so I want to snapshot what you said at the point of time I'm responding: > Based on Chicago principles, less virtue signaling and more doing, apolitical and completely ruthlessly neutral (like Switzerland), highly capitalistic but also with strong integrity, protect the interest of United States and its allies, straightforward CEOs that don’t speak corporate lingo, work with DoD and DARPA, unwav…

Why such a hostile response? I am trying to have a peaceful discussion. And all those rhetorical questions appear to be strawmaning what I am proposing.

Oxymorons are currently present in the way Apple does its PR - no problem with sweatshop labor in China, but they'll never miss a chance to have a political opinion about other things - diversity, BLM, Ukraine, etc. Whatever aligns with their audience.

Re: Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians

#129

Post by bobthechef »

IAmWorried wrote: post #58

What the actual fuck is wrong with these people? Calling for literal violence against Russians is less dangerous than claiming masks aren't helpful? Is there something here I'm not getting?

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN