Live data from Hacker News

Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

nytimes.com

271–280 of 789 posts

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really worrying. Just different individuals and organizations taking different positions on different subjects. Most importantly, all of it happening on private property. I have an unpopular opinion. I believe people should be able to fly nazi and confederate flags on their private property. (Even if their private property overlooks yours.) I believe football players should be able to kneel during the national an…

> All of these are just people having opinions. If you don't like their opinions, don't associate with them. That's the freedom that you have. At the risk of starting a tangent, this doesn't work when it comes to business. Businesses (or any relationship of dependency) should not be allowed to have "an opinion" because before long it becomes collusion and shunning. How well did "no, no, you have the freedom to go som…

It's like the difference between Sam's Club and a typical grocer. The grocer offers services to the public, Sam's Club does not. It is members only. And it can have any requirements it pleases for membership. It doesn't have any racial exclusivity policies, but that would be well within their rights if they did. (For instance, country clubs have often had racial exclusivity clauses, even after the civil rights act.) Sam's Club is not a company for the public.

When you need consideration for membership, there really is just no way you can claim that to be non-private. That includes Patreon, it's private. It's their rules. Full stop. It's like adwords, if you want to use it, you have to start giving Google more consideration. Normally to use the public parts of Google, you don't need to give any consideration at all. (Of course, Google takes the tracking information from you anyway with their public facing services, but they don't ask you to actively give them any consideration.)

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#272

I'm torn about this. On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened polic…

> On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The government, soapboxes, homes and places of business that are happy to have them. Freedom of Speech is not the right to be heard. If people don't like what you have to say, or how you are saying it, they are free to walk away. If you don't like what someone is doing in your place of business, you can also throw…

Theres a fine line between “being allowed to throw a loud ranting racist out of a pub” because the pub is your business and you should be allowed to choose who to do business with and you don’t like racists... and throwing out a person of a different race because it’s your business and you should be allowed to choose who to do business with and don’t like that race...

That is, we want businesses to have the right to choose who to do business with, unless we disagree with their reasons for not wanting to do business with someone.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Carl Benjamin himself, the comments were meant ironically. He was reacting to a chat stream, which is missing context in that video, and the chat used slurs like this. So Benjamin used the slurs back at them. Having said that, we have to assume Benjamin’s inner thoughts to know what he really meant, so I’m not arguing we should disregard it completely because of his alledged good intentions.

You see officer, I did all that hate speech _ironically_

"You see Praetor, we don't know that he didn't think a bad thought."

This insistence on attributing maximum malice is part of the problem.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#274

I'm torn about this. On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened polic…

Seems we haven’t figured out how to draw the correct distinctions between what are clearly different types of businesses.

If Patreon is a gallery or art market or auction house, and Reddit is a Café, what is Cloudflare? Are they a toll road? Private highway? Something else?

Likening any of those businesses to the closest brick and mortar equivalent is probably futile, but bear with me a moment.

In the real world, businesses generally do business on their own terms. If they don’t own their own property, they lease it, and the municipality they are in zones the land and enforces certain regulations. There might be a couple of other factors, the United States has determined race to not be a valid criteria for whether you allow them into your public facing establishment. Mostly we don’t allow sex segregation, but there are exceptions here too, like with public baths.

A Café owner has an enormous amount of leeway with who they will do business with though. By and large they can ask people to leave, or to not come back so long as the determining factor isn’t discrimination against a protected class. They can compare properties, including landlords, neighborhoods and zoning regulations. If they want to target a particular demographic, it can be as simple as making the menu bilingual or playing a particular kind of music.

Now if someone builds a private road on their own property, that is their own business, but if they build a private road under contract to the city and charge people to use it, that is the city’s business. They can’t tell Nazis not to drive on that road anymore than the city can, assuming this city is in the United States anyway, but a Café owner could absolutely tell those same Nazis in that same city to not come in. Wouldn’t even have to give a reason for it. That’s fine, cafes exist everywhere and if you wanted to open one that catered specifically to Nazis, the law isn’t going to stop you.

I think we have knee jerk reactions when it comes to services like Cloudflare or Patreon disallowing certain people. To be honest, I tried to make a good case for why they should, but my best isn’t a particularly strong legal argument. Cloudflare and Patreon didn’t lay the cables that connect my home to the rest of the Internet, my ISP did, with a charter from my city.

Cloudflare and Patreon are businesses that work better when there is a critical mass of people already using them. They work best at-scale and don’t leave a whole lot of room in the market for competitors, Cloudflare much less so than Patreon, so in a sense they almost feel like utilities or like they should be.

They’re not utilities though, or cafes or galleries or any of that. They are private businesses though, so in that sense they are a lot closer to the Café owner than to your ISP or electric utility or the nearest private tollway. They might be hard to replicate businesses, and the people they are kicking off might find it hard to build a parallel alternative that sticks, but that is life.

That said, I much prefer businesses that are consistent in their policy enforcement practices than ones that aren’t, that is just good business.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#275
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if it's centralisation so much as personification. Patreon wants to be a a friendly brand, part of people's self-image. And having chosen this, perhaps they can't afford to live and let live. It's very difficult to imagine Bell Telephone (in their 100% monopoly days I mean) feeling responsible for what people discuss on their wires, or feeling a need to deny (say) pornographers service so that its other…

> It's very difficult to imagine Bell Telephone (in their 100% monopoly days I mean) feeling responsible for what people discuss on their wires, or feeling a need to deny (say) pornographers service so that its other customers wouldn't feel tainted. Bell in its monopoly days was a common carrier [0], regulated by law to treat all phone lines equally. > Or Visa likewise today -- it's understood that other people will…

> One of the weirdest ironies in this debate is that the people Patreon is ending business relationships with tend to be libertarian/conservative types who are generally skeptical of government regulation of business. And yet what they really seem to want is regulation of Patreon, Twitter [1], Cloudflare [2], etc as common carriers.

For the little guy there is no practical difference between a government service and a homogeneous oligopoly. I believe that given enough time these services would get regulated as infrastructure and hence banned from refusing customers, just that our legal framework is too rigid to adapt to the fast pace of technological progress.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#276

I'm torn about this. On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened polic…

> The societal norms are shifting to a place where there are certain topics that are not allowed to be discussed at all even if looking at them from a critical lens. Patreon want to prevent the expression of certain thoughts. For example, they are against "negative generalizations, of people based on their race". However, negative generalisations are sometimes true. For example the homicide rate in Japan is much lowe…

[deleted]

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#277

I'm torn about this. On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened polic…

I wonder if there's a way to create a "no assholes" rule that almost everyone could get behind. It'd be hard to come up with for sure.

Nah, everyone disagrees with each other on what constitutes assholey behavior.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good question. I've found a transcript published by patreon: https://patreonhq.com/hate-speech-on-patreon-a9026e52c2cf?gi... It's... pretty vitriolic. I'm not totally comfortable with even quoting the redacted version, but here goes nothing: > “I just can’t be bothered with people who chose to treat me like this. It’s really annoying. Like, I — . You’re acting like a bunch of n_____s, just so you know. You act like w…

I can't deny, that's uncomfortable to read. Stepping back from my discomfort, and trying to understand the context in which that statement was made, the impression I get is that he's using white-supremacist stereotypes of white_people==good and black_people==bad against white supremacists. If a white supremacist holds a worldview that white people are polite and civil, and black people are the opposite, then it seems…

It sounds like he's also referencing the old and tired racist tactic of arguing that they don't hate black people, just the ones who are "acting like niggers", and turning that argument back on the people who use it.

(Also, the use of slurs isn't verboten period. It's still - so far as I can tell - within the bounds of publicly-acceptable discourse for people with the correct political views to refer to black people with the wrong, conservative views as "niggers" and every other slur. Possibly even whilst threatening violence against them.)

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#279
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are your thoughts on religious discrimination? As a former christian, I am well aware that being a christian is not innate. Furthermore I consider christian doctrine to be inherently discriminatory against people like me. Should it be legal for me to bar christians from my restaurant? Of the 11 federally protected classes, religion stands out as the only one that isn't innate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prote…

To be clear, I wasn't really expressing much of a personal opinion, just thinking about the difference between the two and thinking about the profound shift in acceptance of gays in society in even the last decade. Personally... I'm not religious, I was raised an atheist, I don't like religion, and I don't really think it should be protected, but I sorta kinda understand why it is, religion seems "special." Veteran s…

> "Veteran status is also protected under employment discrimination law, and military service isn't an innate attribute"

I'd say being a veteran is, once you're a veteran you cannot change that about yourself. You could decide to not become a veteran, but you can't unveteran yourself.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#280
post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The government, soapboxes, homes and places of business that are happy to have them. Freedom of Speech is not the right to be heard. If people don't like what you have to say, or how you are saying it, they are free to walk away. If you don't like what someone is doing in your place of business, you can also throw…

I don't think anyone is saying that there should be a law that forces Patreon to allow everyone on their platform. More a lamenting that the consequences of large platforms acting like this might be bigger than people think. Reminds me a little of the whole Parental Advisory thing with rock music or Spotify's decisions around violent artists. How outraged should we be that artists that say very questionable things ar…

To reinforce the grand-parent point: the services are free to put the line wherever they please. It's literally their private business.

If you want a service with more inclusive tolerance levels, sign up for such a service (and not Youtube), or found such a service (and try to make it viable).

The problem is, of course, centralization. Network effects make a few successful services kings of a market, so "everybody" wants to be represented there. This puts such a service in a position of significant power. People actually vote them into that position of power by their continued patronage; this is their free choice, even if not always well thought-out choice.

So, if you want less powerful centralized players, use decentralized services where you can, help fund, build, and spread them. Think Facebook vs Mastodon. (Unfortunately, in music space, there's no decentralized analog to Spotify or Bandcamp.) Internet itself is such a decentralized platform, just not on the application / business level. Good thing we still have it, at least.

Post reply on HN