Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt • Hacker News Board

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

#631

Post by PavlovsCat » Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 5:18 AM UTC

PavlovsCat wrote: post #618

NegativeK wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why people expect platforms that have ToS to be robotic about them. Companies are run by people. People get uncomfortable when you become known for spraying around racial epithets, and some are not going to want to work with you. If I'm using some vendor and find out that I really don't like what their public persona is doing, I'm going to reevaluate that relationship.

> I'm not sure why people expect platforms that have ToS to be robotic about them. Being fair, being open, being honest isn't being "robotic". Treating people like more than something to exploit and throw away is what I would consider "robotic". The constant "it's a private company, brain off", that's what is robotic. > Companies are run by people. People get uncomfortable when you become known for spraying around ra…

complaining about words others use, not even using words to argue == nuff fucking said.

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

#632

Post by TimothyBJacobs » Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 5:29 AM UTC

rndgermandude wrote: post #542

cc81 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>I don't think anyone is saying that there should be a law that forces Patreon to allow everyone on their platform. I am saying essentially that; there should be a law that forces Patreon and other companies (those oligarchic payment processors, Google, Facebook, twitter, etc) which basically qualify as utility companies to allow people on their platform, unless those people abuse(d) those platforms for severe unlawf…

You pay for utilities, you don't pay for YouTube or Twitter. Forcing them to carry content is in effect forcing them to either take a loss on that content, or force advertisers to advertise alongside content that they probably don't want associated with their brand.

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

#633

Post by asabjorn » Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 5:31 AM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #533

asabjorn wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Context matters. The alt-right people he targeted viewed it as an insult, so he used their own language against them and framed them as what they define as bad.

Yes but it's an insult targeted towards black people. I'm not sure it had the impact he thought it'd have, since some white racist would just think "but I'm not black", and he just ended up kind of perpetuating the insult. I mean, I know he didn't mean disrespect towards black people, it was just in poor taste.

The social justice belief you cite that a group gets harmed by forbidden words, even if none in that group heard it and it was targeted at some other groups folly, is just that; a belief. What proof do you have that is not belief that supports your claim that he targeted black people?

The evidence clearly shows he was not targeting blacks. Before the regressive left dug this up I suspect no black person saw it. It was said on a livestream that had a total of 3000 views, not his channel, and he was attacking and insulting what seems to be a large amount of alt-right in a livechat accompanying the stream. The alt-right had at that point made him a target for months.

I would assume such territory with so few view have very few black viewers amongst those 3000 views, and I would assume anyone there would have supported his fight against alt-right bigotry.

Edit: Very telling considering what we are discussion. However, pretty weak of you to vote me down instead of providing evidence of your belief and your serious claim. But then again , it is standard issue for social justice believers to suppress instead of engaging.

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

#634

Post by asabjorn » Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 5:34 AM UTC

zamalek wrote: post #120

orthecreedence wrote: post #33

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…

Why should your right to not hear something trump my right to hear it?

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

#635

Post by sbuttgereit » Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 5:52 AM UTC

sbuttgereit wrote: post #448

peterwwillis wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These "norms" are generalized and not always applicable to real life. If I disapprove of you yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, should I also have to defend your right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater? We "erode freedom of speech" when it hurts people. This is not about "weird people with quirky ideas". This is about people who use speech to abuse, cause harm, intimidate, harass, or inspire others to commit su…

I hate generic statements like, "if you use speech to try to hurt people". They tend to be made to let you say something and get many people agreeing with you who would not otherwise if they knew what you really were after. So I would ask you to define what constitutes "hurt" and define what constitutes "people" in your sentence. I don't think you mean all people... because in the same sentence you advocate harm (or…

Please note that the original post to which I replied appears to have been edited some time after my reply; so if my comment appears to not have context, note that the context changed.

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

#636

Post by Dylan16807 » Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 5:56 AM UTC

FakeComments wrote: post #604

Dylan16807 wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think almost anyone has faced consequences for being anti-vaccine. That's been extremely free-speech, and it hasn't helped people come to the right conclusions at all.

That’s just not true — consequences for not having their children vaccinated are legislated lots of places; the arguments against anti-vaxers are often appeals to the same authorities that happily over-prescribed opiates and based around shaming them; etc.

I'm talking about what people say, not what they do with their children.

But can you be more specific? What consequences can you name, especially in the US? I'm not aware of there being almost anything in the US, except that they might not be allowed into some schools, which barely even counts as a punishment.

And yet the idea proliferates wildly.

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

#637

Post by memeograph » Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 6:02 AM UTC

The whole "private companies can do what they want" and "nobody has to listen" argument is a red herring. The choice to financially support who you want is being denied, by capricious and orwellian "safety" boards, who openly talk about having no objective standards for it.

If that doesn't set off your bullshit alarms, you don't value the mindset that gave us all the ability to listen in the first place, and let people live such bubbled, comfortable lives that a wrong word feels like an attack.

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

#638

Post by lifeformed » Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 6:03 AM UTC

ptero wrote: post #204

orthecreedence wrote: post #33

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…

Trying to prevent people from arguing for an evil (E) never stops E long term. It should be fought with reason and counter-arguments, not with silencing the speaker. Suppressing the speaker can indicate, especially to those wavering, that there are no reasonable counter-arguments and there must be something true in the message that controlling powers are trying to suppress. There are different modes: I do not have to…

It's asymmetric. It takes years to build a skyscraper but seconds to destroy one. Hate, appealing to biases, low-effort ideas, and emotion-based reasoning are much easier to spread than to refute. Is racism common because people just haven't heard a good rebuttal to it?

Those who argue in bad faith will spread viral speech resistant to good faith counterarguments. To assume that these people are just missing the correct information is to assume that we are dealing with purely rational minds. No amount of reasoning will change a bad-faith argument.

I think a lot of the discussion about free speech values need to consider the context of our changing world. The rhetorical battlefield of the modern world is no longer as we know it. Perhaps it made more sense in the past to simply fight ideas with ideas, since schools of thought were more centralized and ideas spread slowly, getting filtered and curated along the way. Today, there is instantaneous spreading of ideas to every corner of the world. The things people hear about are not the best ideas, but rather the most transmittable ideas. Our society has spent billions of dollars cultivating the mind virus industry, and they have discovered very powerful techniques for spreading dangerous pathogens. Facts alone do not cure a mind infected with emotionally-rooted lies. We need stronger immune systems.

And while education is indeed one part of the picture, having more opportunities for empathy and having stronger cultural standards are another. Restricting this kind of speech sets the standard that some ideas are not compatible with a modern society. However, I agree that this method is flawed: it creates the perception of persecution and martyrdom, and uncomfortably concentrates power. I think modern progressive thinking needs to focus more on a sort of empathetic education rather than going all in on an antagonistic shaming approach.

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

#639

Post by bjourne » Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 6:04 AM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #594

mallets wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. But would take a stand against Patreon, and only Patreon, if such a thing were to occur. Patreon is "free" to cultivate their public image as they see fit and I am free to stop using them, discourage others from using it, etc. Nothing to do with their take on free speech.

I think the lesson of the past, is that people who do the kind of suppression which Patreon is engaging in, which Pay Pal is engaging in, which people who ran "restricted" clubs engaged in -- the people doing these things are the ones who have decided that certain people are "undesirables" and are motivated by the darker side of human emotion. It's those who are on the wrong side of history. The right side is the sid…

That is not the same thing. The white supremacists are thrown off Patreon because of what they do not because of who they are. Their ideas aren't being suppressed.

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

#640

Post by perl4ever » Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 6:05 AM UTC

cabalamat wrote: post #233

orthecreedence wrote: post #33

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…

"For example the homicide rate in Japan is much lower than in Jamaica; from this it follows that Jamaicans are on average more homicidal than Japanese. That's a negative generalisation. It's also true."

To me, a generalization is where you infer that because a general fact exists (e.g. the homicide rate) there is consequently a more specific fact about each member of a group. I feel like you have stopped short of actually making a generalization, or are leaving it ambiguous as to whether you have made one. If the homicide rate implies something about each Jamaican, what does it imply? I find the equivocation over such matters more viscerally irritating than the racism itself.