Message from @atheist4thecause
Discord ID: 526270184625799172
Regulated by whom
Im fine with twitter making their own rules
Regulated by the websites
If patreon said "no harmful speech"
sargon, in my child's browse history ?
it's more likely than you think
they can go do that
and ban people
okay so all of this and youa gree with me
No I dont
yeah, you do
you just said you think social media sites should have the right to regulate harmful speech
in fact, that's probably FURTHER than I would go
on their own platform
I want these companies to have some ability to regulate, but their ability to regulate should be limited
if i say some awful thing on facebook, twitter shouldn't ban me
My point was, people arent mad at patreon for banning for the N word
they are mad because they misrepresented their practices
Actually many free speech absolutists are
also they arent banning for the N word
quick search proves that
I think they are a minority of the controversy
I think we disagree over why the issue is controversial
I agree that banning for using the N word is fne
I already recognized that the Patreon case with Sargon is iffy for some reasons, but I also explained why it is kind of justified at the same time
my position is nuanced
Justified, maybe
should we ban porn from internet ? children might stumble across it <:TimThink:482277772497125378>
If we specifically told you we wouldnt ban you for something
and then we did
It could be justified for moral reasons
but not justified under their stated practice
which is why it's kinda justified kinda not
Its like a cop explicitly saying to you, I wont pull you over if you speed less than 5 miles over
then they pull you over for doing 47 in a 45
Well technically you did do something "bad"
but he said he wouldnt
so they would be kinda justified and kinda not
why is everybody so scared of nuance?
Yeah im pointing out the controverys is the "unjustified" part there
The free speech absolutests would be the ones saying "there should be no speed limits"