I'm not really sure what you mean by "bad faith" could you give an example please?

Fallacious arguments, personal attacks, stuff like that.

Ohh, thank God.

Yeah that's a good rule.

> Fallacious arguments, personal attacks, stuff like that.
@m.miller I'm going to correct this a bit. Fallacious arguments are allowed, but if they are repeated over and over and over and it turns into "preaching" the same thing, then it can become bad faith. And yes, attacking the person and not the argument is not welcome. No level of defamation will be tolerated. For instance, if someone claims "Biden is a pedophile" and the evidence they site is him touching the arm of a young girl, that's defamation.

Sorry

No need to appologize. Just a minor correction/clarification.

@everyone I am accepting article submissions for our online publication at thewarofideas.org . I am looking for thought provoking pieces! Please email to travis@pang-burn.com If your article is selected, it will be shared across all Pangburn networks. A great way to put your article idea to the test is to post in the Battlefield first. All at thewarofideas.org

@ThePangburn Sadie isn't too pleased with the article I'm writing about determinism and compassion.

Must be wrong then

Lol

The dog has a say. “I’m not determined!”

> @m.miller I'm going to correct this a bit. Fallacious arguments are allowed, but if they are repeated over and over and over and it turns into "preaching" the same thing, then it can become bad faith. And yes, attacking the person and not the argument is not welcome. No level of defamation will be tolerated. For instance, if someone claims "Biden is a pedophile" and the evidence they site is him touching the arm of a young girl, that's defamation.
@ThePangburn

Politicians like that are inherently "public figures" and subject to different standards for libel or slander (often loosely called "defamation", confusing legal and colloquial meanings). US case law has two defining benchmarks.

"Roxanne sleeps with her trumpet" was close enough to factually true (in a several hour interview, Ms. Pulitzer described playing the trumpet, and storing it in the corner of her bedroom), to not be libel of a public figure. A parody full page Hustler ad for Campadre liqeur, mimicing a Playboy Dewars Profile, was found so facetious that a "reasonable person" (legal "term of art") would not believe it was meant to claim Jerry Falwell actually lost his virginity to his mother while drunk in an outhouse, regardless of the disposition of the goat.

Canada may get confused with UK law that isn't as clear as in the USA, where truth is an absolute defense against claims being libel or slander. There are also cases where someone's illegal actions in an official capacity deserve ad hominem against the underlying person, and destroying his professional career, eg the UK doctor who was paid to publish fake studies as commercial frauds, tricking many idiots into believing that thimerosol preserved vaccines somehow cause autism. Or, mental illness cases like Kanye West (and a few others less well known) allegedly running for political office, up to and including US President, despite not doing the legal steps required. Or malignant narcissists not as public figures, filing false criminal complaints or other vexatious litigation to torment or terrorize innocent targets.

Cases like Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg or Marissa Mayer (before being paid to leave Yahoo!) are also ones where illegal business plans and acts to advance them are inseparable between key individuals and those acts. The other class where derogatory speech is not legal "defamation" in US terms is smears that express opinion with no factual claim, often over political positions that are controversial, but seen as desirable to some, intolerable to others.

BTW, site, sight, cite (casual abbreviation for citation).... Can we stop conflating those, along with fake pedophile smears by people who deserve to be defamed for not knowing accurate word meanings, or worse, knowing but inviting a Harry Frankfurt book style review as to being bullshitters versus just liars?

Please install a Polling Bot in this Server. Its very usefull we can vote 😉

We can make a lot of polls on issues and its fun 🥳

does anyone want to discuss modern music?

Modern music is becoming hit or miss

in which way

i agree to an extent

@Rohit gogoi oh yes

i feel like there are bad songs, which have always been, but some of my favorite bodies of work OAT have come out in the last decade

> @ThePangburn
>
> Politicians like that are inherently "public figures" and subject to different standards for libel or slander (often loosely called "defamation", confusing legal and colloquial meanings). US case law has two defining benchmarks.
>
> "Roxanne sleeps with her trumpet" was close enough to factually true (in a several hour interview, Ms. Pulitzer described playing the trumpet, and storing it in the corner of her bedroom), to not be libel of a public figure. A parody full page Hustler ad for Campadre liqeur, mimicing a Playboy Dewars Profile, was found so facetious that a "reasonable person" (legal "term of art") would not believe it was meant to claim Jerry Falwell actually lost his virginity to his mother while drunk in an outhouse, regardless of the disposition of the goat.
@LokiV a joke is not defamation. You could afford to be more pragmatic in the delivery of your thoughts. Sometimes our phones auto correct incorrectly. This is just the reality of technology.

@everyone I don't upload much here yet, but check out my new music channel 😁 hope you subscribe! https://youtu.be/iWPYBARtaXA

> @LokiV a joke is not defamation. You could afford to be more pragmatic in the delivery of your thoughts. Sometimes our phones auto correct incorrectly. This is just the reality of technology.
@ThePangburn

So Travis, you'd be willing to pay the legal retainers for Colbert and Kimmel shows, since jokes cannot draw legal action as they're incapable of being actionable as slander or libel?

Your claim is simply not true, while it's an issue of distinguishing relevant details that determines the difference. Give or take 5-10 years of one's life plus millions for legal fees, that the "joke" of a "justice" system imposed under threat of kidnapping or execution, pretends every target of its process must have available for potential litigation, even if patently absurd or malicious. Falwell even won a $400k judgment that could have stood, had Flynt not kicked in over $2 million in legal fees alone to get that fraud based judgment (Falwell's allegedly harmed mother was effectively a fiction character, not any actual person in context) reversed.

Do you remember when MasterCard had NYC law firm Baker-Botts sending often specious legal threat letters to satire and parody video and graphic ad publishers, whether for the "Priceless" theme, or "MasterRace"? They intimidated lots of targets to cave, until a couple got help from PILG projects at Harvard law and Public Citizen in DC, and shut down that abuse of legal process. In the process, US protections for such speech was expanded as clearly protecting commercial satire and parody, versus previously only noncommercial forms.

Too bad the best of those used older video tech, as the one that concludes with a girl's father telling her to give the guy a blow job already, was "Priceless".

1 My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy
2 The College Dropout
3 Late Registration
4 Yeezus
5 808's and Heartbreak
6 Graduation
7 The Life Of Pablo
8 Ye
9 Jesus is King

Lol yikes

@everyone going live on YouTube for the weekly ama! Bring some interesting questions and come and hang out! 😊 I'll be in front of the piano!

Why didn't we have a Daniel Dennet Appreciation Day? Does no one here rate him much?

We will!

@everyone It really helps the Pangburn cause if you guys can drop a like and comment on the video! Also share on social media if you are feeling very generous 😄 https://youtu.be/xTj-ZD8Yrg4

There used to be a (now likely retired if not deceased) nudist from Hawaii who went by the alias Dr. Leisure, and who taught college courses in various aspects of leisure in our lives or society.

Did Pangburn miss International Talk Like a Pirate Day, Arrrggh!?

Which would make a more useful legal or cultural holiday, ITLAPD, or Moosemas? Moosemas is the flexible holiday which can be declared when needed, any day. Uncertain if it has special meaning to salesmen named Bruce, or pagans or SCAdians who've sung the Moose Song. Imagine, if you would, employers and government trying to deal with calendars and Moosemas, or the lengths they'd go to trying to suppress it?

I'm breaking out my legos today :)

> I'm breaking out my legos today :)
@m.miller
Are you making anything discernible, or just holding tribute to chaos as a form of natural order?

How about a Moose, a pirate, and a pirate ship?

@m.miller You made a reference to being asexual earlier, but you also appear to have a desire for intimate companionship (I apologize if that inference is malformed), which (from my limited perspective) appears to imply that you are not in fact asexual. What say ye? x) (I'm curious, as I've not met but one person in the past who claimed to be asexual, though even then they exhibited similar desires).

I’m fascinated by what that would even feel like. Biological urges is often peoples’ biggest weakness.

@Smoke not every part of companionship is sex. I want someone to watch movies with and play Mario with. Someone to go on drives and walks with. Someone to talk to who gets me. Intimacy is many things other than sex.