Cancel Culture - Page 5

olygirl · #81 10.01.2021, 14:18

	Quote:	MusicChick
	Me neither, hence the question. I got tired of short formats when SMSs started. Most people don't know how to contextualize. Or, maybe we need to ask if the guys pushing him out did it as officials or anti-Trumpers. And "when you reach X millions of supporters you shall be expelled" will ever be written in their T&Cs. What did China do with Alibaba again?

I keep telling myself that it's fine to have one mod that miscontrues the issues and plays to right-wing theories.

BasP72 · #82 10.01.2021, 14:21

I wonder by the way where Facebook gets its holier than thou attitude from, blocking sexist racist whatever content.

It is an often conveniently forgotten fact that Facebook started as an online meat-market where (male) students could rate female students across a hot-or-not scale.

I am still waiting for #metoo to be all over this, or for any of the female students to claim emotional distress and sue Zuckerberg into the ground.

Tom1234 · #83 10.01.2021, 14:22

	Quote:	kiwiguy08
	Great, now do the Chinese CCP, Ayatollah Khomeini, Antifa........

I think Ayatollah Khomeini self-deleted when he died in 1989.

MusicChick · #84 10.01.2021, 14:23

	Quote:	BasP72
	I wonder by the way where Facebook gets its holier than thou attitude from, blocking sexist racist whatever content. It is an often conveniently forgotten fact that Facebook started as an online meat-market where (male) students could rate female students across a hot-or-not scale. I am still waiting for #metoo to be all over this, or for any of the female students to claim emotional distress and sue Zuckerberg into the ground.

I think they are busy liking eachothers' posts.

Ouchboy · #85 10.01.2021, 14:29

	Quote:	MusicChick
	Me neither, hence the question. I got tired of short formats when SMSs started. Most people don't know how to contextualize.

oh ok......

FairDinkum · #86 10.01.2021, 14:33

"They're worried Trump will tweet the nucl.codes"

Sure. Because if he wants to give the codes to some enemy out there he cant find other ways of doing it

and sure, all those bad guys are just waiting for the codes to drop and go ahead ..and nuke whatever is there to nuke

Actually what's disturbing is how we could be told any excuse even the most ridiculous ones.. and in case we reply to that c***p that's been served then we'll be banned and sent to goulag or smthg .

Therefore, all that talk about democracy,free speech was indeed just plain marketing

BasP72 · #87 10.01.2021, 14:36

	Quote:	FairDinkum
	and sure, all those bad guys are just waiting for the codes to drop and go ahead ..and nuke whatever is there to nuke

Can you imagine the joy of Israel, being able to nuke Irans facilities while the whole world sees the missels originating from the US

MusicChick · #88 10.01.2021, 14:39

	Quote:	FairDinkum
	"They're worried Trump will tweet the nucl.codes" Sure. Because if he wants to give the codes to some enemy out there he cant find other ways of doing it and sure, all those bad guys are just waiting for the codes to drop and go ahead ..and nuke whatever is there to nuke Actually what's disturbing is how we could be told any excuse even the most ridiculous ones.. and in case we reply to that c***p that's been served then we'll be banned and sent to goulag or smthg . Therefore, all that talk about democracy,free speech was indeed just plain marketing

It was tongue in cheek. I don't also think that a few nutcases dressed in Chubaka outfit and pseudo military stuff will seriously turn the regime of the USA. It's another Trump shinnenigan, he stays in media coverage. I feel bad for Biden, coz media reach is limited and Trump still steals it and via Chubaka brigade.

HickvonFrick · #89 10.01.2021, 14:50

	Quote:	Polymath
	This is a very interesting analogy that you mention. It's amusing that it was published on Twitter... so the baker can bake a cake with the theme that they can refuse to bake cakes of certain themes. The analogy comes from the case of Lee v Ashers Baking Company Ltd and others. Lee initiated legal proceedings after Ashers refused to make a cake with a message promoting same-sex marriage, citing their religious beliefs. This is a highly controversial case. In the first instance, the Belfast County Court ruled in favour of the plaintiff on the grounds that it was discriminatory. However, Judge Brownlie erred in her judgment as she conflated sexual orientation with support for same-sex marriage (Ashers maintained that they would have refused to bake the same cake for a heterosexual individual). Moreover, it would mean that a Muslim baker would have to bake a cake with a cartoon of the prophet Mohammed on it and the slogan 'Je Suis Charlie'. An atheist printer would have to print leaflets proclaiming 'the fool says in his heart “There is no God”'. And, a gay graphic designer would have to accept a contract to design a flyer saying 'why sodomy is a sin'. All these examples point towards allowing some form of conscientious objection. The case was appealed to the Court of Appeal and rejected before being heard in the UK Supreme Court. The SC overturned the prior ruling and held that people could not be forced to promote a belief or opinion that they did not believe in or profoundly disagreed with. To my knowledge this has been referred to the European Court of Human Rights. It's also interesting to note that in Elane Photography v Willock, the New Mexico Supreme Court in 2013 held that it was 'the price of citizenship' for the plaintiff to be required to photograph a same-sex ceremony in spite of her religious beliefs. These cases highlight how difficult it is to balance competing interests. Could it be said then that it's the price of doing business that Twitter must publish all opinions etc? Why I think the analogy breaks down is that one must distinguish between legal persons and natural persons. Both cannot be treated equally. On the contrary, the tenets of equality are treat equals equally and unequals unequally.

Judge Brownlies verdict ensured my healthy disrespect for the judiciary was upheld.

Discriminating against a homosexual on the basis of their sexuality should (and now does) mean refusing to sell that person a regular cake, not a cake adorned with a political message they don't agree with. That's evidently discrimination based on a political view, which is not a protected characteristic in the UK.

The New Mexico case is very close to the boundary for me. I can see both sides. I don't think it's at all analogous. On balance I just about agree with the judgement.

MusicChick · #90 10.01.2021, 15:03

I only discriminate against les eclaires. Ick.

JackieH · #91 10.01.2021, 15:16

and who are they?

les éclairs - lightening

les éclairés - 'the enlightened ones'

les éclaireurs - scouts

les eclaires ?????

newtoswitz · #92 10.01.2021, 15:23

My feeling is that they should have applied the rules a lot more consistently much earlier, with many more posts flagged, blocked or deleted.

Then it's more likely the full deletion option wouldn't have been needed, whereas the way it panned out Trump probably thought they'd never dare and kept pushing way beyond the limits as he always does.

I still don't think they should ban him - just make all his posts pre-moderated, like many forums and news sites do, and judge them per the normal rules.

baboon · #93 10.01.2021, 15:25

The irony is that Trump is massively into cancel culture when it's for his benefit.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/07/p...ngs/index.html

HickvonFrick · #94 10.01.2021, 15:29

	Quote:	JackieH
	and who are they? les éclairs - lightening les éclairés - 'the enlightened ones' les éclaireurs - scouts les eclaires ?????

What's the French equivalent to the English "eclair"

Belgianmum · #95 10.01.2021, 15:30

	Quote:	HickvonFrick
	What's the French equivalent to the English "eclair"

As in the a pastry? Like a chocolate eclair?

That would be un éclair.

MusicChick · #96 10.01.2021, 15:37

	Quote:	HickvonFrick
	What's the French equivalent to the English "eclair"

Cakes! Gross. They should be banned.

jacek · #97 10.01.2021, 15:41

	Quote:	MusicChick
	I only discriminate against les eclaires. Ick.

I don’t understand what the whole fuss is all about Chewbacca guy. It’s quite un-eclaires to me.

MusicChick · #98 10.01.2021, 15:47

	Quote:	jacek
	I don’t understand what the whole fuss is all about Chewbacca guy. It’s quite un-eclaires to me.

Hahahaha...This is a serious thread! Is that éclair?

22 yards · #99 10.01.2021, 15:48

	Quote:	MusicChick
	Absolutely. If DT is pushed out by extreme measures of biased media and people who cannot stand opposing views, it stinks. It will create far bigger conflict and a long one. Let's tread carefully when people label their opponents trolls and liars instead of focusing on the issues in debates. These opponents do not deserve to be (perma)banned just because people get irritated that there is somebody with consistent view that differs. Thanks, terri - this is a good thread.

What a load of absolute bullshit.

You rail against "PC" practices and policies, but frankly I can't think of anything much more politically correct than giving someone a pass for anything they say because "it's just their alternative view". No, in a functioning society people can't spew any crap they like and a) not be subject to criticism and b) not be held to account.

Trump claiming, completely without evidence, that fraud was committed and the election stolen is not an "alternative view". It is, in fact, fraud of its own making.

Trump claiming that the courts (presided over by judges, many of whom HE appointed) are wrong and fraudulent is not an "alternative view". It's more lies and bullshit.

Trump fomenting "revolution", rioting and a pathetic, symbolic coup d'état is not an "alternative view". It's a Federal crime and an impeachable offence.

I could go on...

Trump is a troll and a liar. He needed to have his mouthpiece removed—and a lot more besides.

FairDinkum · #**100** 10.01.2021, 15:51

Wonder if pornhub too has banned Trump ?

Musicchick my reply wasnt really about what you've said...That argument about "nuclear codes" has been told by Pelosi and I just couldnt believe it , so I was only thinking out loud

Cant believe how easily we accept censorship ... and no they're not just private companies so they can do whatever they want . It doesnt work like that.