The tale of Jaffe

Started by the-pi-guy, Dec 06, 2018, 01:29 AM

previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

the-pi-guy

Dec 06, 2018, 01:29 AM Last Edit: Dec 06, 2018, 01:34 AM by the-pi-guy
We should give people like Milo a platform, Says Jaffe; not doing so is ruining the country. Defends himself with NPC memes. | ResetEra





Phantom Thief vs. David Jaffe?



Quote
EDIT: Phantom Thief created this thread https://www.resetera.com/threads/we...country-defends-himself-with-npc-memes.84716/ and gave his input on the matter and because of that Jaffe wants to have a debate?
2ND EDIT: Video:




Jaffe has a bone to pick with Era

the-pi-guy

All fixed.

Forgot that Era doesn't work here.

Legend

That sounds extreme even for Jaffe.

the-pi-guy

The thing that Jaffe misses, is that Milo has a platform.  He's on facebook.

The problem is, no one is entitled to a specific platform.  You can't take someone's time, money or property to be able to say whatever you want to say.  For example, I can't start posting bad stuff on VizionEck.  I also can't sue a company if they don't let me have an account.  

In other words the government supports our freedom of speech, but that freedom is from the government.  It doesn't entitle us to use someone else's private property to spread whatever our speech.

I know some liberals and a lot of conservatives have the view that anybody, even Nazi's should be able to have a platform.  

I really like that ideal, but it's an ideal.  The big danger is that someone spreading hateful things requires that someone else is able to basically correct them or we get more people believing hateful things.  That is beyond dangerous.

I think in order for that ideal to be a reality, it would require smarter people to be willing to correct, and it requires that everything be truthful.

Xevross

Careful, he'll tweet saying he wants a debate with you, 1/2 tau!

Freedom of speech is a right, but platform holders also have rights to block/ remove users if it goes against their beliefs/ terms. Not all people deserve platforms, and there are many examples of people who should be shut down, like neo nazis and racists.

ethomaz

Dec 06, 2018, 02:29 PM Last Edit: Dec 06, 2018, 02:32 PM by ethomaz
I'm not sawing the issue here... he wants to debate with somebody with weird biased ideias... or I'm missing something bigger?

the-pi-guy

I'm not sawing the issue here... he wants to debate with somebody with weird biased ideias... or I'm missing something bigger?
He thinks everyone should have a platform, even Nazi's.  

ethomaz

He thinks everyone should have a platform, even Nazi's. 
Really? What did he means with platform? A community only for Nazi's? Dude is weird.

the-pi-guy

Really? What did he means with platform?
Basically that people should be able to talk about whatever.
For example, I should be able to go to schools and talk about whatever I want.

ethomaz

Basically that people should be able to talk about whatever.
For example, I should be able to go to schools and talk about whatever I want.
Seems fine since you don't harm others people I guess.

I'm against Nazism but I believe there is crazy people enough to believe and like it ideals... that is fine... crazy people like to talk about crazy things but if this crazy guy start to put these ideals in practice and harm others people then the law should punish them.

They are a big difference here... I don't think anybody or even the government has the right to choose what somebody likes or want to talk about no matter how evil it is... that is the person choice no matter how crazy it is... said that government and laws should make sure what these people likes didn't harm other people.

You will be no better than Nazi's or Ku Klux Klan if you think these people can't talk about what they like.

So yeap if Jeff is talking about that then I'm on his side.

Xevross

Seems fine since you don't harm others people I guess.

I'm against Nazism but I believe there is crazy people enough to believe and like it ideals... that is fine... crazy people like to talk about crazy things but if this crazy guy start to put these ideals in practice and harm others people then the law should punish them.

They are a big difference here... I don't think anybody or even the government has the right to choose what somebody likes or want to talk about no matter how evil it is... that is the person choice no matter how crazy it is... said that government and laws should make sure what these people likes didn't harm other people.

You will be no better than Nazi's or Ku Klux Klan if you think these people can't talk about what they like.

So yeap if Jeff is talking about that then I'm on his side.
The law is freedom of speech. No one should be blocked from speaking their beliefs. That being said, if what they say insights hatred, discrimination or violence, then they absolutely should be stopped and punished.

And the whole platform thing, it depends who's platform it is. People who own a platform have the right to remove people if they say things against their terms/ beliefs.

My opinion on someone like Milo, is that he should be allowed to say what he has to say. But he's doing so on social media, and those media platforms have every right, and should, take down someone like him. He had the freedom to use it speak what he wants, but he ruined it for himself by inciting hatred.

ethomaz

The law is freedom of speech. No one should be blocked from speaking their beliefs. That being said, if what they say insights hatred, discrimination or violence, then they absolutely should be stopped and punished.

And the whole platform thing, it depends who's platform it is. People who own a platform have the right to remove people if they say things against their terms/ beliefs.

My opinion on someone like Milo, is that he should be allowed to say what he has to say. But he's doing so on social media, and those media platforms have every right, and should, take down someone like him. He had the freedom to use it speak what he wants, but he ruined it for himself by inciting hatred.
I agree with you... talk about what you want since you don't harm anybody else.... if that the case it should have some penalties.

And finally I understood what platform means lol

So platform means social media platforms like Twiiter, Facebook, etc.

It is a bit hard to say what is right or what is wrong here... first if it was a private owner like this forum I think the owner has the right to allow or not who he things deserves be in that community.

But Facebook is a public social media owned by a public company (the company is private I know... public I mean that in the term of a service used by the public... or everybody). When you have a public service like Facebook you can't create any type of rule anymore... you probably needs to have a TOS that is agreed by the user when he enter in the community and worst if you try to change it you need the users to agree again.

It is not that easy to be fair.

I don't think any public social media platform has the right to block or ban anybody from their platform without a law order... it just doesn't seem right to me.

What the platform should do is give users tools to block what they don't want to read/face in that platform.

Legend

Yeah it's not black and white now that websites like facebook and twitter are so well known. Essentially they are monopolies in a way.


Looking at the bigger picture, a problem in general imo is that we treat the right to free speech as a right to treat all voices as equal regardless of context. For example tv shows will regularly have an expert and a non expert debate each other and treat it as a 50/50 stalemate where it's left up to the viewer to decide who is right.