Cancel culture IRL - Page 7

d4m10n · 13th August 2020, 01:24 PM

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

I think the key here is not the number of twidiots pile on, it is whether the actions being published are a problem for the employer.

If enough twidiots pile-on, they can generate a problem for the employer. I'm old enough to remember the shaming of Gelato Andy (who did indeed do something shameful) and how it tanked his Yelp rating in just a day or two. Similarly (though not nearly at scale) you can see a handful of suggestions to #BoycottKroger:

https://twitter.com/olwyngdh/status/1292257955975487488
https://twitter.com/reginesbarjon/st...40388553695233
https://twitter.com/Laura78703/statu...96388492099584
https://twitter.com/HobbesCarlota/st...28336073531392
https://twitter.com/Mac33Cam1/status...5344934813696]
https://twitter.com/Pete_Da_Pirate/s...21224777469953

That said, there is a much better argument for boycotting Kroger (until they come up with a better way to enforce mask compliance) than for punishing an individual employee who was not violating corporate policy or state law.

Cain · 13th August 2020, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Or, to put it another way, offering up an example of "comics working out material in a club" as being different to "undsiguised racism" is rather ignoring the fact that it's entirely possible for "comics working out material in a club" to be racists saying racist things. There are, after all, no shortage of cruel, racist jokes in this world.

"Entirely possible" is doing a lot of heavy-lifting here. Say what you mean. There's a world of difference between what's possible and what's likely. One problem is that when a comment is veiled in a joke, it's, uhm, somewhat disguised. The common refrain, "It's just a joke." I think a lot of people make jokes that they do not mean. Men especially insult each other. A man is groaning on a toilet. His buddy asks, "What're you doin' in there?" "Giving birth to your twin." I also think the vast majority of racists make an effort to conceal their racism. Finally, so much of this is bound up in intent, which is not always easy to read. Asian comedians can make jokes about Asians that non-Asians can't (without fear of being called racist).

The people reading prophecies in holy books are more important than the alleged prophets. It's not that the Bible perfectly predicted 9/11 so much as someone with an agenda piecing words to events.

People act in bad faith when it comes to hunting for racism and when it comes to ignoring it. So, when the plague first struck China, plenty of reporters in the mainstream press referred to "Wuhan Flu." It was pointed out that this could stir racist sentiment, so it should be called something else. Fair enough. When Trump calls it "Wuhan Flu" months later, he's acting in bad faith. However, playing to racists does not necessarily mean that Trump is racist (he's racist for other reasons).

Trump works out material much like a comedian. He has said that when handlers first asked him to say "Drain the swamp" at a rally, he thought the line was corny. Trump was surprised and impressed with the response, so he said it again at another rally -- and witnessed a huge reaction. Retelling this story at yet another rally, Trump remarked, "Now I say it like I believe it."

Quote:

I'm not sure if that should get more leeway. True, you're more likely to misspeak when you're talking extemporaneously, but you're also less likely to censor your true feelings than if you're repeating something you've gone over and over and rehearsed to within an inch of your life. Or, to put it another way, you're more likely to say what you actually think.

Or you're caught in a moment playing to a crowd. And I would ascribe a similar kind of diminished agency to the people who get caught up in Twitter mobs.

Dr. Keith · 13th August 2020, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

If enough twidiots pile-on, they can generate a problem for the employer. I'm old enough to remember the shaming of Gelato Andy (who did indeed do something shameful) and how it tanked his Yelp rating in just a day or two. Similarly (though not nearly at scale) you can see a handful of suggestions to #BoycottKroger:

https://twitter.com/olwyngdh/status/1292257955975487488
https://twitter.com/reginesbarjon/st...40388553695233
https://twitter.com/Laura78703/statu...96388492099584
https://twitter.com/HobbesCarlota/st...28336073531392
https://twitter.com/Mac33Cam1/status...5344934813696]
https://twitter.com/Pete_Da_Pirate/s...21224777469953

That said, there is a much better argument for boycotting Kroger (until they come up with a better way to enforce mask compliance) than for punishing an individual employee who was not violating corporate policy or state law.

I think you are proving that cancel culture works. If there is enough pressure Kroger will have to find a better response to the maskless. Businesses often respond to pressure from their customers and the public at large in a functioning economy.

But, it seems Kroger Andy is unlikely to be personally sacrificed in this process.

Mischief managed?

d4m10n · 13th August 2020, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

I think you are proving that cancel culture works.

I'd say there is conceptual space between a boycott directed at a corporation and an attempt to cancel an individual malefactor.

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

If there is enough pressure Kroger will have to find a better response to the [maskless]. Businesses often respond to pressure form their customers and the public at large in a functioning economy.

So say we all.

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

...it seems Kroger Andy is unlikely to be personally sacrificed in this process.

It seems unlikely now and that's all to the good. Frankly, I'm surprised it turned out that way, given that the public shaming was initially tightly focused on one relatively powerless individual.

I Am The Scum · 13th August 2020, 04:44 PM

Are we at the point where "cancel culture" is just a shorthand for "this person should be fired for their behavior?" Sometimes that claim is reasonable, sometimes it is not.

And if that's where we're at, then the concern over cancel culture has lost a lot of its punch.

d4m10n · 13th August 2020, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

Are we at the point where "cancel culture" is just a shorthand for "this person should be fired for their behavior?" Sometimes that claim is reasonable, sometimes it is not.

That's basically where I'm at (FWIW) although you can sub in "deplatformed" for traveling speakers and "demonitized" for internet personalities.

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

And if that's where we're at, then the concern over cancel culture has lost a lot of its punch.

I guess? There are plenty of other cultural norms which can be taken too far, IMO.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 14th August 2020, 12:54 AM

Originally Posted by Cain

"Entirely possible" is doing a lot of heavy-lifting here. Say what you mean. There's a world of difference between what's possible and what's likely. One problem is that when a comment is veiled in a joke, it's, uhm, somewhat disguised. The common refrain, "It's just a joke." I think a lot of people make jokes that they do not mean. Men especially insult each other. A man is groaning on a toilet. His buddy asks, "What're you doin' in there?" "Giving birth to your twin." I also think the vast majority of racists make an effort to conceal their racism. Finally, so much of this is bound up in intent, which is not always easy to read. Asian comedians can make jokes about Asians that non-Asians can't (without fear of being called racist).

The people reading prophecies in holy books are more important than the alleged prophets. It's not that the Bible perfectly predicted 9/11 so much as someone with an agenda piecing words to events.

People act in bad faith when it comes to hunting for racism and when it comes to ignoring it. So, when the plague first struck China, plenty of reporters in the mainstream press referred to "Wuhan Flu." It was pointed out that this could stir racist sentiment, so it should be called something else. Fair enough. When Trump calls it "Wuhan Flu" months later, he's acting in bad faith. However, playing to racists does not necessarily mean that Trump is racist (he's racist for other reasons).

Trump works out material much like a comedian. He has said that when handlers first asked him to say "Drain the swamp" at a rally, he thought the line was corny. Trump was surprised and impressed with the response, so he said it again at another rally -- and witnessed a huge reaction. Retelling this story at yet another rally, Trump remarked, "Now I say it like I believe it."

Much of this seems tangential, or not even vaguely related, to what I said.

You positioned "comics working out material in a club" as being in opposition to "undisguised racism", which is clearly ignoring the fact that "comics working out material in a club" can be indulging in "undisguised racism".

Quote:

Or you're caught in a moment playing to a crowd.

Right. So, again, the situation doesn't give you an extra bit of leeway, because how what's going on should be assessed depends so much on what it is that's actually going on. There are far too many variables and unknowns to fit into a sweeping, blanket, one-size-fits-all rule, as you are trying to do.

HansMustermann · 14th August 2020, 12:58 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

That's basically where I'm at (FWIW) although you can sub in "deplatformed" for traveling speakers and "demonitized" for internet personalities.

Except even those don't just happen at the drop of a hat. Most that even got a video removed, it was under the DMCA, not by crowd pressure, and even that can be appealed. Or in fact you can sue someone who used the DMCA wrong, and nowadays Google will even do that for you.

To genuinely get de-platformed, you'd have to genuinely break the rules often enough.

To get demonetized, well, it's only for one video, so just don't be an idiot really. As in, intelligence is defined as the ability to learn and apply, so DO THAT. Whatever advertising rules you broke in the video that got demonetized, look again at the rules in your contract, and don't break them in the next video.

So basically what I'm seeing is the same old dishonest argument that was always used to defend awful behaviour from consequences: point at some other thing that would be abusive if it actually got through, except it didn't and wouldn't, act as if all instances where a bellend gets some consequences are the same kind of thing.

It's even older than the internet. Whenever some company gets sued for doing something awful, defenders of corporate irresponsibility point at some ridiculous lawsuit and act as if it's perfectly equivalent and it's that kind of oppression the poor companies have to put up with. The fact that the ridiculous lawsuit didn't actually go anywhere -- or if it did, it turns out it was only mis-represented as being ridiculous -- is glossed over.

Essentially that's the same thing I see here when it comes to the outrage about "cancel culture." Either the ones "punished" by it actually fully deserved it, or if it was ridiculous outrages, it turns out there never actually was some massive mob asking for their dismissal. It's just mis-represented to make it seem like every actual bellend that was hit by it, was just some poor little angel being persecuted.

d4m10n · 14th August 2020, 04:27 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Either the ones "punished" by it actually fully deserved it, or if it was ridiculous outrages, it turns out there never actually was some massive mob asking for their dismissal. It's just mis-represented to make it seem like every actual bellend that was hit by it, was just some poor little angel being persecuted.

They all had it coming, eh? Must be nice to believe we live in such a just world.

HansMustermann · 14th August 2020, 05:46 AM

TBH, after reading through that list, I'm even more convinced that they had it coming. For being too stupid by half, if nothing else. But in the case of most of them, actually there was more reason than that.

Look, it's actually quite simple: don't be a public ass hole to other people, if you don't want to discover what it means when all that audience start being ass holes to you. It's not a novel concept, really. Asking that it should be a one way street, completely shielding you from the consequences of your actions, is just asking for a privilege. And, to put it bluntly, you're not royalty.

Distracted1 · 14th August 2020, 05:49 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

TBH, after reading through that list, I'm even more convinced that they had it coming. For being too stupid by half, if nothing else. But in the case of most of them, actually there was more reason than that.

Look, it's actually quite simple: don't be a public ass hole to other people, if you don't want to discover what it means when all that audience start being ass holes to you. It's not a novel concept, really. Asking that it should be a one way street, completely shielding you from the consequences of your actions, is just asking for a privilege. And, to put it bluntly, you're not royalty.

Many victims of lynchings actually did the things they were hanged for- ergo, lynching was fine and should not be considered an out-of-bounds reaction.

HansMustermann · 14th August 2020, 05:57 AM

Originally Posted by Distracted1

Many victims of lynchings actually did the things they were hanged for- ergo, lynching was fine and should not be considered an out-of-bounds reaction.

Ah, yes, the mandatory over-the-top analogy, that's not analogous at all. It was starting to feel awkward to read defences of why it should be ok to be a racist, without the racists being compared to the blacks that got lynched. I was starting to wonder if I accidentally ended up being in some mirror universe

The key difference, of course, is that both are actually a case of entitled twits trying to enforce their entitlement on others. And by "entitled twits", I don't mean the internet posse, but the delusional bellends who seem to think they have some right to publish their drivel on someone else's web site, or to be paid for it, and think they're victims -- in fact, outright on par with a lynching victim -- if the world doesn't bend over backwards to fulfil their delusional expectations. If you can't tell the difference between someone lynching you, and someone having the right to decide what goes on the servers they own, yeah, sucks to be you.

d4m10n · 14th August 2020, 06:07 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

...after reading through that list, I'm even more convinced that they had it coming. For being too stupid by half, if nothing else.

Telling a bawdy dongle joke is a justifiably sackable offense now? Reporting said joke to the public, as well? Come on, Mustermann.

HansMustermann · 14th August 2020, 06:22 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Telling a bawdy dongle joke is a justifiably sackable offense now? Reporting said joke to the public, as well? Come on, Mustermann.

Except if you're talking about Richards, it turns out that the backlash was against HER for trying to shame those guys, not against them. So if anything, it shows that it's not as easy to start some public outcry against someone if they hadn't actually done anything offensive, as those decrying "cancel culture" mis-represent it, and that it can backfire.

And out of the whole list, Richards is actually the most clear example I could have picked of someone just reaping what they sow. She was trying to "cancel" some strangers over something she doesn't really understand, but instead she got "cancelled" herself. (The one guy who did get sacked, found employment the next day. She didn't.) And even after the backlash happened, we never see her having any remorse or even stopping it or anything. She continues to be an awful person and tries to pin more blame on one of the guys she had picked on. I hope I can be excused if I'm not going to lose any sleep if she can't take what she was trying to dish out.

Distracted1 · 14th August 2020, 07:15 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Ah, yes, the mandatory over-the-top analogy, that's not analogous at all. It was starting to feel awkward to read defences of why it should be ok to be a racist, without the racists being compared to the blacks that got lynched. I was starting to wonder if I accidentally ended up being in some mirror universe

The key difference, of course, is that both are actually a case of entitled twits trying to enforce their entitlement on others. And by "entitled twits", I don't mean the internet posse, but the delusional bellends who seem to think they have some right to publish their drivel on someone else's web site, or to be paid for it, and think they're victims -- in fact, outright on par with a lynching victim -- if the world doesn't bend over backwards to fulfil their delusional expectations. If you can't tell the difference between someone lynching you, and someone having the right to decide what goes on the servers they own, yeah, sucks to be you.

Lynchings happened to white people more often than to blacks. The analogy is quite appropriate. An offended mob dealing out punishment on their own terms. Sometimes with legitimate cause-sometimes without. Bad form all around.

I Am The Scum · 14th August 2020, 08:05 AM

Tell me more about the legitimate causes for lynching.

TragicMonkey · 14th August 2020, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

Tell me more about the legitimate causes for lynching.

Mussolini's?

I Am The Scum · 14th August 2020, 08:19 AM

Okay I'll give you that one.

Dr. Keith · 14th August 2020, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

It seems unlikely now and that's all to the good. Frankly, I'm surprised it turned out that way, given that the public shaming was initially tightly focused on one relatively powerless individual.

Why? It was an overplayed hand. Overplayed hands tend to fail in the light of day.

Distracted1 · 14th August 2020, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

Tell me more about the legitimate causes for lynching.

In any instance where the accused did or said what the mob claimed he/she did or said, it was a legitimate lynching.
If one is to give said mob the power to be judge, jury, and executioner, as well as the power to decide what is and is not a lynching worthy offense.

That is the point of the comparison.

d4m10n · 14th August 2020, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

Why? It was an overplayed hand.

If you could tell that was true when the tweet first landed, you're a far better prognosticator than I'll ever be. I'm constantly surprised at what goes viral and how it plays out.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 14th August 2020, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

If you could tell that was true when the tweet first landed, you're a far better prognosticator than I'll ever be. I'm constantly surprised at what goes viral and how it plays out.

A good rule of thumb appears to be to ask whether or not it's a reasonable complaint. If it's not, then the mob are unlikely to descend.

d4m10n · 14th August 2020, 08:56 AM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

A good rule of thumb appears to be to ask whether or not it's a reasonable complaint. If it's not, then the mob are unlikely to descend.

Adria Richards wouldn't likely agree.

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Except if you're talking about Richards, it turns out that the backlash was against HER for trying to shame those guys, not against them.

I am well aware of this; it does not justify her firing.

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

So if anything, it shows that it's not as easy to start some public outcry against someone if they hadn't actually done anything offensive...

Except that the offensive dongler was sacked as well.

SuburbanTurkey · 14th August 2020, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Adria Richards wouldn't likely agree.

I am well aware of this; it does not justify her firing.

Except that the offensive dongler was sacked as well.

I'm curious, how many Donglegates before you have an irredeemable culture?

By my eye, the public has gotten a lot more saavy over the years since this happened. It's been a bit of heuristic process, and there's no shortage of regrettable overreactions, but I'm curious how to conclude that the whole idea of public accountability for bad actors is a lost cause.

d4m10n · 14th August 2020, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

I'm curious, how many Donglegates before you have an irredeemable culture?

One donglegate is enough to show that we've yet to adjust, as a culture, to novel levels of social connectivity.

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

...I'm curious how to conclude that the whole idea of public accountability for bad actors is a lost cause.

I've yet to see anyone claim this.

HansMustermann · 14th August 2020, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

I am well aware of this; it does not justify her firing.

And I should care... why?

1. The alternative would be that someone is somehow FORCED to not talk about her, or is forced to keep her employed no matter how much that association hurts their business. That strikes me as an entitlement delusion.

We're essentially moving away even from the domain of having rights like, say, the others won't raise their hand against you, to the domain of expecting others to be somehow forced to give you whatever you want. Be it a wage, or ad money, or a medium for your message, or whatever. Which is just stupid.

2. She got hit by exactly what she was trying to cause to other people. And even after the backlash started happening, she never actually showed any remorse, didn't even stop, didn't try to calm everyone down, but rather tried even harder to dump on that guy. Phrases like "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" or "hoist by one's own petard" come to mind.

And again, it strikes me as an entitlement delusion if she expected to have some privilege there. Because that's the name for when you get something that the other guy doesn't get. If you expect that the internet only serves as a soapbox for you, but never for those who don't like you -- which seems like exactly what I'm supposed to want for her -- that's expecting a privilege.

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Except that the offensive dongler was sacked as well.

And he actually found a job the next day, because it turns out, that kind of thing doesn't actually stick if you haven't actually been an awful person. It turns out that those that do stay unemployed or "deplatformed" or whatever, are those who actually do have a legitimate complaint against them.

SuburbanTurkey · 14th August 2020, 09:41 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

One donglegate is enough to show that we've yet to adjust, as a culture, to novel levels of social connectivity.

I've yet to see anyone claim this.

Seems that a public racist can't lose their job without pages of hand wringing about "cancel culture" and people citing the same handful of historical grievances.

HansMustermann · 14th August 2020, 09:57 AM

Well, it seems to go mostly from the other direction in this thread, namely 'here's an example of an accusation that nobody took seriously and had no consequences for the two people involved, therefore when someone actually does get deplatformed, it's over something just as trivial and unjustified.' Same general idea, though.

Dr. Keith · 14th August 2020, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

If you could tell that was true when the tweet first landed, you're a far better prognosticator than I'll ever be. I'm constantly surprised at what goes viral and how it plays out.

Really? I thought you posted it here expressly to call her out for overplaying her hand and encourage backlash.

That's why I started a MySpace campaign to have you de-platformed. It's going OK, but my viewership has sunk a lot now that folks aren't trolling MySpace for Luby's coupons as much as they were before the pandemic.

Don't expect a lot of octogenarians to approve of you on twitter. Some may even send over passive aggressive messages like "bless your heart." I have a polite following.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 14th August 2020, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Adria Richards wouldn't likely agree.

Indeed. She seems to have little remorse for her actions, other than for how they negatively affected her because, she claims, she was literally scared for her life (from, as you term it, "a bawdy dongle joke"). In fact, she blames the man she got fired for getting her fired because, even if he didn't engage with anybody else on the subject, he had tweeted that he'd lost his job and therefore given the mob something to rally around.

And she was fired for doing what you're claiming to be against - trying to stir up an internet hate-mob against people. And the role she was fired from was of "developer evangelist". Her job was literally to create goodwill. And her actions, while on the clock, did the opposite. She also claims that she knew full well what she was doing when she tweeted.

I'm not sure she's the example I'd choose of a) someone whose firing cannot be connected to her performance in her capacity as an employee, or b) the bastion of what is or is not an overreaction.

I absolutely don't endorse everything that happened to her in this case. But there are probably better examples you could find than someone who tried to whip up a hate mob and instead found herself the victim of one.

SuburbanTurkey · 14th August 2020, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

One donglegate is enough to show that we've yet to adjust, as a culture, to novel levels of social connectivity.

I've yet to see anyone claim this.

Pretty sure there are multiple people here insisting that public racists, like Amy Cooper, ought not be fired or otherwise publicly shunned for their actions. Do you consider these examples of cancel culture scorn worthy?

JeanFromBNA · 14th August 2020, 11:11 AM

I wasn't aware that Kroger Andy was racist, except that the definition of racism keeps changing to encompass anything that's useful to the accuser. There's a database of canceled people that's pretty detailed: http://www.canceledpeople.com/cancelations

Cain · 14th August 2020, 11:14 AM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Much of this seems tangential, or not even vaguely related, to what I said.

You positioned "comics working out material in a club" as being in opposition to "undisguised racism", which is clearly ignoring the fact that "comics working out material in a club" can be indulging in "undisguised racism".

I don't know how to characterize this other than "stubbornly stupid."

My original comment: "This goes for undsiguised racism. It does not apply to the UCLA professor put on leave because he read Martin Luther King's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" (which includes a racial slur). Or to comics working out material in a club."

Someone could equally say that I never accounted for the "real possibility" that a professor might just secretly get off on saying a racial slur in class under the cover plausible deniability. I wonder if you've ever been to a comedy club. It's more a matter of trying to discern a blurry line and calibrate an act. Comedians usually strive to generate laughter, not to be racist. It's more a matter of jokes being informed by a racist/subtly racist worldview, but all of that's neither here nor there.

Quote:

Right. So, again, the situation doesn't give you an extra bit of leeway, because how what's going on should be assessed depends so much on what it is that's actually going on. There are far too many variables and unknowns to fit into a sweeping, blanket, one-size-fits-all rule, as you are trying to do.

It's odd you would say there's a one-size-fits-all-rule at work when I'm explicitly inclined to allow for lenience in extemporaneous situations. Everything about this topic is fuzzy and inchoate, so it's little surprise you would attempt to mischaracterize my approach. Par for the course with you. The blanket is entirely your own. It's not about rules as much as a sensibility. With enough muddling we can aspire to develop heuristics.

Emily's Cat · 14th August 2020, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

A good rule of thumb appears to be to ask whether or not it's a reasonable complaint. If it's not, then the mob are unlikely to descend.

There wasn't a reasonable complaint against Nick Sandmann or Bret Weinstein.

Emily's Cat · 14th August 2020, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Seems that a public racist can't lose their job without pages of hand wringing about "cancel culture" and people citing the same handful of historical grievances.

Seems like people just can't seem to keep the many examples that don't involve racism in their heads at all...

d4m10n · 14th August 2020, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Pretty sure there are multiple people here insisting that public racists, like Amy Cooper, ought not be fired or otherwise publicly shunned for their actions.

How did you make the leap from "Individual X ought not lose their job" to "Public accountability for bad actors is a lost cause," though?

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Seems that a public racist can't lose their job without pages of hand wringing about "cancel culture" and people citing the same handful of historical grievances.

Seems to me that some shamings and/or sackings are obvious overreactions, while others are appropriate reactions to (workplace) incapacity or (personal) immorality. Plenty of cases lie in a gray area as well, IMO. Can we discuss this topic without hand-wringing? I'd like to think so.

d4m10n · 14th August 2020, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

I thought you posted it here expressly to call her out for overplaying her hand and encourage backlash.

I posted it for the first and last reasons given at #213.

Dr. Keith · 14th August 2020, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

I posted it for the first and last reasons given at #213.

Did you think her participation in that cultural phenomenon would reflect positively upon her in these parts?

d4m10n · 14th August 2020, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

Did you think her participation in that cultural phenomenon would reflect positively upon her in these parts?

I would hope that we all relate to the positive impulse to encourage universal mask use, and that most of us see this particular approach to pro-mask PR as suboptimal. That said, I'd be quite surprised if anyone here took the trouble to try to deplatform Muscato from, say, Patreon (or what-have-you) and at least moderately surprised if anyone took a shaming approach to the issues raised by the OP.

Dr. Keith · 14th August 2020, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

I would hope that we all relate to the positive impulse to encourage universal mask use, and that most of us see this particular approach to pro-mask PR as suboptimal. That said, I'd be quite surprised if anyone here took the trouble to try to deplatform Muscato from, say, Patreon (or what-have-you) and at least moderately surprised if anyone took a shaming approach to the issues raised by the OP.

That's a long way to say you did not intend her financial harm, but you did intend to show her suboptimal approach to dealing with a masking issue to a broader audience that you trust to follow your intent.

I mean, I guess we could take that as a compliment. So, thanks?

I just think it is a fine line to rest upon. Cancel culture thrives on sharing. You shared. Whether she or KA face any consequences, you can feel comfortable that you helped in some very small way by brining it to the attention of at least a dozen people who otherwise wouldn't have known. I'm not so sure your intent gives you a perch above the fray.

13th August 2020, 01:24 PM	#241
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,388	Originally Posted by Dr. Keith I think the key here is not the number of twidiots pile on, it is whether the actions being published are a problem for the employer. If enough twidiots pile-on, they can generate a problem for the employer. I'm old enough to remember the shaming of Gelato Andy (who did indeed do something shameful) and how it tanked his Yelp rating in just a day or two. Similarly (though not nearly at scale) you can see a handful of suggestions to #BoycottKroger: https://twitter.com/olwyngdh/status/1292257955975487488 https://twitter.com/reginesbarjon/st...40388553695233 https://twitter.com/Laura78703/statu...96388492099584 https://twitter.com/HobbesCarlota/st...28336073531392 https://twitter.com/Mac33Cam1/status...5344934813696] https://twitter.com/Pete_Da_Pirate/s...21224777469953 That said, there is a much better argument for boycotting Kroger (until they come up with a better way to enforce mask compliance) than for punishing an individual employee who was not violating corporate policy or state law.
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

13th August 2020, 01:46 PM	#242
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 14,275	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim Or, to put it another way, offering up an example of "comics working out material in a club" as being different to "undsiguised racism" is rather ignoring the fact that it's entirely possible for "comics working out material in a club" to be racists saying racist things. There are, after all, no shortage of cruel, racist jokes in this world. "Entirely possible" is doing a lot of heavy-lifting here. Say what you mean. There's a world of difference between what's possible and what's likely. One problem is that when a comment is veiled in a joke, it's, uhm, somewhat disguised. The common refrain, "It's just a joke." I think a lot of people make jokes that they do not mean. Men especially insult each other. A man is groaning on a toilet. His buddy asks, "What're you doin' in there?" "Giving birth to your twin." I also think the vast majority of racists make an effort to conceal their racism. Finally, so much of this is bound up in intent, which is not always easy to read. Asian comedians can make jokes about Asians that non-Asians can't (without fear of being called racist). The people reading prophecies in holy books are more important than the alleged prophets. It's not that the Bible perfectly predicted 9/11 so much as someone with an agenda piecing words to events. People act in bad faith when it comes to hunting for racism and when it comes to ignoring it. So, when the plague first struck China, plenty of reporters in the mainstream press referred to "Wuhan Flu." It was pointed out that this could stir racist sentiment, so it should be called something else. Fair enough. When Trump calls it "Wuhan Flu" months later, he's acting in bad faith. However, playing to racists does not necessarily mean that Trump is racist (he's racist for other reasons). Trump works out material much like a comedian. He has said that when handlers first asked him to say "Drain the swamp" at a rally, he thought the line was corny. Trump was surprised and impressed with the response, so he said it again at another rally -- and witnessed a huge reaction. Retelling this story at yet another rally, Trump remarked, "Now I say it like I believe it." Quote: I'm not sure if that should get more leeway. True, you're more likely to misspeak when you're talking extemporaneously, but you're also less likely to censor your true feelings than if you're repeating something you've gone over and over and rehearsed to within an inch of your life. Or, to put it another way, you're more likely to say what you actually think. Or you're caught in a moment playing to a crowd. And I would ascribe a similar kind of diminished agency to the people who get caught up in Twitter mobs.
	__________________ April 13th, 2018: Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.

13th August 2020, 03:00 PM	#243
Dr. Keith Not a doctor. Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 22,484	Originally Posted by d4m10n If enough twidiots pile-on, they can generate a problem for the employer. I'm old enough to remember the shaming of Gelato Andy (who did indeed do something shameful) and how it tanked his Yelp rating in just a day or two. Similarly (though not nearly at scale) you can see a handful of suggestions to #BoycottKroger: https://twitter.com/olwyngdh/status/1292257955975487488 https://twitter.com/reginesbarjon/st...40388553695233 https://twitter.com/Laura78703/statu...96388492099584 https://twitter.com/HobbesCarlota/st...28336073531392 https://twitter.com/Mac33Cam1/status...5344934813696] https://twitter.com/Pete_Da_Pirate/s...21224777469953 That said, there is a much better argument for boycotting Kroger (until they come up with a better way to enforce mask compliance) than for punishing an individual employee who was not violating corporate policy or state law. I think you are proving that cancel culture works. If there is enough pressure Kroger will have to find a better response to the maskless. Businesses often respond to pressure from their customers and the public at large in a functioning economy. But, it seems Kroger Andy is unlikely to be personally sacrificed in this process. Mischief managed?
	__________________ Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God. He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake. Last edited by Dr. Keith; 13th August 2020 at 03:03 PM.

13th August 2020, 03:07 PM	#244
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,388	Originally Posted by Dr. Keith I think you are proving that cancel culture works. I'd say there is conceptual space between a boycott directed at a corporation and an attempt to cancel an individual malefactor. Originally Posted by Dr. Keith If there is enough pressure Kroger will have to find a better response to the [maskless]. Businesses often respond to pressure form their customers and the public at large in a functioning economy. So say we all. Originally Posted by Dr. Keith ...it seems Kroger Andy is unlikely to be personally sacrificed in this process. It seems unlikely now and that's all to the good. Frankly, I'm surprised it turned out that way, given that the public shaming was initially tightly focused on one relatively powerless individual.
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin Last edited by d4m10n; 13th August 2020 at 03:09 PM.

13th August 2020, 04:50 PM	#246
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,388	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum Are we at the point where "cancel culture" is just a shorthand for "this person should be fired for their behavior?" Sometimes that claim is reasonable, sometimes it is not. That's basically where I'm at (FWIW) although you can sub in "deplatformed" for traveling speakers and "demonitized" for internet personalities. Originally Posted by I Am The Scum And if that's where we're at, then the concern over cancel culture has lost a lot of its punch. I guess? There are plenty of other cultural norms which can be taken too far, IMO.
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

13th August 2020, 04:44 PM	#245
I Am The Scum Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 4,569	Are we at the point where "cancel culture" is just a shorthand for "this person should be fired for their behavior?" Sometimes that claim is reasonable, sometimes it is not. And if that's where we're at, then the concern over cancel culture has lost a lot of its punch.

14th August 2020, 12:54 AM	#247
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 31,247	Originally Posted by Cain "Entirely possible" is doing a lot of heavy-lifting here. Say what you mean. There's a world of difference between what's possible and what's likely. One problem is that when a comment is veiled in a joke, it's, uhm, somewhat disguised. The common refrain, "It's just a joke." I think a lot of people make jokes that they do not mean. Men especially insult each other. A man is groaning on a toilet. His buddy asks, "What're you doin' in there?" "Giving birth to your twin." I also think the vast majority of racists make an effort to conceal their racism. Finally, so much of this is bound up in intent, which is not always easy to read. Asian comedians can make jokes about Asians that non-Asians can't (without fear of being called racist). The people reading prophecies in holy books are more important than the alleged prophets. It's not that the Bible perfectly predicted 9/11 so much as someone with an agenda piecing words to events. People act in bad faith when it comes to hunting for racism and when it comes to ignoring it. So, when the plague first struck China, plenty of reporters in the mainstream press referred to "Wuhan Flu." It was pointed out that this could stir racist sentiment, so it should be called something else. Fair enough. When Trump calls it "Wuhan Flu" months later, he's acting in bad faith. However, playing to racists does not necessarily mean that Trump is racist (he's racist for other reasons). Trump works out material much like a comedian. He has said that when handlers first asked him to say "Drain the swamp" at a rally, he thought the line was corny. Trump was surprised and impressed with the response, so he said it again at another rally -- and witnessed a huge reaction. Retelling this story at yet another rally, Trump remarked, "Now I say it like I believe it." Much of this seems tangential, or not even vaguely related, to what I said. You positioned "comics working out material in a club" as being in opposition to "undisguised racism", which is clearly ignoring the fact that "comics working out material in a club" can be indulging in "undisguised racism". Quote: Or you're caught in a moment playing to a crowd. Right. So, again, the situation doesn't give you an extra bit of leeway, because how what's going on should be assessed depends so much on what it is that's actually going on. There are far too many variables and unknowns to fit into a sweeping, blanket, one-size-fits-all rule, as you are trying to do.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

14th August 2020, 12:58 AM	#248
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 18,009	Originally Posted by d4m10n That's basically where I'm at (FWIW) although you can sub in "deplatformed" for traveling speakers and "demonitized" for internet personalities. Except even those don't just happen at the drop of a hat. Most that even got a video removed, it was under the DMCA, not by crowd pressure, and even that can be appealed. Or in fact you can sue someone who used the DMCA wrong, and nowadays Google will even do that for you. To genuinely get de-platformed, you'd have to genuinely break the rules often enough. To get demonetized, well, it's only for one video, so just don't be an idiot really. As in, intelligence is defined as the ability to learn and apply, so DO THAT. Whatever advertising rules you broke in the video that got demonetized, look again at the rules in your contract, and don't break them in the next video. So basically what I'm seeing is the same old dishonest argument that was always used to defend awful behaviour from consequences: point at some other thing that would be abusive if it actually got through, except it didn't and wouldn't, act as if all instances where a bellend gets some consequences are the same kind of thing. It's even older than the internet. Whenever some company gets sued for doing something awful, defenders of corporate irresponsibility point at some ridiculous lawsuit and act as if it's perfectly equivalent and it's that kind of oppression the poor companies have to put up with. The fact that the ridiculous lawsuit didn't actually go anywhere -- or if it did, it turns out it was only mis-represented as being ridiculous -- is glossed over. Essentially that's the same thing I see here when it comes to the outrage about "cancel culture." Either the ones "punished" by it actually fully deserved it, or if it was ridiculous outrages, it turns out there never actually was some massive mob asking for their dismissal. It's just mis-represented to make it seem like every actual bellend that was hit by it, was just some poor little angel being persecuted.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand? Last edited by HansMustermann; 14th August 2020 at 01:19 AM.

14th August 2020, 04:27 AM	#249
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,388	Originally Posted by HansMustermann Either the ones "punished" by it actually fully deserved it, or if it was ridiculous outrages, it turns out there never actually was some massive mob asking for their dismissal. It's just mis-represented to make it seem like every actual bellend that was hit by it, was just some poor little angel being persecuted. They all had it coming, eh? Must be nice to believe we live in such a just world.
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin Last edited by d4m10n; 14th August 2020 at 04:33 AM.

14th August 2020, 05:46 AM	#250
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 18,009	TBH, after reading through that list, I'm even more convinced that they had it coming. For being too stupid by half, if nothing else. But in the case of most of them, actually there was more reason than that. Look, it's actually quite simple: don't be a public ass hole to other people, if you don't want to discover what it means when all that audience start being ass holes to you. It's not a novel concept, really. Asking that it should be a one way street, completely shielding you from the consequences of your actions, is just asking for a privilege. And, to put it bluntly, you're not royalty.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

14th August 2020, 05:49 AM	#251
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,450	Originally Posted by HansMustermann TBH, after reading through that list, I'm even more convinced that they had it coming. For being too stupid by half, if nothing else. But in the case of most of them, actually there was more reason than that. Look, it's actually quite simple: don't be a public ass hole to other people, if you don't want to discover what it means when all that audience start being ass holes to you. It's not a novel concept, really. Asking that it should be a one way street, completely shielding you from the consequences of your actions, is just asking for a privilege. And, to put it bluntly, you're not royalty. Many victims of lynchings actually did the things they were hanged for- ergo, lynching was fine and should not be considered an out-of-bounds reaction.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

14th August 2020, 05:57 AM	#252
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 18,009	Originally Posted by Distracted1 Many victims of lynchings actually did the things they were hanged for- ergo, lynching was fine and should not be considered an out-of-bounds reaction. Ah, yes, the mandatory over-the-top analogy, that's not analogous at all. It was starting to feel awkward to read defences of why it should be ok to be a racist, without the racists being compared to the blacks that got lynched. I was starting to wonder if I accidentally ended up being in some mirror universe The key difference, of course, is that both are actually a case of entitled twits trying to enforce their entitlement on others. And by "entitled twits", I don't mean the internet posse, but the delusional bellends who seem to think they have some right to publish their drivel on someone else's web site, or to be paid for it, and think they're victims -- in fact, outright on par with a lynching victim -- if the world doesn't bend over backwards to fulfil their delusional expectations. If you can't tell the difference between someone lynching you, and someone having the right to decide what goes on the servers they own, yeah, sucks to be you.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand? Last edited by HansMustermann; 14th August 2020 at 05:58 AM.

14th August 2020, 06:07 AM	#253
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,388	Originally Posted by HansMustermann ...after reading through that list, I'm even more convinced that they had it coming. For being too stupid by half, if nothing else. Telling a bawdy dongle joke is a justifiably sackable offense now? Reporting said joke to the public, as well? Come on, Mustermann.
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

14th August 2020, 06:22 AM	#254
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 18,009	Originally Posted by d4m10n Telling a bawdy dongle joke is a justifiably sackable offense now? Reporting said joke to the public, as well? Come on, Mustermann. Except if you're talking about Richards, it turns out that the backlash was against HER for trying to shame those guys, not against them. So if anything, it shows that it's not as easy to start some public outcry against someone if they hadn't actually done anything offensive, as those decrying "cancel culture" mis-represent it, and that it can backfire. And out of the whole list, Richards is actually the most clear example I could have picked of someone just reaping what they sow. She was trying to "cancel" some strangers over something she doesn't really understand, but instead she got "cancelled" herself. (The one guy who did get sacked, found employment the next day. She didn't.) And even after the backlash happened, we never see her having any remorse or even stopping it or anything. She continues to be an awful person and tries to pin more blame on one of the guys she had picked on. I hope I can be excused if I'm not going to lose any sleep if she can't take what she was trying to dish out.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand? Last edited by HansMustermann; 14th August 2020 at 06:35 AM.

14th August 2020, 07:15 AM	#255
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,450	Originally Posted by HansMustermann Ah, yes, the mandatory over-the-top analogy, that's not analogous at all. It was starting to feel awkward to read defences of why it should be ok to be a racist, without the racists being compared to the blacks that got lynched. I was starting to wonder if I accidentally ended up being in some mirror universe The key difference, of course, is that both are actually a case of entitled twits trying to enforce their entitlement on others. And by "entitled twits", I don't mean the internet posse, but the delusional bellends who seem to think they have some right to publish their drivel on someone else's web site, or to be paid for it, and think they're victims -- in fact, outright on par with a lynching victim -- if the world doesn't bend over backwards to fulfil their delusional expectations. If you can't tell the difference between someone lynching you, and someone having the right to decide what goes on the servers they own, yeah, sucks to be you. Lynchings happened to white people more often than to blacks. The analogy is quite appropriate. An offended mob dealing out punishment on their own terms. Sometimes with legitimate cause-sometimes without. Bad form all around.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

14th August 2020, 08:05 AM	#256
I Am The Scum Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 4,569	Tell me more about the legitimate causes for lynching.

14th August 2020, 08:08 AM	#257
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,463	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum Tell me more about the legitimate causes for lynching. Mussolini's?
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

14th August 2020, 08:19 AM	#258
I Am The Scum Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 4,569	Okay I'll give you that one.

14th August 2020, 08:24 AM	#259
Dr. Keith Not a doctor. Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 22,484	Originally Posted by d4m10n It seems unlikely now and that's all to the good. Frankly, I'm surprised it turned out that way, given that the public shaming was initially tightly focused on one relatively powerless individual. Why? It was an overplayed hand. Overplayed hands tend to fail in the light of day.
	__________________ Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God. He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.

14th August 2020, 08:37 AM	#260
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,450	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum Tell me more about the legitimate causes for lynching. In any instance where the accused did or said what the mob claimed he/she did or said, it was a legitimate lynching. If one is to give said mob the power to be judge, jury, and executioner, as well as the power to decide what is and is not a lynching worthy offense. That is the point of the comparison.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure. Last edited by Distracted1; 14th August 2020 at 08:40 AM.

14th August 2020, 08:40 AM	#261
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,388	Originally Posted by Dr. Keith Why? It was an overplayed hand. If you could tell that was true when the tweet first landed, you're a far better prognosticator than I'll ever be. I'm constantly surprised at what goes viral and how it plays out.
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

14th August 2020, 08:53 AM	#262
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 31,247	Originally Posted by d4m10n If you could tell that was true when the tweet first landed, you're a far better prognosticator than I'll ever be. I'm constantly surprised at what goes viral and how it plays out. A good rule of thumb appears to be to ask whether or not it's a reasonable complaint. If it's not, then the mob are unlikely to descend.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

14th August 2020, 08:56 AM	#263
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,388	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim A good rule of thumb appears to be to ask whether or not it's a reasonable complaint. If it's not, then the mob are unlikely to descend. Adria Richards wouldn't likely agree. Originally Posted by HansMustermann Except if you're talking about Richards, it turns out that the backlash was against HER for trying to shame those guys, not against them. I am well aware of this; it does not justify her firing. Originally Posted by HansMustermann So if anything, it shows that it's not as easy to start some public outcry against someone if they hadn't actually done anything offensive... Except that the offensive dongler was sacked as well.
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin Last edited by d4m10n; 14th August 2020 at 09:03 AM.

14th August 2020, 09:21 AM	#264
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 7,932	Originally Posted by d4m10n Adria Richards wouldn't likely agree. I am well aware of this; it does not justify her firing. Except that the offensive dongler was sacked as well. I'm curious, how many Donglegates before you have an irredeemable culture? By my eye, the public has gotten a lot more saavy over the years since this happened. It's been a bit of heuristic process, and there's no shortage of regrettable overreactions, but I'm curious how to conclude that the whole idea of public accountability for bad actors is a lost cause.
	__________________ Gobble gobble

14th August 2020, 09:29 AM	#265
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,388	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey I'm curious, how many Donglegates before you have an irredeemable culture? One donglegate is enough to show that we've yet to adjust, as a culture, to novel levels of social connectivity. Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey ...I'm curious how to conclude that the whole idea of public accountability for bad actors is a lost cause. I've yet to see anyone claim this.
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

14th August 2020, 09:33 AM	#266
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 18,009	Originally Posted by d4m10n I am well aware of this; it does not justify her firing. And I should care... why? 1. The alternative would be that someone is somehow FORCED to not talk about her, or is forced to keep her employed no matter how much that association hurts their business. That strikes me as an entitlement delusion. We're essentially moving away even from the domain of having rights like, say, the others won't raise their hand against you, to the domain of expecting others to be somehow forced to give you whatever you want. Be it a wage, or ad money, or a medium for your message, or whatever. Which is just stupid. 2. She got hit by exactly what she was trying to cause to other people. And even after the backlash started happening, she never actually showed any remorse, didn't even stop, didn't try to calm everyone down, but rather tried even harder to dump on that guy. Phrases like "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" or "hoist by one's own petard" come to mind. And again, it strikes me as an entitlement delusion if she expected to have some privilege there. Because that's the name for when you get something that the other guy doesn't get. If you expect that the internet only serves as a soapbox for you, but never for those who don't like you -- which seems like exactly what I'm supposed to want for her -- that's expecting a privilege. Originally Posted by d4m10n Except that the offensive dongler was sacked as well. And he actually found a job the next day, because it turns out, that kind of thing doesn't actually stick if you haven't actually been an awful person. It turns out that those that do stay unemployed or "deplatformed" or whatever, are those who actually do have a legitimate complaint against them.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand? Last edited by HansMustermann; 14th August 2020 at 09:36 AM.

14th August 2020, 09:41 AM	#267
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 7,932	Originally Posted by d4m10n One donglegate is enough to show that we've yet to adjust, as a culture, to novel levels of social connectivity. I've yet to see anyone claim this. Seems that a public racist can't lose their job without pages of hand wringing about "cancel culture" and people citing the same handful of historical grievances.
	__________________ Gobble gobble

14th August 2020, 09:57 AM	#268
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 18,009	Well, it seems to go mostly from the other direction in this thread, namely 'here's an example of an accusation that nobody took seriously and had no consequences for the two people involved, therefore when someone actually does get deplatformed, it's over something just as trivial and unjustified.' Same general idea, though.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

14th August 2020, 10:04 AM	#269
Dr. Keith Not a doctor. Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 22,484	Originally Posted by d4m10n If you could tell that was true when the tweet first landed, you're a far better prognosticator than I'll ever be. I'm constantly surprised at what goes viral and how it plays out. Really? I thought you posted it here expressly to call her out for overplaying her hand and encourage backlash. That's why I started a MySpace campaign to have you de-platformed. It's going OK, but my viewership has sunk a lot now that folks aren't trolling MySpace for Luby's coupons as much as they were before the pandemic. Don't expect a lot of octogenarians to approve of you on twitter. Some may even send over passive aggressive messages like "bless your heart." I have a polite following.
	__________________ Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God. He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.

14th August 2020, 10:51 AM	#270
Squeegee Beckenheim Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 31,247	Originally Posted by d4m10n Adria Richards wouldn't likely agree. Indeed. She seems to have little remorse for her actions, other than for how they negatively affected her because, she claims, she was literally scared for her life (from, as you term it, "a bawdy dongle joke"). In fact, she blames the man she got fired for getting her fired because, even if he didn't engage with anybody else on the subject, he had tweeted that he'd lost his job and therefore given the mob something to rally around. And she was fired for doing what you're claiming to be against - trying to stir up an internet hate-mob against people. And the role she was fired from was of "developer evangelist". Her job was literally to create goodwill. And her actions, while on the clock, did the opposite. She also claims that she knew full well what she was doing when she tweeted. I'm not sure she's the example I'd choose of a) someone whose firing cannot be connected to her performance in her capacity as an employee, or b) the bastion of what is or is not an overreaction. I absolutely don't endorse everything that happened to her in this case. But there are probably better examples you could find than someone who tried to whip up a hate mob and instead found herself the victim of one.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

14th August 2020, 10:53 AM	#271
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 7,932	Originally Posted by d4m10n One donglegate is enough to show that we've yet to adjust, as a culture, to novel levels of social connectivity. I've yet to see anyone claim this. Pretty sure there are multiple people here insisting that public racists, like Amy Cooper, ought not be fired or otherwise publicly shunned for their actions. Do you consider these examples of cancel culture scorn worthy?
	__________________ Gobble gobble Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 14th August 2020 at 10:55 AM.

14th August 2020, 11:11 AM	#272
JeanFromBNA Critical Thinker Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 439	I wasn't aware that Kroger Andy was racist, except that the definition of racism keeps changing to encompass anything that's useful to the accuser. There's a database of canceled people that's pretty detailed: http://www.canceledpeople.com/cancelations

14th August 2020, 11:14 AM	#273
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 14,275	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim Much of this seems tangential, or not even vaguely related, to what I said. You positioned "comics working out material in a club" as being in opposition to "undisguised racism", which is clearly ignoring the fact that "comics working out material in a club" can be indulging in "undisguised racism". I don't know how to characterize this other than "stubbornly stupid." My original comment: "This goes for undsiguised racism. It does not apply to the UCLA professor put on leave because he read Martin Luther King's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" (which includes a racial slur). Or to comics working out material in a club." Someone could equally say that I never accounted for the "real possibility" that a professor might just secretly get off on saying a racial slur in class under the cover plausible deniability. I wonder if you've ever been to a comedy club. It's more a matter of trying to discern a blurry line and calibrate an act. Comedians usually strive to generate laughter, not to be racist. It's more a matter of jokes being informed by a racist/subtly racist worldview, but all of that's neither here nor there. Quote: Right. So, again, the situation doesn't give you an extra bit of leeway, because how what's going on should be assessed depends so much on what it is that's actually going on. There are far too many variables and unknowns to fit into a sweeping, blanket, one-size-fits-all rule, as you are trying to do. It's odd you would say there's a one-size-fits-all-rule at work when I'm explicitly inclined to allow for lenience in extemporaneous situations. Everything about this topic is fuzzy and inchoate, so it's little surprise you would attempt to mischaracterize my approach. Par for the course with you. The blanket is entirely your own. It's not about rules as much as a sensibility. With enough muddling we can aspire to develop heuristics.
	__________________ April 13th, 2018: Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.

14th August 2020, 11:44 AM	#274
Emily's Cat Rarely prone to hissy-fits Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth Posts: 14,768	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim A good rule of thumb appears to be to ask whether or not it's a reasonable complaint. If it's not, then the mob are unlikely to descend. There wasn't a reasonable complaint against Nick Sandmann or Bret Weinstein.
	__________________ I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.

14th August 2020, 11:45 AM	#275
Emily's Cat Rarely prone to hissy-fits Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth Posts: 14,768	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Seems that a public racist can't lose their job without pages of hand wringing about "cancel culture" and people citing the same handful of historical grievances. Seems like people just can't seem to keep the many examples that don't involve racism in their heads at all...
	__________________ I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.