The ongoing X and Elon Musk Transgressions Thread

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by pylon

Again, I think Jordan Peterson is another good example. Some of his takes really suck and lack empathy. However I do also agree with his assertion we are raising a lost generation of young men, and that masculinity shouldn't be automatically labelled as toxic.

Nobody is labelling all masculinity as toxic. And the reason we're raising an entire generation of lost men is because of people like Peterson preaching virtues that are completely out of sync with modern societies.

[marsplasticeraser]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Social media companies are generally exempted from the responsibilities that traditional publishers have in terms of what they disseminate. The idea being, the chilling effect on free speech that would result from making social media companies liable for what users post would cause more harm than the benefit it might provide (less illegal content, less hate speech, etc.).

.

I'm totally ok if the future has users more accountable for what we say online.

I just don't know how this is actually regulated.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by marsplasticeraser

I'm totally ok if the future has users more accountable for what we say online.

I just don't know how this is actually regulated.

Moderation based on a clearly defined set of rules for users that are laid out when they join?

It's really not that hard.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by pylon

Did I in any capacity defend Jordan Peterson as a person? "Say what you want about the guy...." is a pretty clear indication of I really don't hold him in reverence. That doesn't change the fact he was ostracized, at the time, for challenging the narrative. And having a mob of teenagers shreiking in his face. That's not a civil way to challenge someone.

I have zero doubt that there is a community of people suffering gender dysphoria. I can't imagine the pain and confusion. And my heart bleeds for people suffering in the trans community.

Except that is 100% not a fact.
He was ostracized because he has some pretty abhorrent views, and he straight up lied about what Bill C-16 said/meant, especially when it came to people in his position.

Under no circumstances was he going to be fired because he refused to use people's preferred pronouns, as he was claiming, and as he 100% proved false, by you know, continuing to teach.
That being said, people realized he was an @$$hole and called him out for it. And even then he wasn't fired, because you can't fire a Tenured Professor for being a dick.
Any "Consequences" that he saw were 100% brought on by the way he treated people, not by any specific belief he held. If he hadn't been a such an insufferable jerk, he would still be teaching, but he wouldn't have grown up to be the self professed martyr he so very much wanted to be.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

You still have not let me know exactly what you think Cancel Culture is. I am trying to understand.

Because as of right now my understanding of your point is:

Here you go, I'll give my take then bow out gracefully.

1) Cancel Culture shouldn't exist, unmoderated free speech is better

Cancel culture will never go away, so that's moot. But I think it is entirely lame and pathetic that some people have nothing better to do than Dox people over differing opinions and attempt to ruin their lives. It has happened to me. Yes, I am a firm believer in free speech. I am also a firm believer in although speech is free, there can be a price to pay for the consequences of your words.

2) Free market is when someone is held accountable for what they do or say, but not when its something you agree with, then its "Cancel Culture. Free Market is Kanye's situation (probably because he was talking bad about Jewish people??)

Doesn't matter if Kanye singled out Jews, Muslims, Chinese.... He got what was coming to him. I don't consider what happened to Kanye "Cancel Culture" per se. Had he said what he said anytime in the last 30 years, the only business decision was to launch him into orbit. Long before the term cancel culture even existed.


3) Cancel Culture Example Jordan Peterson, who wasn't cancelled, so why is he an example?

I never said Peterson was outright cancelled. I acknowledged he went on to amass wealth and fame. However when he disagreed with the language in C16, he was effectively cancelled at the time for challenging the verbiage, swiftly and viciously, with little debate. He was cancelled as a professor, and was given no choice but to step down. How he leveraged that post-cancellation doesn't stop the fat the mob came for and took their pound of flesh.

4) You believe there are only two options, unmoderated free speech and totalitarian regime, as if there is no gray area between the two that can exist.

Numerous times I have explained, there are obvious extremes like incitement of violence, Sex crimes, ideation of murder etc.... that I would not label as free speech. I was responding to an extreme example where if we don't have moderated speech, 4Chan is where we are headed, across the board.

5) You don't understand what "Free Speech" is, or what is and isn't a right.

I do not think anyone understands what free speech truly is anymore. Hence why there are thousands of debates on the subject daily. Nor am I so arrogant I would give you an exact definition or claim to know exactly what it is. Let me make my views as clear as I can.

Words get someone physically harmed, killed, cause property damage, or threaten National Security = Should be censored

Words that hurt your feelings, present an opinion you dislike (no matter how preposterous), make you uncomfortable or triggered = Should not be censored

Anything outside that scope.... let the courts decide. Alex Jones certainly exercised his right to free speech. However the impact his words had on those people who were relentlessly harassed, was what he paid for. And I am fine with that.

So in conclusion, if you exercise your right to free speech, just be prepared to pay for the consequences if your words cause true harm. Not hurt feelings, harm.

And to everyone's relief, myself included, that's all I have to say.

[nik-]

What is it that you feel you can't say? I mean really.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by pylon

I never said Peterson was outright cancelled. I acknowledged he went on to amass wealth and fame. However when he disagreed with the language in C16, he was effectively cancelled at the time for challenging the verbiage, swiftly and viciously, with little debate. He was cancelled as a professor, and was given no choice but to step down. How he leveraged that post-cancellation doesn't stop the fat the mob came for and took their pound of flesh.

Wrong. He didn't challenge the language in C16 so much as he lied about it to stoke mass hysteria, create needless controversy, and paint himself as a victim.

(language warning)

NSFW!

[Looch City]

Free speech but be prepared for consequences. BUT only if you caused physical harm not hurt feelings.

Lol that’s a new one. Isn’t that basically how the term “snowflake” was started by the right?

Quit being a snowflake, it’s just feeeelings, be a man and don’t cry!!

[pylon]

Originally Posted by nik-

What is it that you feel you can't say? I mean really.

There are thousands of things I can't say without suffering severe, life altering consequences. Be it from the SJW mob, or my employer. The same goes for you, or Pepsi, or Rube.....

The questions is would you or I want to say them, or believe what I am saying. Of course not. The people here with the exception of a very few, seem like decent, well intentioned people. And that wasn't a veiled insult at anyone in this particular thread. I like you all and value all of your opinions.

My biggest issue is this. When you crack open the door, for controlled speech of any kind, even a little...where does it end? First you normalize it in Social Media. Then when people are OK with it and just shrug their shoulders, the government decides to step in now that people are OK with it, then what?

That's my fear.

Do they start monitoring text messages? Emails? Phone calls?

Look where China is at on this issue. I don't want to live in an Orwellian hell like that. That's why it's important to me. Not because I want to run around lobbing ethnic slurs at people. I certainly hope people don't think that's my motive.

[nik-]

See that sounds like you want to be free of consequences for the things you say. That right isn't guaranteed to anyone anywhere before or after Social Media existed. That's some kind of fantasy.

There's nothing I really want to say that would cost me my job, so I'm not sure where that need comes from tbh.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by nik-

See that sounds like you want to be free of consequences for the things you say. That right isn't guaranteed to anyone anywhere before or after Social Media existed. That's some kind of fantasy.

There's nothing I really want to say that would cost me my job, so I'm not sure where that need comes from tbh.

That's your take? Really?

I am pretty sure people only read the first sentence then reply here.

[nik-]

I mean how am I supposed to seriously address it when someone's take is "SJW, lost my job, China"

Consequences for your actions and statements is not Orwellian.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by pylon

My biggest issue is this. When you crack open the door, for controlled speech of any kind, even a little...where does it end? First you normalize it in Social Media. Then when people are OK with it and just shrug their shoulders, the government decides to step in now that people are OK with it, then what?

Slippery slope fallacy aside, we already have some forms of controlled speech.

[Hack&Lube]

We joke about Musk completely messing this up but it must suck to be still employed at Twitter.

No job security, work from home revoked, days of rest revoked to implement a 24/7 work culture, etc. he's going to have to overpay to retain talent as every other silicon valley major has much better working conditions and perks.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by nik-

I mean how am I supposed to seriously address it when someone's take is "SJW, lost my job, China"

Consequences for your actions and statements is not Orwellian.

So you think China's policy to monitor Social Media and punish dissenters for anti government speech is OK then.

Gotcha.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

We joke about Musk completely messing this up but it must suck to be still employed at Twitter.

No job security, work from home revoked, days of rest revoked to implement a 24/7 work culture, etc. he's going to have to overpay to retain talent as every other silicon valley major has much better working conditions and perks.

While all that may be true, you do realize that every other tech company is firing people right now, right?

If you work in tech and are not a top performer, you have zero job security right now. Very obvious that tech is overstaffed if they are so quick to cut thousands of jobs.

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by pylon

So you think China's policy to monitor Social Media and punish dissenters for anti government speech is OK then.

Gotcha.

That's your take? Really?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

That's your take? Really?

Pylon's playing logical fallacy bingo today.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by pylon

So you think China's policy to monitor Social Media and punish dissenters for anti government speech is OK then.

Gotcha.

Just for future reference, this has the opposite effect of what you're looking for.

[photon]

Originally Posted by rubecube

We already have some forms of controlled speech.

And it depends on the context but speech is controlled all over the place either implicitly or explicitly. If I'm on a Calgary Flames website my speech about the Flames or Oilers probably will be controlled. If I go to social functions with friends and family speech is controlled by social pressures. Be the racist uncle, don't get invited back. Lots of things that if said would get one un-invited to church, or the bar, or museum, etc.

It's been long understood that I don't have a right to unlimited free speech on private property when it comes to the wall of your house or a radio station or a newspaper, there's no reason to think it would change on social media.