Free Speech

Anything not relating to the X-Universe games (general tech talk, other games...) belongs here. Please read the rules before posting.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 8549
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by mr.WHO » Wed, 5. May 21, 14:56

Vertigo 7 wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 13:10
This clown show is getting even more hilarious...

phones with cameras = internet. 56k modems = same amount of information as today only smaller. Victim blaming women is somehow not supposed to be that cause you're supposed to get the telepathic message that the subject and actions in the sentence weren't actually what was spoken.
Thank you for you valuable and constructive opinion it really adds much to the discussion.
Not to mention somehow trying to add vomen victim blaming from gods know what part sentence pull out of context.


Every rudiculous justification for limiting Free Speech was simply non-issue just 10-15 years ago, no matter, if it's was kids or adults internet culture.
Yet now, it seems even 20-30 years adults are somehow more fragile and sensitive despite internet and social media regulated more than ever.

How well censorship works, if there is aparently racism and sexism around every corner, comparing to 90s and 2000s?

Or maybe you should admit that censorship went too far, seeing people must appologize for using OK hand gesture, because of some 4-chan meme got traction with mentally derange Twitter mob?

How long will it take from here to get witch hunts because someone is not up-to-date with latest Twitterdation?

That's why I'm all in for Free Speech - ANY free speech, because you're on course to actually get into something worse than any hate speech could ever achive.

User avatar
fiksal
Posts: 16569
Joined: Tue, 2. May 06, 17:05
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by fiksal » Wed, 5. May 21, 15:02

mr.WHO wrote:
Mon, 3. May 21, 11:34
fiksal wrote:
Mon, 3. May 21, 01:48
mr.WHO wrote:
Sun, 2. May 21, 23:06
Who will decide what is good and what is not and at what point?
I provided plenty historical examples that goverments are terrible at censorship.
Democracy does, people that vote on laws. If a law says one cant call for violence, then one can not, for example.
On that I can agree, yet Democracy without access to all the information (both true and fake) is not real democracy.
I will even say that if people only have access to one set of inofrmation, no matter for correct and benevolent, it's not Democracy, but masked Dictatorship.
I never said denying access to information. That was never my argument.
mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 14:56
That's why I'm all in for Free Speech - ANY free speech, because you're on course to actually get into something worse than any hate speech could ever achive.
There never been an example in history of "something worse"; when making inciting violence illegal lead to something worse. But there are countless examples of when allowing hate speech and inciting violence lead to more than just words.

I guess we'll wait and see?
Chips wrote:
Tue, 4. May 21, 20:30
https://www.amnesty.org.uk/free-speech- ... uman-right

I'll go with Amnesty International. Most people think it really means you can say anything you want. It doesn't. You can read your own laws in respective countries (or regions) to find out the constraints around free speech.
Good reference
Last edited by fiksal on Wed, 5. May 21, 15:06, edited 1 time in total.
Gimli wrote:Let the Orcs come as thick as summer-moths round a candle!

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 8549
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by mr.WHO » Wed, 5. May 21, 15:06

fiksal wrote:
Mon, 3. May 21, 01:48
I never said denying access to information. That was never my argument.
Censorship is denying access to information.

I already presented the arguments that Free Speech is much more effective in combating fake-news and disinformation than any censorhip could ever dream.
Last edited by mr.WHO on Wed, 5. May 21, 15:08, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
fiksal
Posts: 16569
Joined: Tue, 2. May 06, 17:05
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by fiksal » Wed, 5. May 21, 15:07

mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 15:06
fiksal wrote:
Mon, 3. May 21, 01:48
I never said denying access to information. That was never my argument.
Censorship is denying access to information.

Censorship of what was I advocating for in your opinion?
mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 15:06
I already presented the arguments that Free Speech is much more effective in combating fake-news and disinformation than any cenship could ever dream.
It's not scientific.
Gimli wrote:Let the Orcs come as thick as summer-moths round a candle!

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 8549
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by mr.WHO » Wed, 5. May 21, 15:19

fiksal wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 15:07
It's not scientific.
You know what's funny, many scientist claim that Sociology is not scientific, because when dealing with large groups of people, when doing experiments with the (near) identical paramenters, you will get different results so many times, that it's hard to actually confirm the experiment results.

Basically human groups have so many variables in them that it's near impossible to "freeze" all other variables, in order to measure the experiment impact on researched variable.

So yeah, in any other topic, I'd treat "unscientific" as an insult, but here it's simply stating the obvious.

fiksal wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 15:07
Censorship of what was I advocating for in your opinion?
Fake news, disinformation, call to violence and hate speech.

Then I provided the examples that this doesn't work, how to combat it better and that censorship will eventually become two-sided sword (the rudiculos OK sign censorship).
Last edited by mr.WHO on Wed, 5. May 21, 15:45, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 8549
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by mr.WHO » Wed, 5. May 21, 15:31

"OK sign" is also good example why censorship is dangerous and why Free Speech is better.

How many people read "OK sign, is white supremacy" and simply blindly accept it?

How many people know it was 4-chan joke meme that was pushed on Twitter after "milk is white supremacy" joke success?

Would people treat it as serious danger, if they knew it was just a joke?

Do you feel now much safer that anyone can now become white supremacist, without even knowing?

What next? Photoshopping 1930s photos with people saluting with OK sign?
WIth how stupid Twitter is and how starved for sensation media are, I wouldn't be suprised to see it in news as "independently fact-checked with anonymous sources".

User avatar
fiksal
Posts: 16569
Joined: Tue, 2. May 06, 17:05
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by fiksal » Wed, 5. May 21, 16:18

mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 15:19
So yeah, in any other topic, I'd treat "unscientific" as an insult, but here it's simply stating the obvious.
It is obvious and it's worthy a discussion to me.
fiksal wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 15:07
Censorship of what was I advocating for in your opinion?
Fake news, disinformation, call to violence and hate speech.
[/quote]

None of what you listed is "information".
mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 15:19
Then I provided the examples that this doesn't work, how to combat it better and that censorship will eventually become two-sided sword (the rudiculos OK sign censorship).
And I am unconvinced by them.

What I said in no way infringed on knowledge or information.
mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 15:19
"OK sign" is also good example why censorship is dangerous and why Free Speech is better.
No, that one is a poor example. It's neither censored no prohibited, nor there are any serious repercussions to it. Or name the country where it's illegal, otherwise I fail to see how it's relevant.

If you say US, you'd be very wrong, not only newly adopted upside down OK is fine to use, it's equally fine to walk the streets with Swastika, or reserve public space for yearly KKK gathering.
Gimli wrote:Let the Orcs come as thick as summer-moths round a candle!

BaronVerde
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by BaronVerde » Wed, 5. May 21, 16:22

It was shown upthread by different people and thorugh different sources that the lack of censorship can potentially contribute to genocide (rise of Nazis to power), can restrict voting rights (the 'murrican lie of a stolen election used to exclude groups of voters) and generally contributes to suppression in a world of disinformation. There are the examples that were being called for.

By the way, a 'scientific method' (search term !) rigorously demands reproducible, testable and falsifiable conjections, methods of reasoning and conclusions. That doesn't mean that everything is correct that science produces, but it ensures criticism and a standard one can rely on.

None of the claims @mr.WHO posted up to now were even sourced, which I suspect would lead us to the far right of disinformation news outlets because that's were absolute free speech is advertized. Of course, a gamer forum is not the right place for scientific rigorousness, but I think one should in a mutually fruitful discussion be somewhat willing and able to at least provide the sources of one's claims. I find that in one's own interest, somehow.

Here's yet another essay on how absolute free speech fosters suppression and silences people:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... ech-crisis

Again: it is absolute free speech that silences people, not careful censorship. Careful censorship, just like a rigorous method to acquire knowledge, holds up the freedom. But I think that's clear to any reasoanble person, isn't it :-) ?

Code: Select all

  /l、 
゙(゚、 。 7 
 l、゙ ~ヽ   / 
 じしf_, )ノ 

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 8549
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by mr.WHO » Wed, 5. May 21, 16:41

fiksal wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 16:18
None of what you listed is "information".
Yes it is and I provided the example why it's so - you simply decided to ignore the examples, so I repeat them again.
If someone call to violence, I want to hear it loud and clear, to make sure I'm at safe distance.
That's a perfectly valid information and it's not for you do decide that it isn't.

fiksal wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 16:18
No, that one is a poor example. It's neither censored no prohibited, nor there are any serious repercussions to it. Or name the country where it's illegal, otherwise I fail to see how it's relevant.

If you say US, you'd be very wrong, not only newly adopted upside down OK is fine to use, it's equally fine to walk the streets with Swastika, or reserve public space for yearly KKK gathering.
Da fuk is the upside down OK sign? That prove my point that no sane person can even keep up with all that Twitterdation.
You're also incorrect that in's not censored in US - if it isn't, then why there is already several case where person lost the job because of it? I recall there was a coast guard guy and recently a guy from Wheel of Fortune who had to appologize to Twitter mob.
If this in not a censorship then I don't know what the hell it is.


BaronVerde wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 16:22
None of the claims @mr.WHO posted up to now were even sourced, which I suspect would lead us to the far right of disinformation news outlets because that's were absolute free speech is advertized. Of course, a gamer forum is not the right place for scientific rigorosity, but I think one should in a mutually fruitful discussion be somewhat willing and able to provide the sources of one's claims.

Yet another essay on how absolute free speech fosters suppression and silences people:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... ech-crisis
It's very rich to ask for scientific rigorisity and then putting link to opinion piece article. Especially the article that doesn't contain a single peck of measurable data.

BaronVerde
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by BaronVerde » Wed, 5. May 21, 16:47

mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 16:41
It's very rich to ask for scientific rigorisity and then putting link to opinion piece article. Especially the article that doesn't contain a single peck of measurable data.
That's a lie. It contains several examples where incitement has lead to measurable effects, like surge in attacks on minorities.
Last edited by BaronVerde on Wed, 5. May 21, 16:54, edited 2 times in total.

Code: Select all

  /l、 
゙(゚、 。 7 
 l、゙ ~ヽ   / 
 じしf_, )ノ 

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 8549
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by mr.WHO » Wed, 5. May 21, 16:52

BaronVerde wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 16:47
mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 16:41
It's very rich to ask for scientific rigorisity and then putting link to opinion piece article. Especially the article that doesn't contain a single peck of measurable data.
That's a lie. It contains several examples where incitement has lead to measurable effects, like surge in attacks on minorities.
Correlation is not causation especially that you can explain statistical surge by bloat and artificial inflation (mentioned "OK sign" and similar stupidities counted as hate attack, while it wouldn't be counted 10-15 years ago).
The whole article is nothing more than an opinion article with a few random statistics added for pretense of credibility.
I can say something stupid and put 2+2=4 in the same sentence, but it doesn't automatically make it scientific nor correct.

You have to try more to meet scientific criteria.

CBJ
EGOSOFT
EGOSOFT
Posts: 51740
Joined: Tue, 29. Apr 03, 00:56
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by CBJ » Wed, 5. May 21, 17:09

mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 16:41
You're also incorrect that in's not censored in US - if it isn't, then why there is already several case where person lost the job because of it? I recall there was a coast guard guy and recently a guy from Wheel of Fortune who had to appologize to Twitter mob.
If this in not a censorship then I don't know what the hell it is.
That is not censorship, nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with freedom of speech. Freedom of speech refers to legal restrictions imposed by governments, not to the actions of private companies. And dealing with the consequences of what you say is not censorship. Failure to understand what freedom of speech actually means is one of the fundamental errors that make these discussions so difficult.

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 8549
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by mr.WHO » Wed, 5. May 21, 17:34

CBJ wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 17:09
mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 16:41
You're also incorrect that in's not censored in US - if it isn't, then why there is already several case where person lost the job because of it? I recall there was a coast guard guy and recently a guy from Wheel of Fortune who had to appologize to Twitter mob.
If this in not a censorship then I don't know what the hell it is.
That is not censorship, nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with freedom of speech. Freedom of speech refers to legal restrictions imposed by governments, not to the actions of private companies. And dealing with the consequences of what you say is not censorship. Failure to understand what freedom of speech actually means is one of the fundamental errors that make these discussions so difficult.
Is it so hard to see that it's nothing more than privatization of censorship?

If I gonna be murdered by Blackwater mercenary instead of US Marine then it doesn't make it any less war crime.

BaronVerde wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 16:47
mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 16:41
It's very rich to ask for scientific rigorisity and then putting link to opinion piece article. Especially the article that doesn't contain a single peck of measurable data.
That's a lie. It contains several examples where incitement has lead to measurable effects, like surge in attacks on minorities.
Lets elaborate why it's not a lie - there is no measurable data, because scienticially accceptable measurable data would looks like this:
- hate crime statistics from last 10-20 years.
- statistics with attached yearly classification and definition of all hate crimes (e.g. if year 2000 would have 100 types of defined hate crimes and year 2021 would have 600 hate crimes, or reverse)
- weight attached to every hate crime (e.g. murder > beating > calling names > something absurd like OK hand gesture).
- all data reconciled and ajdusted with above variables.

Only such data could show hard evidence if there was increase or decrease in hate against minorities.

...but even then it could be questionable, because as I mention with Sociology, you cannot reproduce the experiment to prove beyond any doubt that the thing you measure (e.g. hate) was specifically cause by the other thing (internet hate speech), because you're physically and scientifically unable to exclude milion other factors that are in effect for historic data.

Basically with sociology you're not doing science, but simply storytelling and educated guess based on historic data.

You can't be sure for final results of something so simplistic as prisoner dillema, yet you expect to figure out something for multi-milion people groups?
At best you could only prove the trend (hate increase or decrease), but there is no way to prove what is the direct cause of that hate.

That's why I avoid putting "scientific" articles in any political discussion.

CBJ
EGOSOFT
EGOSOFT
Posts: 51740
Joined: Tue, 29. Apr 03, 00:56
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by CBJ » Wed, 5. May 21, 17:43

mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 17:34
Is it so hard to see that it's nothing more than privatization of censorship?
It is nothing of the sort. If the whole premise of what you say is predicated on you redefining the terms involved to means something different to what everyone else understands by them, there is nothing to discuss.

Vertigo 7
Posts: 3457
Joined: Fri, 14. Jan 11, 17:30
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by Vertigo 7 » Wed, 5. May 21, 17:49

mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 14:56
Vertigo 7 wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 13:10
This clown show is getting even more hilarious...

phones with cameras = internet. 56k modems = same amount of information as today only smaller. Victim blaming women is somehow not supposed to be that cause you're supposed to get the telepathic message that the subject and actions in the sentence weren't actually what was spoken.
Thank you for you valuable and constructive opinion it really adds much to the discussion.
Not to mention somehow trying to add vomen victim blaming from gods know what part sentence pull out of context.


Every rudiculous justification for limiting Free Speech was simply non-issue just 10-15 years ago, no matter, if it's was kids or adults internet culture.
Yet now, it seems even 20-30 years adults are somehow more fragile and sensitive despite internet and social media regulated more than ever.

How well censorship works, if there is aparently racism and sexism around every corner, comparing to 90s and 2000s?

Or maybe you should admit that censorship went too far, seeing people must appologize for using OK hand gesture, because of some 4-chan meme got traction with mentally derange Twitter mob?

How long will it take from here to get witch hunts because someone is not up-to-date with latest Twitterdation?

That's why I'm all in for Free Speech - ANY free speech, because you're on course to actually get into something worse than any hate speech could ever achive.
Firstly, all you have to do is read back a little bit to see exactly what I meant wrt victim blaming.

2ndly, I find your arguments here to be quite hypocritical considering the amount of times you've been all in for curtailing freedoms of anyone that doesn't fit into certain religious or ethnic categories. Remember that time you called police beating and kidnapping protestors "normal police work"? or that time you said you were afraid of women wearing a burqa even if they chose to wear it? or that time you said BLM was stupid? Or that time you said there was "nothing to protest about" when the cop shot Jacob Blake 7 times point blank in the back?

You say you're all in for "ANY free speech", I find it disturbing that your post history says otherwise. But someone on the left attacking white supremacy symbolism and expressions, can't have that now, can we?
The Future is Progressive!
rebellionpac.com
Fight white supremacy, fight corporate influence, fight for the rights of all peoples!

BaronVerde
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by BaronVerde » Wed, 5. May 21, 18:18

mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 17:34
Lets elaborate why it's not a lie - there is no measurable data, because scienticially accceptable measurable data would looks like this:
- hate crime statistics from last 10-20 years.
- statistics with attached yearly classification and definition of all hate crimes (e.g. if year 2000 would have 100 types of defined hate crimes and year 2021 would have 600 hate crimes, or reverse)
- weight attached to every hate crime (e.g. murder > beating > calling names > something absurd like OK hand gesture).
- all data reconciled and ajdusted with above variables.

Only such data could show hard evidence if there was increase or decrease in hate against minorities.

...but even then it could be questionable, because as I mention with Sociology, you cannot reproduce the experiment to prove beyond any doubt that the thing you measure (e.g. hate) was specifically cause by the other thing (internet hate speech), because you're physically and scientifically unable to exclude milion other factors that are in effect for historic data.

Basically with sociology you're not doing science, but simply storytelling and educated guess based on historic data.

You can't be sure for final results of something so simplistic as prisoner dillema, yet you expect to figure out something for multi-milion people groups?
At best you could only prove the trend (hate increase or decrease), but there is no way to prove what is the direct cause of that hate.

That's why I avoid putting "scientific" articles in any political discussion.
All you're doing is misreading, invent random magic numbers, construe things in a way hardly worth a reply because it is unclear how the thoughts come to be. These are distractions and whataboutism. The prisoner dilemma has nothing to do with free speech, it's game theory. Sociology is a social science. In all science, there is always a doubt, that's what makes it so thrilling and what drives it. You can't even support your own statements, so why demanding evidence 'without doubt' from others ? We're already beyond that and looking into the future, with more or less concern, you're holding us back.

Going back, I wrote 'a gamer forum is hardly the place for [scientific rigour]'. Don't claim I demaned its application in here, I just asked for sources for your assertions, which you keep on failing to produce, instead, as others have mentioned, you redefine things, twist peoples words, wind and evade.

Really, there's little to discuss, no progress is to be expected. Pity.

Code: Select all

  /l、 
゙(゚、 。 7 
 l、゙ ~ヽ   / 
 じしf_, )ノ 

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 8549
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by mr.WHO » Wed, 5. May 21, 18:29

Thanks, now at least I know what you refers to and I can reply to that.
Vertigo 7 wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 17:49
I find your arguments here to be quite hypocritical considering the amount of times you've been all in for curtailing freedoms of anyone that doesn't fit into certain religious or ethnic categories. or that time you said you were afraid of women wearing a burqa even if they chose to wear it?
I don't recall curtailing religius/ethnic freedoms, other than Burka Ban discussion. There I was describing it as a public safety measure decided by Swiss in referendum.
However, you're correct that would be against Freedom of Speech, a form of censorship and I think you put this argument back then.

Lets be honest - in the end you want to censor/free different things than I, but I'm drifting towards Freedom of Speech, so I'm more likely to stop supporting Burka ban, than you to stop supporting censorship.

Vertigo 7 wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 17:49
Remember that time you called police beating and kidnapping protestors "normal police work"?
I specifically said this is the same police procedure across the world, both Europe and Asian and I remember specifically mention that it's hard to find police which didn't do it (I think I put UK police as an "anomaly" example).
I never said it was "good" or "righteous" (especcially all the bad stuff I saw from "yellow vest protest")


Vertigo 7 wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 17:49
or that time you said BLM was stupid?
I never said BLM has no right to protest specifically. What I said was OPINION that it's stupid to mass gather during COVID outbreak.

Vertigo 7 wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 17:49
Or that time you said there was "nothing to protest about" when the cop shot Jacob Blake 7 times point blank in the back?

Jacob Blake is great case study to get back especially after recent case with the girl who tried to stab other girl and policeman had like 0.5s to react - people say "why he didn't tazed her"? Well, jacob Blake was tazed and he didn't even slowed down.
I recall I said specifically that protesting the whole case was stupid as police was left with no option, other than possibly physically jumping several guys on him to stop him...which is now also questionable, becasue he could stop breath, am I right?
So what else? should they taze him till his hearth shut-down? Let him drive away?

Overall my opinion that something is stupid to be protested doesn't equal to denying the right to protest - that's what Freedom of Speech is about.


CBJ wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 17:43
mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 17:34
Is it so hard to see that it's nothing more than privatization of censorship?
It is nothing of the sort. If the whole premise of what you say is predicated on you redefining the terms involved to means something different to what everyone else understands by them, there is nothing to discuss.
It's rich to hear about term re-definition, when other side redefine everything all the time - again that "OK sign" - no one defined it as a hate symbol just a few years ago, now it has half of the "negative connotation" definition on wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK_gesture

CBJ
EGOSOFT
EGOSOFT
Posts: 51740
Joined: Tue, 29. Apr 03, 00:56
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by CBJ » Wed, 5. May 21, 18:59

You are the one who brought that symbol up, it has nothing to do with freedom of speech, and now you're using it as an excuse for whataboutism.

User avatar
mr.WHO
Posts: 8549
Joined: Thu, 12. Oct 06, 17:19
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by mr.WHO » Wed, 5. May 21, 19:06

CBJ wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 18:59
You are the one who brought that symbol up, it has nothing to do with freedom of speech, and now you're using it as an excuse for whataboutism.
It's not whataboutism - it's a clear example how censorship can get out of control out of tiny stupid thing.
That's one of the things that Free Speech has been made to prevent.
BaronVerde wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 18:18
All you're doing is misreading, invent random magic numbers, construe things in a way hardly worth a reply because it is unclear how the thoughts come to be. These are distractions and whataboutism. The prisoner dilemma has nothing to do with free speech, it's game theory. Sociology is a social science. In all science, there is always a doubt, that's what makes it so thrilling and what drives it. You can't even support your own statements, so why demanding evidence 'without doubt' from others ? We're already beyond that and looking into the future, with more or less concern, you're holding us back.
And from this, I can tell you never have been close to actual science paper. I also see the pattern of trying to cut out the discussion with whataboutism buzz word when there in no arguments left.

User avatar
Chips
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri, 19. Mar 04, 19:46
x4

Re: Free Speech

Post by Chips » Wed, 5. May 21, 19:26

mr.WHO wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 19:06
CBJ wrote:
Wed, 5. May 21, 18:59
You are the one who brought that symbol up, it has nothing to do with freedom of speech, and now you're using it as an excuse for whataboutism.
It's not whataboutism - it's a clear example how censorship can get out of control out of tiny stupid thing.
That's one of the things that Free Speech has been made to prevent.
Okay, I'm sorry, but what censorship exactly is this? Make it super simple so I'm not able to misunderstand.

Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic English”