SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Fine print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Journal by Azuma Hazuki
Tolerance Is Not A Moral Precept.
This is a thorough once-over giving the lie to the "conservatives'" self-serving bullshit squealing that "Butbutbutbutbut if you don't tolerate my intolerance you're a hypocrite!" The short version, as put forth in the article, is this: tolerance is a peace treaty, not a suicide pact.
Put another way, it's social technology, just like laws. It allows us, in an ever-more-connected global society, to exist and function. Like a treaty it covers those, and only those, who are party to it.
This means that if you're a genocidal fucking psychopath then no, Virginia, we do not have to "tolerate" your unhinged ramblings. You are cancer in the body politic. You have gleefully ripped your human card to shreds and dropped the pieces in an incinerator, cackling like a hyena on PCP at how you have "owned the libs." You have placed yourselves outside the treaty. We are not obligated to put up with your shit.
tl;dr: if you can't behave like a civilized human being, don't be surprised when you get treated like a rabid animal. Read and be better, or don't, it's your choice, but don't bitch when you get your find-outs.
This is a thorough once-over giving the lie to the "conservatives'" self-serving bullshit squealing that "Butbutbutbutbut if you don't tolerate my intolerance you're a hypocrite!" The short version, as put forth in the article, is this: tolerance is a peace treaty, not a suicide pact.
Put another way, it's social technology, just like laws. It allows us, in an ever-more-connected global society, to exist and function. Like a treaty it covers those, and only those, who are party to it.
This means that if you're a genocidal fucking psychopath then no, Virginia, we do not have to "tolerate" your unhinged ramblings. You are cancer in the body politic. You have gleefully ripped your human card to shreds and dropped the pieces in an incinerator, cackling like a hyena on PCP at how you have "owned the libs." You have placed yourselves outside the treaty. We are not obligated to put up with your shit.
tl;dr: if you can't behave like a civilized human being, don't be surprised when you get treated like a rabid animal. Read and be better, or don't, it's your choice, but don't bitch when you get your find-outs.
On Tolerance - For Everyone Who Needs To Hear This
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 320 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
"Gotcha, you snot-necked weenies!"
-- Post Bros. Comics
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Wednesday May 03, @06:46AM
This is not a statement of site policy - this is my own personal view.
I fail to understand this statement. Spam mods do exactly what they are meant to do no matter how many or few are used. They indicate to others that the comment are off-topic, irrelevant, and repetitive. Community members can filter them out easily by changing their personal settings. The real problem is that so many want to be spoon fed exactly what they want to read - they cannot be bothered to modify their settings.
But you wonder why I sometimes reply to his comments - or yours for that matter. Because if they go unchallenged they become the 'truth' as we witnessed a few months ago. Anybody can create an account using any email address that they choose - but several people asked when we we going to allow new members to join? We have never stopped them. They had simply read statements made by an AC claiming that we had. All lies, of course, but if they are not countered they now have a tendency to become the 'truth'. The AC in particular may still post in the journals, but he has not achieved a single one of his many stated threats, aims or intentions. That he can still post is something that we allow, not something that we cannot stop. We also let him waste his efforts creating a new account from time to time, to see if he has changed his ways. He hasn't and will probably never do so.
The willing acceptance of ignorance, which started in the USA but is now rapidly spreading around the world, means that people simply believe what they read on the screen in front of them. They have stopped looking for the truth - they would rather read falsehoods which reinforce their existing incorrect perceptions, or simply require less effort to believe.
We have introduced a 'human captcha' for those accounts that look like sock puppets, and this has been completely successful in preventing the creation of a huge majority of them or removing the remainder quickly when they are identified. We treat all sock puppets the same - we are not only looking at stopping those created by certain individuals.
You are also wrong in your claim that the only thing we can do is delete his posts. Not so - but I do not think that anyone wants to consider the alternatives at the moment; banning all AC posting for example, or closing the journals to anyone who has not got an account. Neither of these actions would serve this site well but would also solve the problem. Removing ALL non-account-holding ACs would not affect the site's operation - not a single non-account-holding AC is contributing to the financial support of the site and those who have an account can already post as AC anyway. Many ACs are just using it as a free site for crap posting in journals that have been created by those who DO have accounts. Personally, I believe that ACs do have a useful role to play on this site - the fact that so many of them abuse their position is what may, sometime in the future, result in their own removal. That would be a shame but it is hardly a problem that cannot be resolved.
It reminds me of people who commit suicide. We try to dissuade them and to help them enjoy life as a valuable person but, at the end of the day, if they are determined to kill themselves then eventually they will be successful in their achieving their wishes.
This site is built on the discussion of topics that require an open mind and an acceptance of things that can be proven to be true to the limits of our understanding at that time. Not challenging lies and falsehoods is anathema to most of us.