Re: I will say...
Posted by mark194 on 2024-September-18 14:41:22, WednesdayIn reply to Re: I will say... posted by monkeyLostInHead on 2024-September-18 10:58:13, Wednesday
|
People would argue that though. They would say that my views on the trans issue are bigoted and toxic and hurtful, for example, and that I shouldnt get to say what I say in case any new users feel hurt or excluded. I don't think that's arguing that you're bad-faith or saying dangerous things though - it seems like that argument is just "Monkey's really mean and I don't like it :(", in which case we can just say, we're not banning/adding people to a list, whichever, for being big meanies, we're just doing that in the case of someone actually acting with malicious intent and saying things that pose an actual danger to impressionable/naive users. I guess if they were to argue that you're so mean to trans people that your words are likely to make trans people kill themselves, they could say you pose a danger to trans users on here, but I don't think any reasonable person could argue that. Would you agree or disagree? Its even up for debate as to whether Tyred is malicious and dangerous. I mean, yeah, sure. It's also up for debate as to whether OJ actually did it. That doesn't mean there isn't very compelling evidence on one side of that debate and little to none on the other. but is it malice to say that someone should tell their parents? Not that by itself, but together with repeatedly displaying hatred and contempt for essentially everyone on BoyChat and repeatedly giving similarly dangerous advice in the past, yeah, it kind of does. Imagine I follow you around every day telling you how much I hate you, think you're a loser, think you're sick and disgusting, etc. Now one day, let's say I suddenly give you a box of cupcakes, and it turns out that the cupcakes are poisoned. Then let's say I do this same thing several more times. Would a reasonable person conclude, "Oh, mark just made an honest mistake here and accidentally gave monkey some poisoned cupcakes"? Because I feel like, at a certain point (maybe even after the first box, but definitely after multiple), no reasonable person could argue that I gave you the poisoned cupcakes out of love and compassion. Same thing with Tyred. If someone repeatedly says "Users of this website are sick, disgusting, perverted, mentally unwell, etc.", "The demographic this website caters to should get castrated", and so on and so forth, and they then go on to say "Why don't you guys all do this dangerous thing that could permanently fuck up your life?", I don't think any reasonable person could argue that they gave such dangerous advice in bad faith, especially when they've continued to do it multiple times. Its bad advice, but I dont think one can mind read someones intentions just from anonymous posts. Sure, but you can infer them. If I try to pet a cat, and the cat hisses at me and bites me, it isn't mind reading to say "That cat is angry." If a parent leaves their child unattended in their house for a moment and they then find the child climbing onto the kitchen counter and opening the cookie jar, it's not mind reading to say "Gee, little Timmy really wanted a cookie." I think that inferring whether Tyred's intentions are malicious is similarly obvious at this point. If they are a dedicated christian, its possible they really believe that telling ones parents is a good thing. If Tyred hadn't already posted 1000 other things belying this possibility, I might buy this. I get that you're playing devils advocate here, but I don't think this would be a reasonable argument to make. |
Follow ups: