Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[smjjames]

UK sending shitposter to prison for shitposting

The judge ruled that he wasn't funny enough to not be imprisoned, because the Scottish Judiciary is the best judge of comedy. Jk lol the UK is fucked, no liberty

Story from 2011, Finnish. In 1941, the Nazis were infuriated by a Finnish businessman's and his German wife's (known to have been against the Nazis) dog that did the nazi salute whenever someone said 'Hitler'. A lawsuit was threatened, but fell apart to a lack of willing witnesses. They also threatened to drive his business to bankrupcy by refusing to export, but that didn't go through either. Today the historian writing the report wonders why the Nazis even cared enough to spend precious time on this while they were preparing to invade the Soviets.

Yeah, I remember that story (not from that specific source though) of a guy who taught his dog to do a salute to annoy the Nazis. Maybe his girlfriend is a Nazi and he thought it was an okay way to annoy her?

you were told twice in the previous page not to quote truean, man, come on

Oh, is that the same guy?

I didn't catch up on the thread between when I last posted and now so I have no idea what you're talking about, but Tiruin did say something about somebody not being quoted in Discord and I'm like "uh, I don't know that guy from Adam".

I'm not comfortable with changing my post, but I'll try to keep that in mind.

Dude, how can you miss almost half of their post trying to explain why they don't like to be quoted, or even the 'please don't quote me' bits previously when you obviously removed them from the quote?

[NJW2000]

Ooh drama

How exciting and interesting too

UK sending shitposter to prison for shitposting

The judge ruled that he wasn't funny enough to not be imprisoned, because the Scottish Judiciary is the best judge of comedy. Jk lol the UK is fucked, no liberty

While the term "third world" has no precise definition, liberty is unrelated to either the original definition or common use.

Gotta have a state to have a police state fam

[Rolan7]

@Maximum Spin
It's probably a good idea, I think Toady may have enforced it at one point.  It's barely even worth discussing, much less fighting.  The mob will never stop.

Consent? Individual preferences? No, those things don't matter. Empathy is uncool and the idea that conversation on the internet involves other people has mostly gone by the wayside in favor of the idea that you're yelling at an audience. Asking something of someone else is infringing on their right to never, ever change their behavior even in the slightest.

If I demanded you not use sarcasm to snipe at me, would you comply without question?  (I wouldn't do that, it's too fun )

Expecting posters to obey arbitrary rules without any apparent explanation (unless they've lurked for years) is the height of gatekeeping.  I would be more sympathetic if people weren't so aggressive about "enforcing" it, and calling it "common decency".
I still suggest providing any sort of explanation in one's signature, even just a hyperlink for the curious to follow.  If it's so tiresome to explain the demand, that seems like the least one could do.

[Maximum Spin]

Dude, how can you miss almost half of their post trying to explain why they don't like to be quoted, or even the 'please don't quote me' bits previously when you obviously removed them from the quote?

Are you talking about the first half of the post I quoted just now? Because all I see and saw is some wanking about a "simple harmless request" without specifying what that was, which is obviously part of some earlier argument or discussion I didn't read and don't care about, presumably developed in the part of the thread I skipped, so I skimmed past and ignored that part. Since, as mentioned, I have no idea who that guy is and didn't know he cared about quoting, I didn't assume it would have anything to do with being quoted. As for the "please don't quote me bits", I don't remember those and probably also just missed them since I only bother to quote the part I'm directly responding to. (cf here.)

While the term "third world" has no precise definition, liberty is unrelated to either the original definition or common use.

Gotta have a state to have a police state fam

It's a joke.

[Putnam]

If I demanded you not use sarcasm to snipe at me, would you comply without question?

yeah, but i actually wasn't in this case, weirdly enough, was more sniping at other people i've met over the last couple years

Expecting posters to obey arbitrary rules without any apparent explanation (unless they've lurked for years) is the height of gatekeeping.  I would be more sympathetic if people weren't so aggressive about "enforcing" it, and calling it "common decency".

when people have very specific hang-ups which it takes little effort to agree to, the loss in utility on a personal level is gonna be pretty damn negligible for following their demands, even if they seem unusual; not quoting someone is as easy as, like, not quoting them

[Ghills]

@Maximum Spin
It's probably a good idea, I think Toady may have enforced it at one point.  It's barely even worth discussing, much less fighting.  The mob will never stop.

Consent? Individual preferences? No, those things don't matter. Empathy is uncool and the idea that conversation on the internet involves other people has mostly gone by the wayside in favor of the idea that you're yelling at an audience. Asking something of someone else is infringing on their right to never, ever change their behavior even in the slightest.

If I demanded you not use sarcasm to snipe at me, would you comply without question?  (I wouldn't do that, it's too fun )

Expecting posters to obey arbitrary rules without any apparent explanation (unless they've lurked for years) is the height of gatekeeping.  I would be more sympathetic if people weren't so aggressive about "enforcing" it, and calling it "common decency".
I still suggest providing any sort of explanation in one's signature, even just a hyperlink for the curious to follow.  If it's so tiresome to explain the demand, that seems like the least one could do.

The best part of all that nonsense is that common decency means following the common norms of a space. Which, in an online text-based forum, includes being the possibility of being quoted so that people can follow along with a thread of conversation or make specific rebuttals.  Truan's nonsense is actually violating common decency for this discussion format, and her refusal to consider the inconvenience she's causing everyone else displays a lack of empathy on her part.

Most of us go along with her request because she's so fixated on the idea that being quoted is bad that she constantly derails conversational threads to repeat it, and it's a pretty harmless request. But common decency isn't on her side. 

Let's call it what it is: going along with an extremely weird personal quirk because she makes quoting her to rebut her mostly-ridiculous statements too much hassle.

[Maximum Spin]

loss in utility

I'm not a utilitarian, bro

[smjjames]

@Maximum Spin
It's probably a good idea, I think Toady may have enforced it at one point.  It's barely even worth discussing, much less fighting.  The mob will never stop.

Consent? Individual preferences? No, those things don't matter. Empathy is uncool and the idea that conversation on the internet involves other people has mostly gone by the wayside in favor of the idea that you're yelling at an audience. Asking something of someone else is infringing on their right to never, ever change their behavior even in the slightest.

If I demanded you not use sarcasm to snipe at me, would you comply without question?  (I wouldn't do that, it's too fun )

Expecting posters to obey arbitrary rules without any apparent explanation (unless they've lurked for years) is the height of gatekeeping.  I would be more sympathetic if people weren't so aggressive about "enforcing" it, and calling it "common decency".
I still suggest providing any sort of explanation in one's signature, even just a hyperlink for the curious to follow.  If it's so tiresome to explain the demand, that seems like the least one could do.

The best part of all that nonsense is that common decency means following the common norms of a space. Which, in an online text-based forum, includes being the possibility of being quoted so that people can follow along with a thread of conversation or make specific rebuttals.  Truan's nonsense is actually violating common decency for this discussion format, and her refusal to consider the inconvenience she's causing everyone else displays a lack of empathy on her part.

Most of us go along with her request because she's so fixated on the idea that being quoted is bad that she constantly derails conversational threads to repeat it, and it's a pretty harmless request. But common decency isn't on her side. 

Let's call it what it is: going along with an extremely weird personal quirk because she makes quoting her to rebut her mostly-ridiculous statements too much hassle.

I think they've also said it's due to personal experiences or something.

[ChairmanPoo]

UK sending shitposter to prison for shitposting

The judge ruled that he wasn't funny enough to not be imprisoned, because the Scottish Judiciary is the best judge of comedy. Jk lol the UK is fucked, no liberty

Dont worry LW. The Soviet Union will provide you wayward shitposters with political asylum

[Tack]

Speaking once again as the devil’s advocate to everyone- I understand it, but it is frustrating to comply with.

[Teneb]

Might as well throw my spare change at this: while it is understandable that one may want to be able to quickly purge their posting history if someone tries to use it against them... the better method would be to simply not post anything that could be used against you.

But really, if people are going to dredge up forum history to attack you in meatspace, they are quite likely to point to the purged posts and accuse you of hiding evidence of "misdeeds".

So keep calm and carry on shitposting.

[Loud Whispers]

Yeah, I remember that story (not from that specific source though) of a guy who taught his dog to do a salute to annoy the Nazis. Maybe his girlfriend is a Nazi and he thought it was an okay way to annoy her?

Almost, but no. The precise joke was that his girlfriend thought her pug "Buddha" was the cutest thing ever, so to annoy her, he taught the pug to be the least cute thing he could think of: Nazi pug

Normally explaining the joke kills it but he explains it pretty funnily, and the Scottish accent helps. A large part of this is part of the UK gov's successful regulation of the wild west of the internet (indeed, when they use the term - they use it to justify curtailing freedom of expression!), to crack down on anyone who criticizes "British values." Meanwhile you can trade British girls for years as sexual property for decades and the gov imaginatively interprets "Britons never shall be slaves" as hate speech

Dont worry LW. The Soviet Union will provide you wayward shitposters with political asylum

Plays right into the hands of Westminster, who are convinced that shitposters are soldiers paid by the Soviets. Everyone knows they do it for free

I am outwardly laughing but inwardly pained

[martinuzz]

Dutch parliament just had to suspend a debate about organized crime, when someone jumped / fell / got pushed from the second floor audience balcony.
It is unknown if he survived the fall.

[ChairmanPoo]

I am outwardly laughing but inwardly pained

Artist rendition

[Loud Whispers]

Dutch parliament just had to suspend a debate about organized crime, when someone jumped / fell / got pushed from the second floor audience balcony.
It is unknown if he survived the fall.

Debate about organized crime interrupted by disorganized crime?

I am outwardly laughing but inwardly pained

Artist rendition

10 seconds later