They come for the things nobody would be caught dead defending (often even people who privately engage in it) first. Look at how during the thing with payment processors and porn games, some people were saying they didn’t mind if it were just the rape games being banned. Those are used as justification for speech restrictions to the public.
(I don’t even think KiwiFarms should be legal personally, Chris Chan’s story should be considered evidence enough that they’re a harassment forum)
I’m just saying like I oppose the death penalty, but there are certain cases where I’m not going to die on that particular hill. I don’t believe they should be killed, but the context of the moment is going to alienate more people than it convinces.
Same thing here. I oppose identification laws but making that argument in defense of those two is going to make folks think it’s a fanatical position rather than a reasonable one.
It’s far better to argue from a reasonable position and then extend that to other cases than just argue these places should be allowed to continue to weaponize anonymity.
They come for the things nobody would be caught dead defending (often even people who privately engage in it) first. Look at how during the thing with payment processors and porn games, some people were saying they didn’t mind if it were just the rape games being banned. Those are used as justification for speech restrictions to the public.
(I don’t even think KiwiFarms should be legal personally, Chris Chan’s story should be considered evidence enough that they’re a harassment forum)
One of the games that was removed was a horror game about a stalker, which was made to raise awareness of sexual violence. Is that a rape game?
I’m just saying like I oppose the death penalty, but there are certain cases where I’m not going to die on that particular hill. I don’t believe they should be killed, but the context of the moment is going to alienate more people than it convinces.
Same thing here. I oppose identification laws but making that argument in defense of those two is going to make folks think it’s a fanatical position rather than a reasonable one.
It’s far better to argue from a reasonable position and then extend that to other cases than just argue these places should be allowed to continue to weaponize anonymity.
One I heard recently is a murder case. I’d say it sounds like murder but fuck it he deserved to die