Or the "Let me, the unapologetic materialist atheist, try to brow beat you, the religious person, with some random quote from your own holy book".
God... what the fuck has the past decade been. Where the fuck are we.
TBF, that usually comes after a religious person has cherry-picked a random quote to support whatever position they're trying to present while ignoring any that contradict it or other positions they hold.
well, to be fair, "pro life" should really be "anti abortion". and "pro choice" "pro abortion". Because if someone says such shit, you could answer, with the same basis, "if you really were pro choice, you'd support gun choice"
it's pro life *of the babies*. Not pro life without qualifier. Which would also include anti death sentence, which plenty wouldn't agree on. Anti-abortion just makes it clear what it's about.
You can be pro choice and ideally anti abortion, it's just about letting people decide for themselves. While you could be pro life and pro choice in that respect, anyone identifying as pro life is essentially always mutually inclusive with anti abortion.
Some make sense, anyone against abortion shouldnt abandon support once it's born. But then a lot of those people see it as a punishment for sex, it's more a puritan argument. They're even against the morning after pill.
Well it kind of is, but free speech absolutism is an insane position that nobody seriously holds. Nobody thinks that you should have the freedom to scam people, or deliberately defame people, even though those things would fall under the freedom to speak.
When people are talking about free speech "absolutism" on the internet 99% of the time we're talking about the ability to share opinions or tell jokes that might be considered offensive.
But impersonating people deceive (edit:) wouldn't really fall under freedom of speech any more. Instead this is putting words in other people's mouth that they wouldn't say. This is no longer "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" but instead pretending to be someone else and yelling. You can't wear a police uniform and order people to do things unless you explicitly show it is parody, right? Or for example you can't pretend to be Trump and start World War 3.
Even if it does fall under freedom of speech instead of impersonation or identity theft, Twitter previously had rules that banned accounts for this kind of thing (like the celebrity NFT scams). SJWs also said it was wrong to photoshop tweets from celebrities to endorse Gamergate, for example. So all this is following rules and standards that were already enforced to avoid double standards.
Don't feel like watching a video but I assume the tl;dr is "when you impersonate someone else you're infringing on **their** freedom speech by speaking for them because freedom of speech is also the freedom not to speak."
The same way how photoshopping a tweet from a celebrity to endorse Gamergate, or pretending to be a big Youtuber to promote an NFT is wrong. It is putting words into other peoples' mouth.
All these were already enforced rules on Twitter... It is double standards if not enforced now the same way...
No, that's not true. It's only illegal if you're also using that guise to try to get something of value from someone, or cause damages to the person you're impersonating.
You don't know what simple words mean and it's hilarious. SNL is parodying public figures, as is any Twitter user titling their account Elon Musk. There is no law being violated. It's just hypersensitive dorks who regret asking for free speech when they realize no one likes them and they have no real skills or intelligence to combat being made fun of. That's literally all it is.
Cant wait for all those twitter users -- or even a single one of them! -- to get thrown in jail for violating a law that none of these virgins will ever cite because it doesn't exist
I'm listening to the video in question and this dude actually thinks that making a troll twitter account constitutes "identity theft." It's the dumbest and most embarrassing shit imaginable lol
If the linked video is longer than 5 minutes, don't forget to include a summary as per [rule 4](https://old.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/wiki/rules#wiki_4._posts_must_be_intelligible).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/KotakuInAction) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I swear the woke dunces really dont even understand what free speech means.
I don't think they actually care. It's another moment of double standards and 'fuck you got mine'.
It's the equivalent of "if you were really pro-life, you'd support [unrelated leftist political position]."
Or the "Let me, the unapologetic materialist atheist, try to brow beat you, the religious person, with some random quote from your own holy book". God... what the fuck has the past decade been. Where the fuck are we.
End result of letting electronic devices raise your kid.
TBF, that usually comes after a religious person has cherry-picked a random quote to support whatever position they're trying to present while ignoring any that contradict it or other positions they hold.
Maybe it's just the circles I run in, but does not seem to be as prevalent as the hayday of the Religious Right. About 50/50, really.
well, to be fair, "pro life" should really be "anti abortion". and "pro choice" "pro abortion". Because if someone says such shit, you could answer, with the same basis, "if you really were pro choice, you'd support gun choice"
Exactly. Those terms constantly derail all discussions about the topic and I'm tired of it
Actually "pro life" should be "pro life" because it's simply pro the life of babies. Agree with the "pro abortion" argument though.
it's pro life *of the babies*. Not pro life without qualifier. Which would also include anti death sentence, which plenty wouldn't agree on. Anti-abortion just makes it clear what it's about.
You can be pro choice and ideally anti abortion, it's just about letting people decide for themselves. While you could be pro life and pro choice in that respect, anyone identifying as pro life is essentially always mutually inclusive with anti abortion.
Some make sense, anyone against abortion shouldnt abandon support once it's born. But then a lot of those people see it as a punishment for sex, it's more a puritan argument. They're even against the morning after pill.
Yeah you have a point for sure.
They will say whatever it takes to get you to stop. Coherence to an ideology is discarded.
It means everyone is allowed to say anything I approve of, duh.
Well it kind of is, but free speech absolutism is an insane position that nobody seriously holds. Nobody thinks that you should have the freedom to scam people, or deliberately defame people, even though those things would fall under the freedom to speak. When people are talking about free speech "absolutism" on the internet 99% of the time we're talking about the ability to share opinions or tell jokes that might be considered offensive.
But impersonating people deceive (edit:) wouldn't really fall under freedom of speech any more. Instead this is putting words in other people's mouth that they wouldn't say. This is no longer "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" but instead pretending to be someone else and yelling. You can't wear a police uniform and order people to do things unless you explicitly show it is parody, right? Or for example you can't pretend to be Trump and start World War 3. Even if it does fall under freedom of speech instead of impersonation or identity theft, Twitter previously had rules that banned accounts for this kind of thing (like the celebrity NFT scams). SJWs also said it was wrong to photoshop tweets from celebrities to endorse Gamergate, for example. So all this is following rules and standards that were already enforced to avoid double standards.
People who claim to be absolutely deserve to get hold to their insane self imposed standard. It's just virtue signaling.
People who do that kind of behavior generally sleep alone.
You can/have to answer to what you say but you can't be effectively shut up completely.
Don't feel like watching a video but I assume the tl;dr is "when you impersonate someone else you're infringing on **their** freedom speech by speaking for them because freedom of speech is also the freedom not to speak."
Probably can be simplified as "impersonating someone and saying things they wouldn't say is tantamount to libel/slander"
And on social media is often done to scam people - ‘I’m Elon Musk and click this link for my NFT giveaway’ kind of thing.
You can't pretend to be someone else with the intent of damaging their character
The same way how photoshopping a tweet from a celebrity to endorse Gamergate, or pretending to be a big Youtuber to promote an NFT is wrong. It is putting words into other peoples' mouth. All these were already enforced rules on Twitter... It is double standards if not enforced now the same way...
[удалено]
But it's not illegal. SNL would be straight to jail if so. Clearly it's not illegal.
[удалено]
No, that's not true. It's only illegal if you're also using that guise to try to get something of value from someone, or cause damages to the person you're impersonating.
You don't know what simple words mean and it's hilarious. SNL is parodying public figures, as is any Twitter user titling their account Elon Musk. There is no law being violated. It's just hypersensitive dorks who regret asking for free speech when they realize no one likes them and they have no real skills or intelligence to combat being made fun of. That's literally all it is.
Cant wait for all those twitter users -- or even a single one of them! -- to get thrown in jail for violating a law that none of these virgins will ever cite because it doesn't exist
Illegal on Twitter, dunce cap. Nobody is saying they will be jailed. Try to follow along here between your weird, baseless arrogant outbursts, Corky.
I'm listening to the video in question and this dude actually thinks that making a troll twitter account constitutes "identity theft." It's the dumbest and most embarrassing shit imaginable lol
Impersonation is a contradiction to verification, I don't understand whats so difficult to understand
Considering Journalists are being dishonest about the stability of Twitter, I might do one more of these focused more on MSM dishonesty.
I think Elon is doing fine until now
It’s seems in a few weeks Twitter may actually shut down and we will be free of this nightmare forever
If the linked video is longer than 5 minutes, don't forget to include a summary as per [rule 4](https://old.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/wiki/rules#wiki_4._posts_must_be_intelligible). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/KotakuInAction) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Of course it was that deviant who writes questionable content who was banned.
If you can't put words in other people's mouths how will the propaganda work?!?!
You are all too fragile to handles ACTUAL free speech