Hacker News Reader

Comment by sn41 | Hacker News Reader

As a liberal and a person who believes in the milk of human kindness against all contrary evidence, I do have a problem with this overenthusiasm. When the trifecta becomes republican, will liberal podcasts be banned? There must be some arbitration. I believe flagging and moderation and proscribing individual videos is better than banning channels outright and deplatforming.

View on HN

>When the trifecta becomes republican, will liberal podcasts be banned?

If they incite violence perhaps they will

>I believe flagging and moderation and proscribing individual videos is better than banning channels outright and deplatforming.

That may indeed be a better course of action, though when you have habitual offenders, in this case bannons channel got 4 warnings, its a huge burden on you to keep checking each and every video, and the violence gets incited while you spend time checking.

If they've been convicted in a court of law for incitement, then many of us wouldn't have much of a problem.

No company or individual should have to carry rhetoric inciting violence until a court of law engages. Responsibility is not solely on the courts - corporations and people can make decisions on what is right without courts.

Especially when the person is obviously saying it -“behead Fauci”.

Bannon has a way to get his message out - he has his own media organization.

Many people don’t feel like what Bannon is doing is right and don’t need a court of law to tell them. Courts of law defended slavery - people made decisions prior to the courts interference to change that.

Small government requires the ability of private groups to choose their own moral stances.

Fair enough. I did not know that there were earlier warnings. A three-strike rule sounds fine.

Liberals own the media companies that are doing the banning. The government has no role in this. My claim is that if you don't like what the companies are doing, you don't like free markets. If you don't like that the government can change every 2 years, you don't like how American government works.

Both of these are the smart opinions to hold.

My point was that it is reasonable to be moderate in applying policy. When did I attack free markets or the democracy? Perhaps I am not as smart as you are, but please do not insult.

I am not insulting you, and I think you are smart. I'm saying that it's unreasonable to expect that banning people is a slippery slope unless you already think corporations and government have too much power, in which case the conversation becomes something entirely different and unbanning these people is not going to solve anything.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com