Discord, not so. Looking at the financial backers of Discord, you can pretty quickly draw a link to the short sellers. Presumably some phone calls or dinners were had last night and strings were pulled to shut the discord down.
I've struggled with this in some friend groups, particularly after having a child diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder.
Can you elaborate this some more? Are you saying that you've struggled with this because people take that 4chan attitude they grew up with into their IRL lives and are assholes to your son with ASD?
The royal "you", not you specifically.
I didn't ask out of a sense of voyeurism. More like a, "dang, is this something I need to watch out for when I get older?"
Strong moral backbone ya got there.
Growing older and realizing in general that things you did when you were younger are bad is fine and dandy, and indeed is "growing up".
But only deciding things are bad when they personally effect you has nothing to do with growing older and is not a good look. It's just selfish myopia.
Being an adult with a consistent moral framework is about being able to say "this is right or wrong", regardless of if it effects you personally or not. If you only notice something is bad when it happens to you, then that's basically what kids do automatically.
Consider this: you read this anecdote and thought “I’m going to belittle this guy.”
Says a lot about _your_ morals.
> ...particularly after having a child diagnosed with an autism...
Which to me says the dichotomy in particular is "before autism personally affected me" and "after autism personally affected me".
Calling people "autists" as a joke is either problematic and worth calling out or it isn't. You being personally affected doesn't change that. At least that is what I would argue is required from a consistent moral framework.
Don't think that says much about my morals, just that I like them to be consistent / not myopic.
Think about the thread we're posting in. This is basically about a company/industry that was like "these retail investors don't need protecting, they're adults and can make their own decisions, even if it means losing money", until those retails investors started costing them money with their adult decisions, at which point they change their mind and decide "actually they need protecting from themselves".
The way you phrased your comment, it sounded like you did the same, just swap out financial shenanigans for name-calling.
That's one theory. Another would be that the gaining media attention caused an influx of users to join a group that equates itself to 4chan, causing moderation issues.
The problem there is that the above people are already likely quite busy, and don't want to take on an additional (unpaid) burden by trying to clean up a sub they don't really care about.
I'm not personally associated (not a member on the boards) but I've seen a lot of discussions float my way over the years and if it became that way now it's unlikely to be from 4chan itself (or a community like it).
But your insinuation here gives credence to many that the internet is eating itself, when it's much more likely to be manipulation from those who stand to lose.
I say this as someone who frequented both communities at one time or another: they are very very very alike. I wouldn't be surprised if this who thing is a charade to take money from 'normies' as much a wall street.
Stop moving goal posts its a bad look.
I think that it's a bit of a stretch to say that the language they use means they're mocking people with disabilities or homophobia. Using words ironically just to be edgy is completely different from believing others to be inferior or an invasive entity to be defended against. That's very apparent when you talk to, say, an angsty teenager versus an actual ethnonationalist or even just your garden variety civic nationalist.
They might use the same words, but mean them in completely different ways, and actually be expressing very different things. I think that as it pertains to the internet, certain dialects of edgy, slang filled english are as close to a global lingua franca as can be considered possible. You can't paint all of these people with the same brush. Aside from speaking the same dialect of english, they use it to express very different thoughts, no less diverse or varied as those who speak other ones. This nuance will get missed if you overliteralize what they say and take it at face value.
They do make a lot of autism jokes (mostly pointed at themselves) and plenty of f bombs, but neither of which is generally seen as ban-hammer-levels of problematic (whether or not it is is up to you)
Mind elaborating on this?
Quote:
Discord has had significant investment from private equity funds including FirstMark Capital, Greenoaks Capital Partners, Index Ventures, IVP, Greylock Partners, Benchmark, Accel, General Catalyst, Ridge Ventures, Spark Capital, and Tencent Holdings. At least one of these firms has invested with Point72 Ventures, which recently helped Melvin Capital.I think discord probably made some calculations on its own as opposed to pressure from Melvin/Point72. Though in this day and age it seems that the truth ends up being stranger than fiction.
Well, yes...?
this is essentially saying "discord has investors, and the stock market also has investors, so they're colluding". there isn't a real connection here
I'm on the fence whether someone influential actually called the CEO of Discord and asked to have it shut down. I'm 99% certain these people know each other. It's not a could the call be made its more of a was it made.
practically, short selling hedge funds and silicon valley investors don't run in the same circles. yeah, they're socially connected but they have separate networks and cultures. conflating the two because they both involve investing isn't accurate
Behind all of these nefarious entities is CALPERS, etc. just trying to keep your pension fund solvent.
That's a stretch. I think the point here is that some parties can save billions of dollars in losses, and makes them a little more likely hypothetically. Im all for dealing with the facts, but the facts are just looking at the '08 crisis a lot of Wall st funds have a track record of bending rules for profit. It's not out of this world to imagine 12 years later that the same culture exists