Support NeoGAF

[Hydranockz]

The conversation was about Twitter needing to do something about people harassing others on the platform. They have a feature it's the block and report feature. How am I deflecting for telling you twitter does in fact have a feature that works. Accounts are suspended after investigations as well. Let me ask you this what would you like for twitter to do differently?

The platform used is largely irrelevant to the behaviour of Nick towards women. This could have been any social media platform or even in person. What Twitter does or doesn't do is of little or no concern to the women who have faced harassment by Nick.

Deflect all you want.

 

[shadowy_cheese]

The most professional way would be to contact HR of the company he works for, but chances are they will treat this as an isolated (minor) case.

That's not actually true for most HR departments. They tend to take this stuff very seriously - especially for individuals with a public profile associated with the company where there is a reputational risk.

Still, these women are not obligated to act "professionally." This guy certainly didn't.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Accounts are suspended after investigations as well.

This really doesn't happen all that often. It's like the main criticism of the platform; they blatantly refuse to use their banhammer unless an account posts hate speech or threats for months.

 

[lutheran]

Trump didn't win because of the economy. He won primarily due to his embrace of racist pro-White policy. We have even have studies that have shown this since the election.

Pretending like Trumps hardcore base or supporters aren't racists is just ignoring the truth here.

Let me guess who is doing these studies.....probably the same people who do the polling. Lets not talk politics in this forum please.

 

[Yearsoflurking]

The platform used is largely irrelevant to the behaviour of Nick towards women. This could have been any social media platform or even in person. What Twitter does or doesn't do is of little or no concern to the women who have faced harassment by Nick.

Deflect all you want.

The conversation was about Twitter not having the tools to report issues such as nicks. It actually does it has the report feature which is what we were talking about. If one would like to go further you would approach the police. Nicks disgusting behavior is not twitter fault

 

[Yearsoflurking]

This really doesn't happen all that often. It's like the main criticism of the platform; they blatantly refuse to use their banhammer unless an account posts hate speech or threats for months.

Now this i agree with they're terrible with suspending users on a timely basis. I'd say facebook is even worse. They have open white supremacist group pages they refuse to take down

 

[Laevateinn]

Let me guess who is doing these studies.....probably the same people who do the polling. Lets not talk politics in this forum please.

A thread about a male using their position of power to try to harass women and foster an environment that discourages women from entering the industry is inherently political. Look beyond your simple bullshit gaming hobby and think about others for more than a millisecond.

 

[RumbleHumble]

So why are we talking about Twitter reporting policies again? Is it because users are suggesting that the women harassed should have blocked Nick and reported him or because these policies will supposedly protect these women from harassers if they go public?

Because the former argument doesn't make any sense to me. The latter argument has been disproven time and time again. One only need follow Lauren Duca (Politics writer for Teen Vogue) for a day to know that Tiwtter's anti-harassment policies don't do shit.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Let me guess who is doing these studies.....probably the same people who do the polling. Lets not talk politics in this forum please.

People still genuinely believe our president won based on economic promises and not the fact that he promised to build a wall that would make America great again aka the most transparently xenophobic presidential campaign ever...wtf....

 

[Harmen]

That's not actually true for most HR departments. They tend to take this stuff very seriously - especially for individuals with a public profile associated with the company where there is a reputational risk.

Still, these women are not obligated to act "professionally." This guy certainly didn't.

I think HR departments vary greatly, so I can't comment on any standard. Plenty of bad stories out there on (major) HR departments in regards to sexism/harassment though.

Furthermore, treating something like an isolated instance doesn't mean they don't take things seriously. I meant it more in the way that they don't get the full scope of the problem if only one isolated case reports. Hence why going public is more effective.

Oh, and I agree these women aren't obligated to go through professional channels.

 

[TwilightPrincess]

So why are we talking about Twitter reporting policies again? Is it because users are suggesting that the women harassed should have blocked Nick and reported him or because these policies will supposedly protect these women from harassers if they go public?

Because the former argument doesn't make any sense to me. The latter argument has been disproven time and time again. One only need follow Lauren Duca (Politics writer for Teen Vogue) for a day to know that Tiwtter's anti-harassment policies don't do shit.

Most of the talk between Nick and the 18 year old wasn't even on twitter but snapchat.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

So why are we talking about Twitter reporting policies again? Is it because users are suggesting that the women harassed should have blocked Nick and reported him or because these policies will supposedly protect these women from harassers if they go public?

Because the former argument doesn't make any sense to me. The latter argument has been disproven time and time again. One only need follow Lauren Duca (Politics writer for Teen Vogue) for a day to know that Tiwtter's anti-harassment policies don't do shit.

I mean, I think it's a fair topic, but not for that reason. Twitter's complete apathy at protecting women is why women don't come forward more often. What are the odds that Twitter would've done anything to Robinson's account? Nearly zero, I'm sure.

 

[OnionPowder]

Let me guess who is doing these studies.....probably the same people who do the polling. Lets not talk politics in this forum please.

Didn't polls have him at a 29 percent chance? Just because it's low doesn't automatically mean the polling was wrong.

 

[TwilightPrincess]

People still genuinely believe our president won based on economic promises and not the fact that he promised to build a wall that would make America great again aka the most transparently xenophobic presidential campaign ever...wtf....

It probably was both or even more "facts". And being for more strict immigration laws doesn't automatically mean you are racist, that's a pretty simplistic and in many cases wrong conjecture. Also it doesn't help to generalize almost 50% of american voters. Thats an attitude of the "left"/"liberals" that helped Trump as well. And it's off-topic in this thread anyway.

 

[Vlade]

The idea was that what is normal on Twitter is cited as not harassment because it is common on Twitter. If that's the case, that is not a defense for harassment, it just implies Twitter isn't doing a good job of maintaining a welcoming diverse public space (should that be a goal of theirs)

 

[Gattsu25]

Didn't polls have him at a 29 percent chance? Just because it's low doesn't automatically mean the polling was wrong.

Then you also have online polls showing him with much better odds than any poll that required human interaction. Even when people know that they'll never speak to the person on the other end of the call again, there's an element of perceived judgement that can prevent people from being entirely honest about something they view as even mildly transgressive.

 

[Mael]

It probably was both or even more "facts". And being for more strict immigration laws doesn't automatically mean you are racist, that's a pretty simplistic and in many cases wrong conjecture. Also it doesn't help to generalize almost 50% of american voters. Thats an attitude of the "left"/"liberals" that helped Trump as well. And it's off-topic in this thread anyway.

When stricter immigration laws start with a speech about Mexican being rapists, drug lords and what not, yeah it kinda does.

Didn't polls have him at a 29 percent chance? Just because it's low doesn't automatically mean the polling was wrong.

It's not even that he polled lower than the result more than the other side basically stayed at home....and even then more than 2 more million people voted for the opponent.
Countrywide polling with an electoral college system doesn't really work.

 

[Crossing Eden]

It probably was both or even more "facts". And being for more strict immigration laws doesn't automatically mean you are racist, that's a pretty simplistic and in many cases wrong conjecture. Also it doesn't help to generalize almost 50% of american voters. Thats an attitude of the "left"/"liberals" that helped Trump as well. And it's off-topic in this thread anyway.

What does saying the mexicans are rapists make you and running your campaign on building a border wall while having an explicit history of racist statements make you?? Trump voters are at best, tolerate of his racism, xenophobia, and misogyny. And that's just as bad. Come the hell on. Literally starting his campaign by explicitly targeting racists as his supporters.

The idea was that what is normal on Twitter is cited as not harassment because it is common on Twitter. If that's the case, that is not a defense for harassment, it just implies Twitter isn't doing a good job of maintaining a welcoming diverse public space (should that be a goal of theirs)

Also this, it's basically how this shit became so normalized in the first place. Twitter's moderation is basically non-existent for common users.

 

[Mael]

What does saying the mexicans are rapists make you and running your campaign on building a border wall while having an explicit history of racist statements make you?? Trump voters are at best, tolerate of his racism, xenophobia, and misogyny. Come the hell on. Literally starting his campaign by explicitly targeting racists.

It makes you economically anxious!

 

[Goofalo]

Dear sweet fucking Linus, how many fucking hoops to women have to jump through for her claims of sexual harassment to be considered "legitimate?"

 

[Gattsu25]

When stricter immigration laws start with a speech about Mexican being rapists, drug lords and what not, yeah it kinda does.


It's not even that he polled lower than the result more than the other side basically stayed at home....and even then more than 2 more million people voted for the opponent.
Countrywide polling with an electoral college system doesn't really work.

Did..you quote the wrong post?

 

[LudicrousSpeed]

The conversation was about Twitter not having the tools to report issues such as nicks. It actually does it has the report feature which is what we were talking about.

I really don't want to drag this off topic, but a report function is only useful if Twitter actually does something about the reports, and they are hilariously bad about that. There's a huge number of people who have posted about getting responses from reports where they reported someone saying "I'm going to murder you and your whole family" and Twitter judged that to not violate any rules.

Twitter's not responsible for the shitty behavior of their users, but they ARE responsible for the fact that they sit on their hands and don't bother taking any action when this behavior is pointed out to them.

 

[Mael]

Did..you quote the wrong post?

In a way, I think I was adding to what you say but yeah.
I'll just that it's early and that I live in the pacific ocean

Spoiler

not an island in the ocean, I do mean under water

.

 

[SJurgenson]

The idea was that what is normal on Twitter is cited as not harassment because it is common on Twitter. If that's the case, that is not a defense for harassment, it just implies Twitter isn't doing a good job of maintaining a welcoming diverse public space (should that be a goal of theirs)

Yeah. We should not let 'but it is what is normal on (Twitter, Snapchat, etc)' be the basis we define our morality on. That said, obviously different communication services/media have different common standards of communication. While 'SEND NUDES' may be a valid conversation opener on Grindr or Tinder, that does not mean it's OK in other contexts.

The presumption on services like Grindr or Tinder is that they are dating/sexual communication services. At some point in a conversation on there, you'd rightly be offended if you had not been propositioned for risqué photographs. However Twitter, Snapchat, and SMS are not those sorts of media -- they are standard, platonic communication channels like a telephone or postal mail.

That's not to say you cannot have intimate conversations on generally platonic services, but the socially agreed upon standard is non-sexual. You can send naughty missives through the US Mail to a lover, but it's generally frowned upon if you include lewds in with your water bill payment.

I suppose my point is that some people don't seem to see (or want to acknowledge) these distinctions -- they say 'but this behavior is A O.K. in this context I just cited', and then go on to claim that because it is OK there, it must be OK in nearly any other context.

People whine about PC culture, and online 'safe spaces' -- safe spaces just mean that people want to be treated as people by default. People have a right to define the nature and scope with with they are treated, even online. A woman does not waive away her right to be treated as an actual person just because they are logged on a computer.

"It's her fault she was harassed on XBox Live -- what did she expect? Everyone knows that's how people act on XBox Live" -- this kind of position infuriates me. Does Microsoft advertise XBox Live as "The best place to play online, while being harassed by assholes!"? If so, I've not seen those advertisements. XBox Live is not a service designed for harassment, or for finding sexual partners. Anyone claiming harassment on a service is OK or not bad because the service is known for that is just using that as an excuse to be an asshole.

Is it OK to say to a woman on XBox Live, "you're a dirty slut and I want to violate you"? No.
Is it OK to say to a woman on 'Doms+Subs Dirty ~SEX TALK~ 24/7!!!!!' Discord channel? Pretty likely.

Just because it is OK in one context does not make it OK in another.

 

[TwilightPrincess]

What does saying the mexicans are rapists make you and running your campaign on building a border wall while having an explicit history of racist statements make you?? Trump voters are at best, tolerate of his racism, xenophobia, and misogyny. Come the hell on. Literally starting his campaign by explicitly targeting racists as his supporters.


Also this, it's basically how this shit became so normalized in the first place.

I wrote about the voters, which can have 500 different reasons why they voted for Trump and not Hillary. I don't think every voter likes every stupid shit Trump was saying. And if you are against more illegal immigration your only option was Trump, even immigrants voted for him. There isn't only black and white, enemy or friend, i hope te americans can learn this again.

And no, i am no fan of Trump and i think there should be other ways than muslim bans and walls, he is more stupid and agressive than i would like a president of such a powerful country to be, but the left moralists calling out every single trumpvoter as racist aren't my thing either and they are at least a part of why Trump could win a second time in my opinion.

Sorry for the ot, i don't want to distract from the threads topic. Move on please.

 

[Muffin1611]

I wrote about the voters, which can have 500 different reasons why they voted for Trump and not Hillary. I don't think every voter likes every stupid shit Trump was saying. And if you are against more illegal immigration your only option was Trump, even immigrants voted for him. There isn't only black and white, enemy or friend, i hope te americans can learn this again.

And no, i am no fan of Trump and i think there should be other ways than muslim bans and walls, he is more stupid and agressive than i would like a president of such a powerful country to be, but the left moralists calling out every single trumpvoter as racist aren't my thing either and they are at least a part of why Trump could win a second time in my opinion.

Sorry for the ot, i don't want to distract from the threads topic. Move on please.

If you're voting for a racist who runs on racism you support racism regardless why you voted or what your intentions are

So every Trump voter is knowingly supporting racism, does that sound better to you?

 

[Mael]

I wrote about the voters, which can have 500 different reasons why they voted for Trump and not Hillary. I don't think every voter likes every stupid shit Trump was saying. And if you are against more illegal immigration your only option was Trump, even immigrants voted for him. There isn't only black and white, enemy or friend, i hope te americans can learn this again.

And no, i am no fan of Trump and i think there should be other ways than muslim bans and walls, he is more stupid and agressive than i would like a president of such a powerful country to be, but the left moralists calling out every single trumpvoter as racist aren't my thing either and they are at least a part of why Trump could win a second time in my opinion.

Sorry for the ot, i don't want to distract from the threads topic. Move on please.

If you voted for Trump, you are either racist or ok with racist policies.
I don't think there's a meaningful distinction to make.

 

[Crossing Eden]

I wrote about the voters, which can have 500 different reasons why they voted for Trump and not Hillary. I don't think every voter likes every stupid shit Trump was saying. And if you are against more illegal immigration your only option was Trump, even immigrants voted for him. There isn't only black and white, enemy or friend, i hope te americans can learn this again.

And no, i am no fan of Trump and i think there should be other ways than muslim bans and walls, he is more stupid and agressive than i would like a president of such a powerful country to be, but the left moralists calling out every single trumpvoter as racist aren't my thing either and they are at least a part of why Trump could win a second time in my opinion.

Sorry for the ot, i don't want to distract from the threads topic. Move on please.

So calling people racist for explicitly supporting a racist who ran a campaign explicitly on racism rhetoric is a bad thing because maybe they didn't care about that but were ok with it? So basically #notalltrumpsupporters. There really was never an election AS black and white as this one. Also ditto to the two posts above this one.

 

[Armaros]

I wrote about the voters, which can have 500 different reasons why they voted for Trump and not Hillary. I don't think every voter likes every stupid shit Trump was saying. And if you are against more illegal immigration your only option was Trump, even immigrants voted for him. There isn't only black and white, enemy or friend, i hope te americans can learn this again.

And no, i am no fan of Trump and i think there should be other ways than muslim bans and walls, he is more stupid and agressive than i would like a president of such a powerful country to be, but the left moralists calling out every single trumpvoter as racist aren't my thing either and they are at least a part of why Trump could win a second time in my opinion.

Sorry for the ot, i don't want to distract from the threads topic. Move on please.

#MakeExcusesForIntolerance

Is what I'm reading from this. Your 'make excuses for supporting the racist candiate' talking points are not new and are not and have not been compelling.

 

[Hoo-doo]

Is this thread even about Nick Robinson anymore?

Did he tweet since the thing happened?

 

[Mael]

Is this thread even about Nick Robinson anymore?

Did he tweet since the thing happened?

He didn't tweet since the whole thing started to begin with.
I doubt he's going to say anything.
It's not like we need his input to know if he did anything wrong considering we already have the receipt on that front.

 

[Marcel]

A thread about sexual harassment isn't a place to re-litigate the fucking election. Y'all need to find some perspective, jesus.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

snip

Great post. And the silly thing is, we're all literally having this discussion on a heavily moderated forum where such antics would see a swift permaban. It is actually possible to protect people online, and the reason websites like Twitter don't is because they like the user traffic and their corporate culture is entirely entitled white boy libertarians. That shit has to go.

 

[SJurgenson]

Did he tweet since the thing happened?

He has not.

I'm not even sure, if I were advising him, I would tell him to do in regards to social media.

He could go with the apologetic route once Vox announces his resignation or termination tomorrow. There's no way he is not resigning, whether they have to force it or not. I'm not sure an immediate online apology would help his case or career.

It might be best if he just disappears for a while, and then tries to work his way back into the industry/community slowly. He could perhaps rescue his career if he quietly works to better himself and attempt to make amends. Any public apology at this point would likely be viewed as face-saving and hollow.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Then you also have online polls showing him with much better odds than any poll that required human interaction. Even when people know that they'll never speak to the person on the other end of the call again, there's an element of perceived judgement that can prevent people from being entirely honest about something they view as even mildly transgressive.

The reason online polls had Trump at a better chance wasn't because of a "shy Trump" effect, it was because online polls are opt-in self-selected samples that don't represent the electorate and Trump has an unusually large online following due to a) his campaign being unusually online, b) the active signal boosting of Trump partisans like /r/the_donald, and c) russian bots. Pollsters are well aware that people might have systematic ways in which they overstate or understate their support based on social desirability bias, and that wasn't a problem here. You can partially tell this from simple observation; did it seem to you that people were shy about supporting Trump? The guy had history's most successful campaign merchandise operation predicated on the dang hats.

But basically none of this is connected to, uh, anything the thread is about.

 

[Crossing Eden]

He has not.

I'm not even sure, if I were advising him, I would tell him to do in regards to social media.

He could go with the apologetic route once Vox announces his resignation or termination tomorrow. There's no way he is not resigning, whether they have to force it or not. I'm not sure an immediate online apology would help his case or career.

It might be best if he just disappears for a while, and then tries to work his way back into the industry/community slowly. He could perhaps rescue his career if he quietly works to better himself and attempt to make amends. Any public apology at this point would likely be viewed as face-saving and hollow.

Actually pretty sure in cases like this the company in question orders the user to stop posting on social media while they investigate. But yea there tend to be quite a few cases where a person apologizing so quickly after being exposed as a fuckboi of some kind, rings hollow.

 

[Fahzgoolin]

It will never cease to baffle me why so many people are willing to go to bat and die on a hill for a complete stranger who does shitty things and is probably a shitty person.

I've been watching this and I think it goes both ways. I in no way support his behavior, but I also don't see the point in any of us getting so involved or interested in his demise. It seems unhealthy and out of place. Maybe it's just my personality and world perspective, but I find these types of threads distasteful.

Edit: not trying to thread complain, but voice my personal concern. The only benefits I can see of this kind of thread is to shed light on the problem of any kind of sexual harassment in the industry. It just doesn't seem to take that route and stay there.

 

[Mael]

He has not.

I'm not even sure, if I were advising him, I would tell him to do in regards to social media.

He could go with the apologetic route once Vox announces his resignation or termination tomorrow. There's no way he is not resigning, whether they have to force it or not. I'm not sure an immediate online apology would help his case or career.

It might be best if he just disappears for a while, and then tries to work his way back into the industry/community slowly. He could perhaps rescue his career if he quietly works to better himself and attempt to make amends. Any public apology at this point would likely be viewed as face-saving and hollow.

Would you even trust him back in the industry though?
There's plenty of people who would what he does without having to make sure he doesn't try to abuse his position.
Allowing him back kinda points to his actions not being that big a deal.

 

[SJurgenson]

Great post. And the silly thing is, we're all literally having this discussion on a heavily moderated forum where such antics would see a swift permaban. It is actually possible to protect people online, and the reason websites like Twitter don't is because they like the user traffic and their corporate culture is entirely entitled white boy libertarians. That shit has to go.

Yeah. The issue I have with the online libertarian mindset of the 'unfettered marketplace of ideas' is that it's basically a bullshit philosophy. They want to claim that free and open discussions and communications mean literally no moderation, but that's never how that has worked.

Open discourse and the free flow of ideas was (generally) celebrated in ancient Athens. That does not mean that citizens or guards would not tell a complete loon screaming at Socrates to stop screaming. Allowing an open and honest dialog about ideas is not the same as no moderation. One is about policing the content of the idea or message, and the other is about moderating the method of the communication.

If you truly believe in allowing the free sharing of ideas (the message), you need to moderate the communication channel (the method). It's pretty clear that low-value noise masquerading as a message hurts the real messages being conveyed. Few people would have an issue with a person continually screaming 'Howard Stern's penis!' being forcefully ejected from a Pavarotti concert -- but once that interaction transitions to an on-line interaction, all these online libertarians come out of the woodwork claiming CENSORSHIP.

 

[Aters]

People still genuinely believe our president won based on economic promises and not the fact that he promised to build a wall that would make America great again aka the most transparently xenophobic presidential campaign ever...wtf....

Not to deny Trump's other stupidity, but honestly, as a foreigner, I don't understand what's so bad about blocking illegal immigrants (a physical wall is stupid though). I assume there are laws that enforce rules of immigration in the US right? What's the use of law if people can safely ignore it? It's so weird that when a foreigner gets of the plane, he is faced with interrogation just to make sure he doesn't have immigration intent, yet when the same thing applied to US-Mexico border, everyone is furious.

 

[SJurgenson]

Would you even trust him back in the industry though?
There's plenty of people who would what he does without having to make sure he doesn't try to abuse his position.
Allowing him back kinda points to his actions not being that big a deal.

I suppose I don't think many people should be completely blacklisted. Has he been a complete, disgusting scumbag for a while? Absolutely. That does not mean he could not change and become a better person.

He shouldn't be forever blacklisted, but if he does attempt to re-integrate he should be watched carefully by any future employer.

 

[RumbleHumble]

I've been watching this and I think it goes both ways. I in no way support his behavior, but I also don't see the point in any of us getting so involved or interested in his demise. It seems unhealthy and out of place. Maybe it's just my personality and world perspective, but I find these types of threads distasteful.

Edit: not trying to thread complain, but voice my personal concern. The only benefits I can see of this kind of thread is to shed light on the problem of any kind of sexual harassment in the industry. It just doesn't seem to take that route and stay there.

I'm not following the bolded. Could you explain a littler more? (Not trying to be sarcastic or accusatory)

 

[Drillary Clinton]

Let me guess who is doing these studies.....probably the same people who do the polling. Lets not talk politics in this forum please.

Lmaooooo

 

[Mael]

I suppose I don't think many people should be completely blacklisted. Has he been a complete, disgusting scumbag for a while? Absolutely. That does not mean he could not change and become a better person.

He shouldn't be forever blacklisted, but if he does attempt to re-integrate he should be watched carefully by any future employer.

The thing is even he turns a new leaf and ends up much better, would that be enough to make his coworkers/partners not uncomfortable?
Heck where should we draw the line?
I'm pretty sure I want nothing to do with anyone even hinting at a link with Jontron for example.
I don't think it's unreasonable to do the same here.
At the very least ban him from twitter or any company representation.

 

[SJurgenson]

The thing is even he turns a new leaf and ends up much better, would that be enough to make his coworkers/partners not uncomfortable?
Heck where should we draw the line?
I'm pretty sure I want nothing to do with anyone even hinting at a link with Jontron for example.
I don't think it's unreasonable to do the same here.
At the very least ban him from twitter or any company representation.

I'm not really disagreeing, I just think that we should not discount the possibility that he could reform himself and be a positive influence in the future. If he thinks his career is 100% ruined, what real incentive does he have to better himself?

If we are (rightly) quick and loud in denouncing his bad actions, we should be prepared and open to celebrate and welcome him if he makes changes and positive future actions.

Should we blindly trust him if he claims to have found his way and made amends? No. But we should not assume he could not reform.

If we just fully denounce and ostracize him for all time, he could just double-down on his asshattery, Colin Moriarty style. If we truly want a better online space, we need to be open to the possibility that bad actors can become good actors. If all forums could ban me on bullshit I posted on The Matrix fan sites when I was 12, I don't think I'd be having this conversation here right now.

 

[SilentRob]

I'm not really disagreeing, I just think that we should not discount the possibility that he could reform himself and be a positive influence in the future. If he thinks his career is 100% ruined, what real incentive does he have to better himself?

If he needs an incentive not to harass women other than "you don't harass women, you creep", then it wouldn't really matter to me what the fuck he does. You don't stop harassing women to get a price.

 

[CannonFodder52]

Yeah. The issue I have with the online libertarian mindset of the 'unfettered marketplace of ideas' is that it's basically a bullshit philosophy. They want to claim that free and open discussions and communications mean literally no moderation, but that's never how that has worked.

Open discourse and the free flow of ideas was (generally) celebrated in ancient Athens. That does not mean that citizens or guards would not tell a complete loon screaming at Socrates to stop screaming. Allowing an open and honest dialog about ideas is not the same as no moderation. One is about policing the content of the idea or message, and the other is about moderating the method of the communication.

If you truly believe in allowing the free sharing of ideas (the message), you need to moderate the communication channel (the method). It's pretty clear that low-value noise masquerading as a message hurts the real messages being conveyed. Few people would have an issue with a person continually screaming 'Howard Stern's penis!' being forcefully ejected from a Pavarotti concert -- but once that interaction transitions to an on-line interaction, all these online libertarians come out of the woodwork claiming CENSORSHIP.

You also have the issue of vulnerable groups being harassed into silence within the libertarian internet user's definition of free speech.

 

[Mael]

I'm not really disagreeing, I just think that we should not discount the possibility that he could reform himself and be a positive influence in the future. If he thinks his career is 100% ruined, what real incentive does he have to better himself?

I don't remember the exact circumstances but someone who did something really shitty ended up being canned.
Afterward that person went on tours to explain what he did and why it was wrong and everything. That person ended up saving the career pursued and still continues trying to make sure people do not do the same that person did.
All I'm saying that I do think you're right in that he can redeem himself but it's going to be very hard work on his part.
JonTron, on the other hand, is forever going to be on my shitlist. I have so little patience for the BS he pulled he's gonna have to be the reason we have an international day against intolerance sanctionned by the UN before I even want to see anything from him.

 

[BearPawB]

It’s a good question: “what does it take for forgiveness?”

If nick came out and said “I appologize to all the women affected by my behavior. What I did was wrong, and I am ashamed. I’m attending counseling to deal with these issues. I want to be sure that I never make anyone feel like I made these people feel again”

Would it be enough?
Can people rehabilitate?

I’m a bit drunk, and I think the inner fan is me is coming out. And I hate it. I just...wish this had never happened. He was such a promising guy on such a good trajectory. Yet as I type these words I feel guilt and shame myself for trying to make it all ok for him

I’m sorry if this doesn’t make sense

I’m just so sad I guy I legit loved (I have car boys art in my house that WAS waiting to be framed) betrayed so many with his behavior.

It goes back to the softboy thing. He was such an ally. He was so sensitive to feelings....it just hurts to know it was all to be a dickhead

 

[Atomski]

I've been watching this and I think it goes both ways. I in no way support his behavior, but I also don't see the point in any of us getting so involved or interested in his demise. It seems unhealthy and out of place. Maybe it's just my personality and world perspective, but I find these types of threads distasteful.

Edit: not trying to thread complain, but voice my personal concern. The only benefits I can see of this kind of thread is to shed light on the problem of any kind of sexual harassment in the industry. It just doesn't seem to take that route and stay there.

I totally have no sympathy for this dude being a complete dipshit but I do think it's a growing trend lately that we are all getting addicted to anger. Hell the presidency just feels like two sides of America being uncontrollably angry at each other.


It's probably been like this all along but now with the internet it's right there out in the open for everyone to see and it's constant.

At the same time though I don't understand how someone with a big social media presence thinks he can get away with harrasing women and not get hammered for it eventually. It's like not only is head a douche.. he is a dumbass to.