Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8492701" data-attributes="member: 7023840">No. That's not it at all.At no point did I say that people were prohibited from agitating for the things they want removed. Putting it that way (which ignores what I wrote) makes this complex issue seem simple- which it isn't. A person can agitate for removing Melissa from on-line sales. Or removing Song of the South. Totally up to them. Just like a person can agitate to expand the death penalty, or to get rid of it entirely. Heck, subject to very few constraints in the United States, you can advocate for almost anything. Go ahead and advocate for ending the corporate form and universal ownership of all IP. Or advocate for banning anything that Umbran doesn't like. That's totally your right, but is unhelpful to any analysis. Just because you can advocate for something, doesn't mean it's a good idea. People can advocate for removing GAZ10, and people can advocate that this advocacy is a bad idea. Trying to phrase this as a matter of rights is profoundly unhelpful.Where I draw the line and where I keep reiterating the need for self-interrogation is when people keep calling for the removal of speech they don't agree with, especially when that speech is a product of its time. You have the right to do that. But I will argue against it, simply because I very much do not want our world lessened by the continued removal of products from the past. You are welcome to disagree with that- but if you're replying to me, at least try and get my arguments right.EDIT- as for the specific example, that was used to illustrate the difference between advocating for the removal of something that is already there, as opposed to demanding the inclusion of something not there. Which is similar to the reference concept that people can reasonably understand that there is a difference between demanding that a library buy a book, as opposed to demanding a library get rid of a book that they are already carrying.</blockquote>

Verification