Anarchy is very cool, until someone has the wrong opinion.

  • Senal@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    key words there are discourse and discussion.

    As is explained in a few responses to your paradox of tolerance reply (that you seem to have conveniently not replied to so far), the kind of discussion or conversation they are referencing requires both parties to be working in good faith.

    from your own reference

    as long as we can counter them by rational argument

    If one party can’t or won’t provide logic or reasoning to their side of an exchange, that’s not a discussion because there is nothing to discuss with someone not willing to engage in good faith.

    There are absolutely places that are ideological echo chambers, despite claiming otherwise, but banning someone for the inability (or unwillingness) to engage in good faith isn’t a removal based on ideology it’s a removal based on not adhering to the basic tenets of how discussions are supposed to work.

    If it just so happens that most of that kind of banning happens to people with ideologies you subscribe to, perhaps it’s worth considering how you can help these people understand how to have an actual conversation.

    That all being said, from what i’ve seen here I’d guess you’re on the purposeful bad faith side of things so I’m not expecting any reasonable consideration, but feel free to surprise me (or block me, i suppose).

    • Voidian@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      You’re making quite a lot of frankly weird assumptions.

      Find a single line from me where I’m saying that people who don’t engage in rational discourse shouldn’t be kicked out.

      In fact, have a honest think. How much of your response is based on a knee jerk reaction instead of actually looking at what I’ve been saying in this thread?

      • Senal@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        You’re making quite a lot of frankly weird assumptions.

        I’ve clearly stated what i’m referring to and how i got there, if you think there is an unsupported statement then reference it directly and i will respond.

        That being said, fuck, i think i’ve seen two posts next to each other and missed where it changed from them to you.

        That’s entirely my bad and i apologise, my response was supposed to be for the other person.

        • Voidian@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          No hard feelings :)

          Not sure what theme you’re using but at least for me the default one makes it a bit hard to separate replies. I still like it most of all for just lurking.

          • Senal@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            24 minutes ago

            I appreciate it.

            Yeah, I’m on the default but i’ll explore the other ones now, see if there is anything i prefer.