Lurker > adjl

SunWuKung420 posted...

Posts without rhyme, simply go unread.

A beat has gone missing from your message.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

BeerOnTap posted...

exactly! So can someone please ask Kamala Harris to please stop pushing the tinfoil hat conspiracy that if a vaccine for covid were to come anytime soon itd be because Trump somehow forced them to roll it out before its ready? Her promulgating this is harmful because it undermines the faith that people should otherwise be able to have in the vaccine when it does come.

Trump may not be the one to blame for rushing it, but if a vaccine comes out before next year, it's definitely been railroaded through the usual testing process and should be met with substantial skepticism. That's not a tinfoil hat conspiracy, that's just a basic understanding of how long vaccine development cycles are. Again, though, Trump is far from the only person (or the richest person, for that matter) who stands to benefit from getting a vaccine to the market quickly, so blaming it on Trump won't necessarily be reasonable without further evidence (such as him personally endorsing the candidate in question beforehand).

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Sahuagin posted...

depending on the situation this can be a very misleading question.

the question, "should twitter censor tweets" is not so easy to answer in general and there's a giant can of worms involved with it that you're glossing over by asking that.

But that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking about this very specific case. Censorship in a broader sense is indeed a much more complex question, but you can answer the question about this case pretty simply.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

Considering evolution has no true end-point, it's doubtful.

You don't actually need a long-term end point to have a pinnacle right now. If you've got a forest full of trees that will grow forever, the tallest one currently represents the highest point of tree growth in that forest. Another tree may someday outpace it, and there will come a time when its current height is considered below average for the forest, but right now, that tree is the pinnacle of tree height.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Somewhere in the 10-12 range, I think. I have a sister who's 2 years younger than me and another that's 7 years younger, so that delayed it by a bit because there's a couple years of middle ground between "old enough to be alone" and "old enough to babysit."

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

The idea that a civil union instead of a full marriage is in any comparable to homosexuals being murdered is absurdly offensive.

The motivations behind it are identical.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

For those who aren't aware, Zeb's anti-vax sentiments are rooted in the fact that his family doctor suggested that his childhood vaccines might have been related to him developing Asperger's syndrome, presumably because that diagnosis happened around the time that Wakefield's study was new and some doctors still thought it might have been valid. He's latched on to that explanation (Asperger's+primacy effect=pretty much exactly that), and basically refuses to accept any evidence, data, or line of reasoning that disagrees with it.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Revelation34 posted...

No she shouldn't resign but lol at "Christian sharia law."

It's an accurate enough description. They're laws that resemble Sharia law (since, you know, it is possible to resemble something without being identical to it), being advanced under a Christian pretense. They certainly aren't as bad as actual Sharia law, but they contain the same themes of treating homosexuals and women as second-class citizens and restricting their rights.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

The article doesn't call it a tax, that I'm seeing. "Covid-19 recovery charge" is what it says, which I think most people will associate more with helping a struggling business than with taxes. It'll probably still trigger some animosity from the people that are upset that people are doing anything about Covid, who don't clue in that the charge is to help with the ramifications of the shutdowns and not actually contributing to them, but such stupidity is fortunately pretty uncommon.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Compared to a decade ago? About the same, which is to say very, very few. I could probably count the number of recreational books I've read since high school (graduated '07) on one hand, and that trend hasn't really shifted since then. Compared to two decades ago? Much fewer. I used to be a very avid reader, that just died off as I got older.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

WhiskeyDisk posted...

I have a ring that wards off Tiger attacks.

need proof? do you see any tigers around me? any tiger wounds?

i rest my case.

Sounds like the ring is tiger-proof enough for your everyday life.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

By choice.

Okay.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

f*** the agreement.

That's not how contracts work, I'm afraid.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Setting up a fishing company to exploit the agreement

Is well within the confines of "moderate livelihood." If we have a contract that allows me to pick six apples from your yard, and I pick six apples from your yard, I am not remotely acting in bad faith, nor is "exploiting the agreement" a reasonable way to frame it. Again, the fishermen in question had less than a thousandth of the traps that comprise the actual commercial fishery. The lobster fishery is not so delicate that a 0.07% increase in harvesting will cause it to collapse (especially by a people who have fished it sustainably for millennia), nor is the industry so fragile that a 0.07% loss in revenue can be seen as the end of the world. Even if it were, that's still on them to account for because this treaty long predates any of their companies and business plans, and any failure to account for it can be seen purely as them failing to do their homework.

This is not the first time this has come into question. This issue has been brought before the Supreme Court of Canada on many different occasions since the treaty was written 250 years ago, and each time it has been affirmed that fishing out of season is fair game. There are currently calls on Ottawa to intervene in this matter by more explicitly defining "moderate livelihood" so that there's a more concrete basis upon which to tell the racist skidmarks to shove it up their portholes, which I think is a good idea, but I can guarantee that the end result will not be to renege completely on the central tenet of allowing them Mi'kmaq to fish out of season.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

zebatov posted...

Yes. I also need food to survive.

You grow all of it? And you produce your own soil and fertilizer to grow them? And, of course, have sequenced and fully understood the genomes of all the seed lines you use, because you can't trust Big Gardening not to slip something in there to hurt you. And I'm sure you mined, smelted, and cast all the metals of all the tools you use in your kitchen and garden, because you wouldn't want Big Knife or Big Shovel contaminating your food with something. Better make sure you only cook over an open flame with wood from trees you grew yourself, too, because you can't trust Big Stove not to add some extra kind of evil energy to the heat.

Every single day, you trust an uncountable number of things you cannot ever hope to claim you have a comprehensive understanding of, many of which (the aforementioned truck and house examples) have far, FAR more potential to cause you harm than any vaccine. Singling vaccines out as something people shouldn't be taking without completely verifying and understanding their contents represents an utter failure to intelligently assess risk, and a complete lack of understanding of what everyday life actually entails.

Clench281 posted...

Do you see any smallpox around here? I'm on a scavenger hunt but I can't seem to find any smallpox.

Last I heard, there was some in the freezer of the micro lab at the local hospital. You could count that, if you wanted to.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

They fish out of season, that's not the same rules.

And you eat different sandwiches from your neighbour. Not every difference between populations is meaningful in every context. The notion of a fishing season means nothing in the context of Mi'kmaq land use because the land use agreement explicitly specifies that.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

A contract between nations has only as much validity as it can enforce.

Civilized nations honour their contracts without relying on the threat of genocide. You would do well to learn from them if you want to function in modern society.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Correction: "You're lucky you weren't exterminated, so stop your whining and play on the same rules as everybody else."

They are playing on the same rules as everyone else. Everyone else is also expected to adhere to the terms of the treaty.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

When it's your land by legal contract, there's plenty to stand on.

FTFY.

Blightzkrieg posted...

Stories like this are always kind of weird because growing up in the city I had basically zero interaction with native Canadian populations.

And then I interact with or hear about people who absolutely fucking despise native Canadians with a shocking degree of openness. It really makes me feel sheltered.

Yep. It's really quite disturbing how much vitriol people have toward natives, especially in a country that so often prides itself on not being as racist as Americans. Canadians have no place being smug in that regard.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SunWuKung420 posted...

I'm average according to winter but being able to run a busy short order line and to create delicious pizzas makes me a chef according to everyone else.

Everyone else that understands basically nothing about food service. Being able to handle a busy line and make delicious food are the criteria needed for a food service professional to call themselves "employed," not "chef." "Chef" is a job title more than an actual assessment of your abilities.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Blightzkrieg posted...

A couple weeks ago I saw a story on this and the comments were almost universally anti-native.

I saw a post linked a while back of a guy suggesting that we should be petitioning the federal government to reopen the residential schools. The whole thing has really brought out some of the shittiest examples of subhuman slime Canada has to offer.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

The only possible benefit I can see to the city explicitly "allowing" it is that customers are more likely to be sympathetic to a "Covid surcharge" than to the restaurants increasing their prices without such a public justification. It also takes some of the competitive angle out of it, since you're more likely to get more people adopting the idea with explicit approval than doing it independently.

Basically, it's not a legal benefit, it's a psychological/social one.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

TheSlinja posted...

dont argue with zues and kyuubi, they probably think its only fair that the natives gave us all their land, it would be racist if they kept it and the whites had nothing

I know I've personally seen Kyuubi explicitly expressing pride in Britain's colonial history. He's generally the sort of person to say "you're all just lucky we haven't exterminated you stop whining and eat your gruel." Notions like honouring treaties and not committing cultural genocide are likely a bit beyond him.

Veedrock- posted...

Look at the righteous Americans itt sleeping well at night because they recently gave Native Americans one day of acknowledgement.

For bonus points, October is officialy Mi'kmaq history month. You can see how well that's going.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Actual quote from the RCMP spokesperson: "We don't see this as a police issue, but we understand both sides." They've literally watched people commit unambiguous acts of assault and vandalism, there have been tens - if not hundreds - of thousands of dollars in obviously criminal damages, but it's "not a police issue." Yep.

Meanwhile, if the situations were reversed and you had a couple hundred natives protesting like this, the crowd would be massacred within minutes of the first stone being thrown.

faramir77 posted...

Also, there's no way in hell that they'd deplete the supply on their own.

Pretty much. The Mi'kmaq have had a sustainable lobster fishery since before white people even knew what lobster was. Despite the government's best efforts, that culture hasn't been completely eradicated, even if we consider the simple practical reality of how few traps they're setting.

zebatov posted...

Are they allowed to do that anywhere or just on their land? Or is it on their land?

I know they dont pay taxes if they work on the rez, and they can hunt whenever, but Im not sure if thats also limited to the rez.

The treaty specifies that Mi'kmaq are allowed to fish for a "moderate livelihood" anywhere in the province without restrictions. Really, it's all "their land" in some sense, since the whole thing is unceded, but that's largely irrelevant here. I'm guessing standard trespassing rules still apply that prevent them from hunting/fishing on private property, but I believe anything that's public land (including the ocean) is fair game.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

they're profiting off it.

The treaty allows for a moderate livelihood. They're well within their rights to profit off of it. It's only if they were to operate on a larger, commercial scale that they'd be doing anything wrong.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

I doubt they're allowed to fish out of season so they can strip harvest the sea;

They're operating 250 traps, compared to the 390,000 operated by the commercial fishery. They're not "strip harvesting the sea." That's ridiculous, paranoid pearl-clutching.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

the rule needs to change.

I mean, you're welcome to try renegotiating a treaty in which we get the entire goddamn province in exchange for a pretty trivial amount of hunting/fishing, but I have a feeling you won't get quite such favourable terms now as 270 years ago. Native or otherwise, people are generally a lot more legally literate now than they were then, and I suspect the Mi'kmaq wouldn't be quite so content with being utterly shafted this time around.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Dude, it's complaining about racial preferential treatment.

It's very much not racial preferential treatment. It's a contract between sovereign nations that dictates the terms under which each nation is allowed to use the land. If you want to talk about racial preferential treatment, compare how the violent mob is being treated by police here (half a dozen RCMP deployed to watch them commit theft, vandalism, and arson while they twiddle their thumbs) to how peaceful natives are treated whenever they try to protest their land (as in, land that's been specifically allocated as being part of their current territory, not any considerations of ancestral territory) being endangered and/or outright poisoned by the oil industry (basically Tank Man with more feathers).

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Seems like a roundabout way to pretend they aren't just increasing their prices to help manage their expenses. It's not really a question of being fair (restaurants can charge whatever they want, after all) so much as it is a question of whether or not the loss of sales from raising the price will be too great to justify the potential for increased revenue.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Correction: I previously stated that the commercial fishery has a couple hundred thousand traps. That was a mistake, the actual number is approximately 390,000. The figure of 250 Mi'kmaq traps is still correct.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

So basically they'd be legally able to completely deplete the supply of lobsters ensuring no more lobster seasons occur there?

adjl posted...

That won't happen, because the treaty specifies a "moderate livelihood" (i.e. you can make a living doing it, but you won't get rich any time soon)

Reading is fun!

Zeus posted...

Sounds like a lousy law.

It's a treaty. They've been granted that right in exchange for use of their land. I think most people would agree that a little subsistence-level lobster fishing is a reasonable price to pay for the entirety of Nova Scotia. Actually, I think most people would agree that the natives got utterly ripped off by that deal, but as you say, it's a lousy law, and that's very much par for the colonial course.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Antbregante posted...

It's really a complex situation that goes beyond "Grr, fisherman racist." Well I definitely don't approve of the tactics used by the fisherman they have legitimate concerns about their livelihood. They have a fishing season for a reason. That's when the lobsters are more mature and as such they are larger. So fishing off season means they need to catch more of them and they are a finite resource. So now there is two groups lobster fishing as well and eventually the area is gonna be over fished and there will be no lobsters. Then the non=native fisherman and the native fisherman will both be out of luck.

Conservation is being used as a pretense for this, but it's obviously nonsense to anyone that actually considers the facts. The natives in question had something like 250 total traps. The commercial lobster fishery has permits for a couple hundred thousand. The lobster being fished by the natives is not enough to make an appreciable dent in available lobster stock, nor even in the bottom line of the commercial fisheries. Also, if conservation was actually a concern, they lost any right to make that argument when they destroyed several thousand pounds of already-fished lobster.

Furthermore, even if the Mi'kmaq fishery were significantly impacting the commercial one, that is their legal right, and it's the commercial fishery that is legally obligated to suffer that loss however they need to in order to uphold their end of the treaty. That won't happen, because the treaty specifies a "moderate livelihood" (i.e. you can make a living doing it, but you won't get rich any time soon) and that precludes the off-season native fishery from growing into a serious competitor, but it's still what the government is legally required to enforce in exchange for using the land.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

It's pretty ridiculous. The plant was burned last night, a few days ago some Mi'kmaq fishermen were literally barricaded in the same plant while an angry mob dumped their lobster catch and torched a van (under police supervision and with no arrests, I might add). This is escalating from a couple weeks back when said mob was personally harassing suspected buyers of Mi'kmaq lobster, or a week or two before that when hordes of commercial fishing trawlers were literally ramming Mi'kmaq fishing boats, firing flares at the fishermen, and destroying their traps (again, under coast guard supervision, but no arrests were made). It's a very bad situation, caused entirely by a bunch of racist yokels with more missing chromosomes than teeth.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

I already did.

You've made exactly two posts here since being asked to provide details on the alleged incident, and neither provided details of any sort.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

The property owner opted to have separate rooms for pooping and showering?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Yeah, that would suck. There are still antibiotics that can treat antibiotic-resistant stuff, but they tend to be the ones with nastier side effects that doctors prefer to avoid using except as an absolute last resort.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

You don't necessarily have to find it. Just list a couple details to show that it was something that actually happened and not just you trying to discredit somebody with a complete falsehood.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Most Americans can't, why should our President be any different?

I feel like holding the president to a higher intellectual standard than the average citizen is reasonable.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

If you're looking for 1:1 scale with absolute interactivity, we might be talking hundreds of years before we reach that level of technical sophistication.

And even then, whatever product comes out is going to be outdated by a few years simply as a consequence of the development time it'll need, so it won't actually be an accurate representation of the current world.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Wanded posted...

https://imgur.com/O75uffF

I don't even know if that's real or not. It could easily be somebody making a joke, or it could just as easily be Trump actually being that ridiculous.

shadowsword87 posted...

For the record, the black death still exists in rural mongolia and rural china. It's really sad.

Oh, it's all over the place. There was actually a sizable outbreak of it in Madagascar like a year ago. It's just fairly easy to treat with antibiotics these days, and is really only dangerous if left untreated (in which case you're probably going to die).

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Clench281 posted...

And yet, global emissions are made up of tiny contributions like each individual's footprint. And corporations produce things based on demand. Almost like if the public stance shifts towards more sustainable practices, it'll add up to large effects. And the best way that an individual can help shift that stance is to take up such practices to normalize them. Of course, the best way a government can modify behavior is with taxes and subsidies, but individuals have little control over that.

Eeyup. Individuals can't make a significant difference, but that doesn't mean nobody should ever try. That just means everyone saying "you're not making much of a difference on your own" should get over themselves and start contributing as well. Addressing the environment effectively isn't a matter of individuals making massive lifestyle changes, it's a matter of the masses making small ones.

That said, there are some individuals that have the power to commit to not dumping 30 million barrels of oil into the ocean, for example. Those individuals need to step up their game.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Being sharp enough to cut meat and being able to cut decent slices of meat are two very different things. We tend to consider literally any cut to be a problem when it's our own flesh, but slicing meat tends to involve more restrictive standards than that.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

zebatov posted...

Unless youre a chemist and can get a hold of the shot to test yourself, youre relying on a corporation to be telling you the truth that its safe. The doctors only know what theyre told. Ive been burned in trusting people, so I dont do that anymore.

Do you grow your own food?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wolfy42 posted...

Yeah long distance relationships never work.

Adjl likes this.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wwinterj25 posted...

You're a arsehole.

He's legally required to do that, plus it's generally just a good idea to try to prevent people that are already drunk (as in, significantly impaired, not just buzzed) from getting more intoxicated, both for their personal safety and for the good of society. If you have a problem with that, I'd recommend having the foresight to buy all the alcohol you want before you get wasted so you're the only one involved in the decision to drink more.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

I still need to finish 2. I was about halfway through before I got distracted by something else (Animal Crossing, I believe).

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

42 can certainly be rounded to 50, if you're rounding to the nearest multiple of 25 or 50. Use of the word "almost" in a context where numbers only ever increment upward also creates the rule of only rounding up, in which case it becomes a question of whether or not 42 is close enough to 50 to justify rounding it, rather than a question of direction.

That means it basically boils down to a question of "is rounding to the nearest 25 reasonable in this case?", which is going to be a subjective judgement, but can be defended in that dividing a human lifespan into quarter-centuries creates a reasonable number of subdivisions that roughly line up with major life stages. It can also be defended by saying that 40's and 50's tend to be pretty similar if we outline life stages with decades instead (one is usually settled into professional life and their living situation and doesn't make any major changes during those two decades, barring any mid-life crises that stem from that sense of stagnancy).

It can be refuted by saying that the start of that 2-decade period feels very different from its midpoint, for the person actually experiencing it, especially where those life stages are not as clearly demarcated by decades as people like to think they are. In that regard, equivocating them doesn't make much sense, but that's generally going to be a sentiment held more by people in that range than by people well outside of it. Basically, you aren't going to think that 42 is nearly 50, but a 30-year-old isn't going to see much difference.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

JigsawTDC posted...

This cannot cut into my video game time.

If it hurts enough to cut into your video game time, either you're a complete wuss who is shut down by the average paper cut (in which case, whatever), or something's quite wrong and you should contact a doctor. It shouldn't be more than a dull ache and a bit of stiffness, not entirely unlike the day after you've done slightly more physical activity than you're used to.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Pros: You reduce your chance of getting the flu, as well as your chance of passing it on to somebody for whom it could be very serious

Cons: Time, money, probably some minor pain and maybe some cold-like symptoms for a short while afterward

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Jen0125 posted...

I'm just looking at men.

https://www.google.ca/imghp

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

ClarkDuke posted...

here's your chance, she's probably a cheap date, too, ok?

Provided you can get her out from under her brother, that is.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Would you dress your dog named Taco up like a taco?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Side note: Ctrl+W is the worst shortcut ever. This post was longer before it all got swallowed by me hitting ctrl instead of shift.

OhhhJa posted...

I find the current approach to be quite destructive honestly

Of course it's destructive. It's a goddamn pandemic. A global outbreak of a deadly disease is always going to be destructive, no matter how people respond to it. That's simply inevitable.

OhhhJa posted...

The current approach has no foreseeable endpoint.

Genuine endpoint, as in everything returns to normal and this whole thing becomes nothing more than a chapter in history books? Yeah, who knows when that's happening. But all of these infection control strategies come with roadmaps for gradually resuming normal life as case numbers reach reasonable levels. Nobody is saying "let's just shut everything down indefinitely." With good compliance rates, it's not actually that hard to get Covid under control, and plenty of countries and regions have basically been able to return to normal aside from wearing masks and ordering takeout more often. Arts and tourism are really the only industries that can't mostly get back to normal (and even the staunchest anti-lockdown folks aren't advocating for a return to normal, unrestricted tourism) until an actual end is in sight, which is obviously not ideal, but it's far from the economic catastrophe you're so afraid of.

Now, will Americans ever comply well enough to progress along those roadmaps? That's another question. Large swaths of the US are being terribly 'Murkin about the whole issue and dragging it out much longer than necessary, and at some point it is going to be necessary to accept that the whiny babies are going to keep the safe approach from working and necessitate something more dangerous. "Do nothing and hope for the best" still isn't going to be a good idea, but the country is not going to be able to keep stimulating the economy indefinitely (especially not if every stimulus bill consists mostly of bonuses for executives and nothing for people that actually need money to get through it), so something more relaxed may be needed.

OhhhJa posted...

We dont even know if a vaccine for this will even be as reliable as a flu vaccine at this point or when we'll even see a safe, effective vaccine

I'd expect six months or so before we have some concrete answers on that, with vaccine deployment reaching herd immunity levels by the end of next year. It's still a ways off, but not so far that it's reasonable to give up on the possibility of a vaccine working and proceed as though it won't. If trials haven't yielded anything in ~6 months, then it's time to start exploring other alternatives, but so far there's no reason to believe a vaccine will never be possible.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

WhiskeyDisk posted...

yet, Twitter ARE complete hypocrites in this scenario

Not at all. In both cases, they censored the content because they felt it violated their policies against misinformation. To demonstrate hypocrisy, you'd have to find an example of them failing to censor something else that violates that policy.

Of course, that would still only demonstrate hypocrisy, not do anything to actually challenge either decision. This is why whatboutism is considered a fallacy: you don't actually address the argument being made. It's a close cousin of strawman/ad hominem fallacies, in that regard.

WhiskeyDisk posted...

but its ok as long as they're censoring those you disagree with.

Again, I ask: Do you think Twitter shouldn't be shutting down people who are deliberately spreading misinformation for the purposes of influencing the election? Because it sounds to me like you're trying to avoid admitting that what they did here was completely justifiable, and are therefore trying to paint them as hypocritical so you don't have to acknowledge them doing something good.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

WhiskeyDisk posted...

nothing in the post you quoted is whataboutism. it actually happened.

"These accounts should have been banned for manipulating voters"
"Well what about the things Twitter is doing to manipulate voters? Shouldn't you also be disapproving of that?"

That's textbook whatboutism, dude. You're attempting to discredit a position you disagree with by painting the people who hold it as hypocrites.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

It what way does fauci saying this automatically dismiss what other medical experts from universities like Oxford, Stanford, and Harvard are saying.

Because it's infinitely more in line with basic common sense: The herd immunity threshold for Covid is currently unknown, but any informed speculation as to what it might be suggests that it will be very high (due to how rapidly it spreads if left unchecked and how difficult it is to prevent that spread reactively), if it can be reached naturally at all (given how short-lived natural immunity seems to be). Blindly hurtling toward that hypothetical threshold with no idea how far off it might be or how many lives that will cost is a terrible idea. In the absence of hard evidence one way or the other (namely, "the threshold is X, here's what that implies"), I'm significantly more inclined to go with the approach that's more consistent with common sense, erring on the side of caution.

Simply, that letter is written well enough to sound convincing, but there's no actual evidence presented to support the viability of the approach is suggests. The primary basis for suggesting it is that more restrictive efforts to control the virus interfere with other medical and basic human needs, which is fundamentally flawed because it ignores that options exist for solving those challenges without giving up on restrictions entirely (e.g. online learning, dedicated cancer screening and vaccination clinics with stricter anti-Covid protocols to protect patients). Phrases like "grave injustice" are nothing more than flimsy emotional appeals that have no place in what's supposed to be a medicine-based plan of action.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

papercup posted...

Herd immunity is not a desired outcome.

It is the desired outcome, just not by natural means. That's what vaccines are for.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Hedonistic Festivals Celebrating Sumptuously

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.