Animals are people too!

Jigrah

Snowbeat wrote: »

i think the best counter-example is the goatmon debacle from a year or two back

goatmon was basically an inoffensive poster, slightly annoying, but just kinda blended in. then he made some unpopular remarks or something and somebody went and dug up the fact that he was a bit of a furry (probably teefs). two years on, people are still making fun of him for that

this is when non-privacy and sharing things on the internet isn't a good thing. it's also a prime reason why this is not a non-judgmental environment

That is an example of when one party had their privacy removed and while others had it intact though. In that kind of situation the lack of privacy is damaging. Should everyones preferences be known to all there would be much less judging and humiliation going on.

Backwards is right in this, and I cannot comprehend how you guys can continue to attack something that so easy to see. Privacy is merely a way in which we control others perceptions, that is it, the end.

Whether this is good or bad would be the area of debate, not whether or not it is true.

Jigrah

Backwardsname wrote: »

OK, I will concede the point that SE++ doesn't fit my definitions

I guess we are just a bunch of judgmental douchebags after all

Shut up you blithering goose.

Dichotomy

nooooo jigrah has breached containment

who didn't follow the regulations

Ubik

Jigrah wrote: »

Snowbeat wrote: »

i think the best counter-example is the goatmon debacle from a year or two back

goatmon was basically an inoffensive poster, slightly annoying, but just kinda blended in. then he made some unpopular remarks or something and somebody went and dug up the fact that he was a bit of a furry (probably teefs). two years on, people are still making fun of him for that

this is when non-privacy and sharing things on the internet isn't a good thing. it's also a prime reason why this is not a non-judgmental environment

That is an example of when one party had their privacy removed and while others had it intact though. In that kind of situation the lack of privacy is damaging. Should everyones preferences be known to all there would be much less judging and humiliation going on.

Backwards is right in this, and I cannot comprehend how you guys can continue to attack something that so easy to see. Privacy is merely a way in which we control others perceptions, that is it, the end.

Whether this is good or bad would be the area of debate, not whether or not it is true.

Why do people keep saying this? What evidence is there of this?

Bigots aren't gonna be change their minds just because everyone knows everything about everyone

Hell, we all pretty much know each others' races and there is still plenty of racism

Ubik

How is "I'm not gonna be racist because other people know I'm a furry and will judge me on that" a proper solution?

Why is it not.. "I'm not gonna be bigoted because being a bigot is wrong"

Bname was arguing that people staying closeted out of fear is wrong
Why is "everyone not being a jerk based on fear of others being a jerk to them" any less terrible?

Jigrah

Ubik wrote: »

Jigrah wrote: »

Snowbeat wrote: »

i think the best counter-example is the goatmon debacle from a year or two back

goatmon was basically an inoffensive poster, slightly annoying, but just kinda blended in. then he made some unpopular remarks or something and somebody went and dug up the fact that he was a bit of a furry (probably teefs). two years on, people are still making fun of him for that

this is when non-privacy and sharing things on the internet isn't a good thing. it's also a prime reason why this is not a non-judgmental environment

That is an example of when one party had their privacy removed and while others had it intact though. In that kind of situation the lack of privacy is damaging. Should everyones preferences be known to all there would be much less judging and humiliation going on.

Backwards is right in this, and I cannot comprehend how you guys can continue to attack something that so easy to see. Privacy is merely a way in which we control others perceptions, that is it, the end.

Whether this is good or bad would be the area of debate, not whether or not it is true.

Why do people keep saying this? What evidence is there of this?

Bigots aren't gonna be change their minds just because everyone knows everything about everyone

Hell, we all pretty much know each others' races and there is still plenty of racism

Well, if bigotry was the majority of society then you would be right, bigotry would persist.

However if it were not, and others preferences, deeds and actions were an open book, bigotry would die as it would not be sustaining. Think about if you knew everyone who was racist, how would you treat them? How would the majority treat them? It wouldn't work out well for them. Bigotry exists because communities and cultures that support it persist, if those cultures and communities were shut off, they would die out.

bongi

Ubik wrote: »

How is "I'm not gonna be racist because other people know I'm a furry and will judge me on that" a proper solution?

Why is it not.. "I'm not gonna be bigoted because being a bigot is wrong"

Bname was arguing that people staying closeted out of fear is wrong
Why is "everyone not being a jerk based on fear of others being a jerk to them" any less terrible?

yeah it does rather seem to be a case of treating the symptoms and not the disease

Ubik

Jigrah wrote: »

Ubik wrote: »

Jigrah wrote: »

Snowbeat wrote: »

i think the best counter-example is the goatmon debacle from a year or two back

goatmon was basically an inoffensive poster, slightly annoying, but just kinda blended in. then he made some unpopular remarks or something and somebody went and dug up the fact that he was a bit of a furry (probably teefs). two years on, people are still making fun of him for that

this is when non-privacy and sharing things on the internet isn't a good thing. it's also a prime reason why this is not a non-judgmental environment

That is an example of when one party had their privacy removed and while others had it intact though. In that kind of situation the lack of privacy is damaging. Should everyones preferences be known to all there would be much less judging and humiliation going on.

Backwards is right in this, and I cannot comprehend how you guys can continue to attack something that so easy to see. Privacy is merely a way in which we control others perceptions, that is it, the end.

Whether this is good or bad would be the area of debate, not whether or not it is true.

Why do people keep saying this? What evidence is there of this?

Bigots aren't gonna be change their minds just because everyone knows everything about everyone

Hell, we all pretty much know each others' races and there is still plenty of racism

Well, if bigotry was the majority of society then you would be right, bigotry would persist.

However if it were not, and others preferences, deeds and actions were an open book, bigotry would die as it would not be sustaining. Think about if you knew everyone who was racist, how would you treat them? How would the majority treat them? It wouldn't work out well for them. Bigotry exists because communities and cultures that support it persist, if those cultures and communities were shut off, they would die out.

This doesn't make any sense
People ALREADY know who is racist
You can tell because they ACT LIKE RACISTS

And they are shunned and scorned and penalized

Jigrah

bongi wrote: »

Ubik wrote: »

How is "I'm not gonna be racist because other people know I'm a furry and will judge me on that" a proper solution?

Why is it not.. "I'm not gonna be bigoted because being a bigot is wrong"

Bname was arguing that people staying closeted out of fear is wrong
Why is "everyone not being a jerk based on fear of others being a jerk to them" any less terrible?

yeah it does rather seem to be a case of treating the symptoms and not the disease

Personally I think bigotry and racism and all that comes in as a defense mechanism, without any privacy protection by classification would not come into play at all. Essentially you would know everyone, and be able to judge them based solely on them and not individual recognizable traits.

Ubik

bongi wrote: »

Ubik wrote: »

How is "I'm not gonna be racist because other people know I'm a furry and will judge me on that" a proper solution?

Why is it not.. "I'm not gonna be bigoted because being a bigot is wrong"

Bname was arguing that people staying closeted out of fear is wrong
Why is "everyone not being a jerk based on fear of others being a jerk to them" any less terrible?

yeah it does rather seem to be a case of treating the symptoms and not the disease

I would argue that removing privacy would not end bigotry

Ending bigotry would lead to more people being comfortable sharing details more freely

Even if bigotry were non-existent, however, it would still not be okay for society to compel someone to "come out" or do anything in their private lives if they aren't harming other people

Framling

Jigrah wrote: »

Ubik wrote: »

Jigrah wrote: »

Snowbeat wrote: »

i think the best counter-example is the goatmon debacle from a year or two back

goatmon was basically an inoffensive poster, slightly annoying, but just kinda blended in. then he made some unpopular remarks or something and somebody went and dug up the fact that he was a bit of a furry (probably teefs). two years on, people are still making fun of him for that

this is when non-privacy and sharing things on the internet isn't a good thing. it's also a prime reason why this is not a non-judgmental environment

That is an example of when one party had their privacy removed and while others had it intact though. In that kind of situation the lack of privacy is damaging. Should everyones preferences be known to all there would be much less judging and humiliation going on.

Backwards is right in this, and I cannot comprehend how you guys can continue to attack something that so easy to see. Privacy is merely a way in which we control others perceptions, that is it, the end.

Whether this is good or bad would be the area of debate, not whether or not it is true.

Why do people keep saying this? What evidence is there of this?

Bigots aren't gonna be change their minds just because everyone knows everything about everyone

Hell, we all pretty much know each others' races and there is still plenty of racism

Well, if bigotry was the majority of society then you would be right, bigotry would persist.

However if it were not, and others preferences, deeds and actions were an open book, bigotry would die as it would not be sustaining. Think about if you knew everyone who was racist, how would you treat them? How would the majority treat them? It wouldn't work out well for them. Bigotry exists because communities and cultures that support it persist, if those cultures and communities were shut off, they would die out.

What?

If everyone knew who was racist, everyone who wasn't racist would always be haranguing them and hassling them, and they'd just get even more embittered. They'd seek out all the other racists, because we'd all know who they were, and they'd form communities of racists, like they do today, except they'd be even more insulated than they are now. They'd never change, because they'd never be exposed to what they hate.

This is a good idea?

Backwardsname

fuuuuuuuuuuuuck is jigrah sort of agreeing with me

alright

pack it in folks

turns out I was on acid the whole time or something

Ruby Rhod

Ok seriously, has no one posted this yet?

Jordyn

Backwardsname wrote: »

I guess we are just a bunch of judgmental douchebags after all

Centipede Damascus

Backwardsname wrote: »

fuuuuuuuuuuuuck is jigrah sort of agreeing with me

alright

pack it in folks

turns out I was on acid the whole time or something

too late, you are now branded

"friend of Jigrah"

Backwardsname

Centipede Damascus wrote: »

Backwardsname wrote: »

fuuuuuuuuuuuuck is jigrah sort of agreeing with me

alright

pack it in folks

turns out I was on acid the whole time or something

too late, you are now branded

"friend of Jigrah"

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Ubik

I remember Backwardsname; him and his best pal Jigrah were nigh inseparable. Those two little scamps always running around the forums, causin' a ruckus

Dichotomy

backwardsname and jigrah, sittin' in a tree

P-O-S-T-I-N-G

Backwardsname

Ubik wrote: »

I remember Backwardsname; him and his best pal Jigrah were nigh inseparable. Those two little scamps always running around the forums, causin' a ruckus

brb

where's the wikihow on noose tying

Anjin-San

the answer is fuck the white man

Muse Among Men

Anjin-San wrote: »

the answer is fuck the white man

Only if the white man in question in hot. Otherwise, do we really want to?

Blake T

Druhim wrote: »

So some nutter in the U.K., Dr. Brett Mills, has recently published an article claiming that animals have a right to privacy and that nature documentaries violate that right. The kicker? This nutbag isn't even a biologist. He's a faculty member of the University of East Anglia's school of film and television studies.

So what other completely inane and crazy theories have you read about lately?

How likely is it that bongi will come in here and start arguing the philosophical ramifications of animal privacy? (LOVE YOU TOBY)

So Using this crazy moon theory do celebrities also have a right to privacy?

Backwardsname

Anjin-San wrote: »

the answer is fuck the white man

no matter what the situation

this is always the answer

Anjin-San

backwards is talking in clinical terms about things people don't think of in basest terms

i disagree with most of his ideas of privacy and individual freedoms but i do leave the door open for him to articulate what he thinks because at least i can think critically about my own ideas and ideals

ya'll dudes irascible

Backwardsname

Anjin-San wrote: »

backwards is talking in clinical terms about things people don't think of in basest terms

i disagree with most of his ideas of privacy and individual freedoms but i do leave the door open for him to articulate what he thinks because at least i can think critically about my own ideas and ideals

ya'll dudes irascible

anjin are you gonna make it to PAX dogg

i probably will be broke as fuck but just in case

Anjin-San

Well, I'm getting a job soon...I'll see what's up after I take care of some medical bills.

Backwardsname

Anjin-San wrote: »

Well, I'm getting a job soon...I'll see what's up after I take care of some medical bills.

man fuck medical bills

i even have insurance but motherfuckers still charge me extra

I only have about $800 and I'm hoping to bargain it down, see if I can get my insurance to sack up and cover it, so I shouldn't complain too much

but still

fuck 'em

Dichotomy

that's obamacare for you

Backwardsname

man

saturday night

been working all day

pretty much tired as fuck and decided not to go to a party

ain't know what to do with my saturday night

basically want to play starcraft II but my key won't arrive 'til monday

haven't felt this much like a basement nerd in a while