"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I'm not expecting anyone to defend anything. Brainleech asked a question and I provided clarifying facts.
There was a steam sig here. It's gone now.
0
WhiteZinfandelYour insidesLet me show you themRegistered Userregular
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Oh, that was undoubtedly a dick move on Tycho and Gabe's part, and I would definitely consider it incitement to harass a person who was likely just doing what their bosses told them to. T & G have undoubtedly been silly geese about tons of things, just like we all have, and it's no surprise to me that their fans are willing to harass when directed to. That doesn't mean I'm okay with what they did, and it mostly serves to underline the toxicity of fandom, which is a nice segue into talking about how entertainment and entertainers influence their audience.
We see this kind of shit every time anyone (especially women) dare to criticize someone or something that millions of people like. Eventually those people become the responsibility of the entertainer. If they do something on your behalf, even if you didn't tell them or want them to, it's your job in no uncertain terms to explicitly tell them that kind of behavior is unacceptable. And Rogen, by having on gibbering homunculi like Alex Jones, Gavin McIness, and Jordan Peterson and making them seem normal, is telling his audience that there's actually nothing wrong with them. You cannot claim that this kind of shit doesn't lead to more harm, even if you're one of the people who sees through them.
If you were able to present me with irrefutable proof that Joe Rogan's audience was basically the Penny Arcade forums circa 2003, I would say "cool, that's unacceptable in 2019."
So we are going to concede the point that Rogan offers any form of significant pushback or criticism of his guests such as Shapiro, Milo, Owen's, and the like to their faces?
Because it's been a few pages since I asked and all we've gotten is some rebuffing of a flat-earther UFC guy.
Rogan mostly doesn't push back unless it's about something he knows a lot about or feels strongly about. That basically means martial arts, drug use and lately hunting. Outside of these areas, Rogan is pretty much only a comfortable person to talk too. That's how the show started. That is his stated goal for it.
There was some push back against Eddie Bravo, because they're very close personal friends and the flat earth stick got annoying, but Rogan specifically isn't there to call out his guests - for good or for ill.
This isn't reassuring given the Seth Rich and reverse racism crap I and others have brought up.
With that said, the main issue is, again not Rogan, or Sanders appearing, but Sanders going on there and not making a mention of the problems with Rogan's podcast.
Thats because you think the Rogan podcast is something that it isnt
A softball venue that, regardless of any and all credible guests or discussions it has, also enables bigots and bad faith actors to spew their unfiltered venom without any significant pushback from a credulous and ignorant host.
Is that not what it is?
No. People are rarely spewing unfiltered venom on Rogan's podcast. When they do, Rogan doesn't just sit there passively. We've had clips posted of him pushing back on people. If he doesn't do so "significantly" enough for you then okay, but the above description is an exaggeration of his passivity and his guests', uh, venom.
You've got me, I should have addressed that better.
People like Petersen or Shapiro don't just get up there and start dropping slurs, that's why they are so insidious. A big part of their schtick involves laying a foundation of credibility and authority.
Clean your room, speak clearly, show up 15 minutes early to a job interview. This way, you've already warmed up to them as people and are more likely to take them seriously when it comes time for the PragerU videos. A spoonful of sugar to help the bigotry go down.
e-typos, damn fingers
I think this underlines how useless and counterproductive it would be for Sanders to bring up these problems on Rogan's podcast.
Except Bernie would be exposing the poisonous nature of those very guests he'd be enemies of. Something I would think he'd find it in his best interests politically to do since he's not running as a Republican.
Guests on Rogan do not engage (afaik) in obvious open bigotry, so right of the bat you'd have to explain and discuss why this shit is problematic. Which, in my experience, isn't actually that easy. I know personally that Peterson is a fraud, but I can hardly convince my brother much less Rogan's entire audience. With study and preparation I could likely make a decent case, but even then it doesn't seem easy. I would rather leave it to people with knowledge and expertise on the topic.
It not being easy isn't a good excuse to not do it. Running for president is harder than that, and Bernie Sanders is ok doing that. And it's not like his staff can't give him insight, Briahna Joy Gray has been on Rogan's show before and she's his press secretary. Fighting bigotry is supposed to be something Bernie's good at.
Bernie is absolutely not an expert on this topic. Even if he boned up on some of it, bringing it up would likely result in a very boring, fruitless 3 hour discussion. So it's clearly better to not do it.
I don't see how this would be a fruitless discussion, as it would be something Bernie would be concerned about in theory and it would be a new experience for Rogan.
Are you trying to make a case for yourself and the people you already agree with here, or do you want to convince somebody? Because this stuff here is not convincing or meaningful unless the reader already agrees with you.
What don't you agree with in my post? How is what I wrote not meaningful or convincing?
I can't really agree or disagree with a statement like "Look at the threads with the various white supremacist and Incel killers" but I looked at those threads and having done so I do disagree with statements like "All this becomes more mainstream with what Rogan's doing" and "He may as well be another Fox News talking head with those conservative figurehead interviews." It seems like you're taking complicated phenomena with a causal story that can't be summed up in a couple of sentences and making these sweeping judgments based on a limited set of facts. I'm right there with you when the criticism is, for example, "Rogan's long-form softball conversational interviews are bad when they give fascists and bigots an opportunity to whitewash their ideas" but then you go and say something like "He may as well be another Fox News talking head" and you lose me because that seems to be ignoring ways that Rogan is obviously not like a Fox News talking head. I can't tell you that its wrong for the similarities to loom larger in your mind than the differences, but I remain unconvinced that I ought to think about him the same way you do.
Rogan's being a Fox taking head because he's humanising, normalising and giving softball interviews to the bad actors on those very same conservative networks. He may have his own style but it remains the same outcome by signal boosting the conservative All-Stars.
Are you trying to make a case for yourself and the people you already agree with here, or do you want to convince somebody? Because this stuff here is not convincing or meaningful unless the reader already agrees with you.
What don't you agree with in my post? How is what I wrote not meaningful or convincing?
I can't really agree or disagree with a statement like "Look at the threads with the various white supremacist and Incel killers" but I looked at those threads and having done so I do disagree with statements like "All this becomes more mainstream with what Rogan's doing" and "He may as well be another Fox News talking head with those conservative figurehead interviews." It seems like you're taking complicated phenomena with a causal story that can't be summed up in a couple of sentences and making these sweeping judgments based on a limited set of facts. I'm right there with you when the criticism is, for example, "Rogan's long-form softball conversational interviews are bad when they give fascists and bigots an opportunity to whitewash their ideas" but then you go and say something like "He may as well be another Fox News talking head" and you lose me because that seems to be ignoring ways that Rogan is obviously not like a Fox News talking head. I can't tell you that its wrong for the similarities to loom larger in your mind than the differences, but I remain unconvinced that I ought to think about him the same way you do.
Rogan's being a Fox taking head because he's humanising, normalising and giving softball interviews to the bad actors on those very same conservative networks. He may have his own style but it remains the same outcome by signal boosting the conservative All-Stars.
You realize the "Fox news" people will accuse Rogan of being a "leftist talking head" because of all the liberal folks he has on too right?
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
More to the point, the actions of our hosts in the following years shows that having a toxic fanbase is a choice - they hired Tube as community manager, who then instituted policies to force out toxic elements. While yes, there are always going to be a few geese who don't get the message, the PA team actively works to remove toxicity, as we saw when they disinvited a couple of racist, transphobic podcasters from presenting at PAX West this year.
Are you trying to make a case for yourself and the people you already agree with here, or do you want to convince somebody? Because this stuff here is not convincing or meaningful unless the reader already agrees with you.
What don't you agree with in my post? How is what I wrote not meaningful or convincing?
I can't really agree or disagree with a statement like "Look at the threads with the various white supremacist and Incel killers" but I looked at those threads and having done so I do disagree with statements like "All this becomes more mainstream with what Rogan's doing" and "He may as well be another Fox News talking head with those conservative figurehead interviews." It seems like you're taking complicated phenomena with a causal story that can't be summed up in a couple of sentences and making these sweeping judgments based on a limited set of facts. I'm right there with you when the criticism is, for example, "Rogan's long-form softball conversational interviews are bad when they give fascists and bigots an opportunity to whitewash their ideas" but then you go and say something like "He may as well be another Fox News talking head" and you lose me because that seems to be ignoring ways that Rogan is obviously not like a Fox News talking head. I can't tell you that its wrong for the similarities to loom larger in your mind than the differences, but I remain unconvinced that I ought to think about him the same way you do.
Rogan's being a Fox taking head because he's humanising, normalising and giving softball interviews to the bad actors on those very same conservative networks. He may have his own style but it remains the same outcome by signal boosting the conservative All-Stars.
You realize the "Fox news" people will accuse Rogan of being a "leftist talking head" because of all the liberal folks he has on too right?
Sweeping generalizations that focus on a single area of similarity will go over great if the person delivering them is speaking to an already sympathetic audience (e.g. Trump on migrants from Mexico) but they're also extremely easy to pick apart if they're delivered to a hostile or even ambivalent or questioning audience.
0
WhiteZinfandelYour insidesLet me show you themRegistered Userregular
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
0
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
jungleroomx on
+7
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
Everybody with a following is going to have a fringe element of that following that will seek to defend them online
Yang is not being accused of encouraging that fringe
He’s being accused of having a following that is more than usually made up of assholes, such that his fringe is meaner and scarier than normal
Tycho and Gabe obviously agreed that their fanbase was problematic because they took steps to change that
Yang could take steps to change that too, but he isn’t
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
So does Alex Jones bear responsibility for the actions of the man who shot up that pizzeria that Jones kept saying was part of a child sex trafficking ring?
Does Bill O'Reilly bear responsibility for the murder of George Tiller, who he repeatedly singled out as a "baby killer?"
Does Donald Trump bear responsibility for the uptick in hate crimes and racially-motivated harassment and violence because of his racist and inflammatory rhetoric?
Are we supposed to give them all free passes because they sort of encouraged this behavior but they didn't explicitly say "hey go out and do this thing?"
Gabe and Tycho themselves felt a measure of responsibility for the behavior of these forums. How do I know this? Because they fucking hired Tube and told him to get us to get our shit together or they would shut us down. In this, they are a lot more responsible than anyone else I named because they recognized the association between us and them. Though it could also be argued that they only had us clean up our behavior after they themselves grew up a bit and became more responsible, but again... not something we can say about those others I listed.
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
Yes, I would - because it's ultimately a space whose rules and structure they define (hence why I called them our hosts, because they are.) Again, they also acknowledge their role and responsibility - that's why we conduct ourselves under the loving graces of Tube and his moderators, why certain phrases are verboten here, and why one of the oldest rules is "no brigading on other sites". One of the major problems with online communities is that their owners don't take responsibility, and the communities become toxic and hostile. If your fanbase responds to criticism with death threats, you fucked up somewhere.
The culture of a fanbase is often seeded by the views and attitude of the people who are the face of the community. It's then cultivated over time by those same people as their behavior appeals to some and alienates others. In that sense they are responsible for it, especially if they refuse to address the problematic aspects of their own community.
These forums are a different case though, of a community drifting away from its founders to the point that we mostly don't even care about them anymore. I wouldn't blame Tycho and Gabe for anything our forum does today, though it may have been different in the early days. For the most part the reason the PA forums have the culture they do is because of conscious decisions on the part of the mod team over the course of many years. Good moderation is absolutely mandatory for a community to maintain a positive culture over time, IMO.
Are you trying to make a case for yourself and the people you already agree with here, or do you want to convince somebody? Because this stuff here is not convincing or meaningful unless the reader already agrees with you.
What don't you agree with in my post? How is what I wrote not meaningful or convincing?
I can't really agree or disagree with a statement like "Look at the threads with the various white supremacist and Incel killers" but I looked at those threads and having done so I do disagree with statements like "All this becomes more mainstream with what Rogan's doing" and "He may as well be another Fox News talking head with those conservative figurehead interviews." It seems like you're taking complicated phenomena with a causal story that can't be summed up in a couple of sentences and making these sweeping judgments based on a limited set of facts. I'm right there with you when the criticism is, for example, "Rogan's long-form softball conversational interviews are bad when they give fascists and bigots an opportunity to whitewash their ideas" but then you go and say something like "He may as well be another Fox News talking head" and you lose me because that seems to be ignoring ways that Rogan is obviously not like a Fox News talking head. I can't tell you that its wrong for the similarities to loom larger in your mind than the differences, but I remain unconvinced that I ought to think about him the same way you do.
Rogan's being a Fox taking head because he's humanising, normalising and giving softball interviews to the bad actors on those very same conservative networks. He may have his own style but it remains the same outcome by signal boosting the conservative All-Stars.
You realize the "Fox news" people will accuse Rogan of being a "leftist talking head" because of all the liberal folks he has on too right?
Who is the liberal equivalent of Gavin Mcinnes or Jordan Petersen and when did he have them on?
A host who provided a safe space for a more or less equal mix of left/ right personalities probably would probably be seen as rightist/leftist by their respective opposition and both would be mostly wrong.
That isn’t Rogan. When your mix is one-part run-of-the-mill Conservative, one part mainstream Progressive and one part far-right brute squad leader it becomes obvious which out of those three the show is there to support.
Are you trying to make a case for yourself and the people you already agree with here, or do you want to convince somebody? Because this stuff here is not convincing or meaningful unless the reader already agrees with you.
What don't you agree with in my post? How is what I wrote not meaningful or convincing?
I can't really agree or disagree with a statement like "Look at the threads with the various white supremacist and Incel killers" but I looked at those threads and having done so I do disagree with statements like "All this becomes more mainstream with what Rogan's doing" and "He may as well be another Fox News talking head with those conservative figurehead interviews." It seems like you're taking complicated phenomena with a causal story that can't be summed up in a couple of sentences and making these sweeping judgments based on a limited set of facts. I'm right there with you when the criticism is, for example, "Rogan's long-form softball conversational interviews are bad when they give fascists and bigots an opportunity to whitewash their ideas" but then you go and say something like "He may as well be another Fox News talking head" and you lose me because that seems to be ignoring ways that Rogan is obviously not like a Fox News talking head. I can't tell you that its wrong for the similarities to loom larger in your mind than the differences, but I remain unconvinced that I ought to think about him the same way you do.
Rogan's being a Fox taking head because he's humanising, normalising and giving softball interviews to the bad actors on those very same conservative networks. He may have his own style but it remains the same outcome by signal boosting the conservative All-Stars.
You realize the "Fox news" people will accuse Rogan of being a "leftist talking head" because of all the liberal folks he has on too right?
Who is the liberal equivalent of Gavin Mcinnes or Jordan Petersen and when did he have them on?
A host who provided a safe space for a more or less equal mix of left/ right personalities probably would probably be seen as rightist/leftist by their respective opposition and both would be mostly wrong.
That isn’t Rogan. When your mix is one-part run-of-the-mill Conservative, one part mainstream Progressive and one part far-right brute squad leader it becomes obvious which out of those three the show is there to support.
Well see that's the thing isn't it? Anyone that i name will seem perfectly reasonable and middle of the road "mainstream" to you, or the people already on that side of the fence.
Lets take Cornell West for example. He was just on there a few weeks ago.
+2
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
Yikers
Like the sub to pewdiepie shit even before christchurch was racist double speak, but now? jesus.
Preacher on
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Are you trying to make a case for yourself and the people you already agree with here, or do you want to convince somebody? Because this stuff here is not convincing or meaningful unless the reader already agrees with you.
What don't you agree with in my post? How is what I wrote not meaningful or convincing?
I can't really agree or disagree with a statement like "Look at the threads with the various white supremacist and Incel killers" but I looked at those threads and having done so I do disagree with statements like "All this becomes more mainstream with what Rogan's doing" and "He may as well be another Fox News talking head with those conservative figurehead interviews." It seems like you're taking complicated phenomena with a causal story that can't be summed up in a couple of sentences and making these sweeping judgments based on a limited set of facts. I'm right there with you when the criticism is, for example, "Rogan's long-form softball conversational interviews are bad when they give fascists and bigots an opportunity to whitewash their ideas" but then you go and say something like "He may as well be another Fox News talking head" and you lose me because that seems to be ignoring ways that Rogan is obviously not like a Fox News talking head. I can't tell you that its wrong for the similarities to loom larger in your mind than the differences, but I remain unconvinced that I ought to think about him the same way you do.
Rogan's being a Fox taking head because he's humanising, normalising and giving softball interviews to the bad actors on those very same conservative networks. He may have his own style but it remains the same outcome by signal boosting the conservative All-Stars.
You realize the "Fox news" people will accuse Rogan of being a "leftist talking head" because of all the liberal folks he has on too right?
Who is the liberal equivalent of Gavin Mcinnes or Jordan Petersen and when did he have them on?
A host who provided a safe space for a more or less equal mix of left/ right personalities probably would probably be seen as rightist/leftist by their respective opposition and both would be mostly wrong.
That isn’t Rogan. When your mix is one-part run-of-the-mill Conservative, one part mainstream Progressive and one part far-right brute squad leader it becomes obvious which out of those three the show is there to support.
Well see that's the thing isn't it? Anyone that i name will seem perfectly reasonable and middle of the road "mainstream" to you, or the people already on that side of the fence.
Lets take Cornell West for example. He was just on there a few weeks ago.
I don't know a lot about Cornel West. What ethnic or religious group does he hate? Does he espouse some sort of...black ethnonationalism, I guess? Is he the opposite of Ben Shapiro because when Ben Shapiro blamed the Israel/Palestine conflict on the Palestinians on the grounds that "The Palestinian Arab population is rotten to the core" and "Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage", West was saying the same transparently racist things about the Israeli Jewish population instead? Is West the opposite of Gavin McInnes because he founded a far-left organization that glorifies and engages in politically-motivated violence in the name of a racial supremacy ideology?
Because if not, then he's not the liberal equivalent of the alt-right and it looks an awful lot like you're trying to operate from a frame where the dangerous left-wing mirror of white supremacy is just 'opposing white supremacy'.
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
Wait....
maybe i'm misunderstanding something.
Is: “Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,”
what you're saying is courting the white supremacy people?
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
Wait....
maybe i'm misunderstanding something.
Is: “Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,”
what you're saying is courting the white supremacy people?
Subscribe to pewdiepie is a racist dog whistle.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Are you trying to make a case for yourself and the people you already agree with here, or do you want to convince somebody? Because this stuff here is not convincing or meaningful unless the reader already agrees with you.
What don't you agree with in my post? How is what I wrote not meaningful or convincing?
I can't really agree or disagree with a statement like "Look at the threads with the various white supremacist and Incel killers" but I looked at those threads and having done so I do disagree with statements like "All this becomes more mainstream with what Rogan's doing" and "He may as well be another Fox News talking head with those conservative figurehead interviews." It seems like you're taking complicated phenomena with a causal story that can't be summed up in a couple of sentences and making these sweeping judgments based on a limited set of facts. I'm right there with you when the criticism is, for example, "Rogan's long-form softball conversational interviews are bad when they give fascists and bigots an opportunity to whitewash their ideas" but then you go and say something like "He may as well be another Fox News talking head" and you lose me because that seems to be ignoring ways that Rogan is obviously not like a Fox News talking head. I can't tell you that its wrong for the similarities to loom larger in your mind than the differences, but I remain unconvinced that I ought to think about him the same way you do.
Rogan's being a Fox taking head because he's humanising, normalising and giving softball interviews to the bad actors on those very same conservative networks. He may have his own style but it remains the same outcome by signal boosting the conservative All-Stars.
You realize the "Fox news" people will accuse Rogan of being a "leftist talking head" because of all the liberal folks he has on too right?
Who is the liberal equivalent of Gavin Mcinnes or Jordan Petersen and when did he have them on?
A host who provided a safe space for a more or less equal mix of left/ right personalities probably would probably be seen as rightist/leftist by their respective opposition and both would be mostly wrong.
That isn’t Rogan. When your mix is one-part run-of-the-mill Conservative, one part mainstream Progressive and one part far-right brute squad leader it becomes obvious which out of those three the show is there to support.
Well see that's the thing isn't it? Anyone that i name will seem perfectly reasonable and middle of the road "mainstream" to you, or the people already on that side of the fence.
Lets take Cornell West for example. He was just on there a few weeks ago.
I don't know a lot about Cornel West. What ethnic or religious group does he hate? Does he espouse some sort of...black ethnonationalism, I guess? Is he the opposite of Ben Shapiro because when Ben Shapiro blamed the Israel/Palestine conflict on the Palestinians on the grounds that "The Palestinian Arab population is rotten to the core" and "Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage", West was saying the same transparently racist things about the Israeli Jewish population instead? Is West the opposite of Gavin McInnes because he founded a far-left organization that glorifies and engages in politically-motivated violence in the name of a racial supremacy ideology?
Because if not, then he's not the liberal equivalent of the alt-right and it looks an awful lot like you're trying to operate from a frame where the dangerous left-wing mirror of white supremacy is just 'opposing white supremacy'.
I've talked about it in other threads, but West has some really toxic views around race, especially about what being "black" actually means. That said, West's positions are nowhere near those of Shapiro, Peterson, or Harris.
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
Wait....
maybe i'm misunderstanding something.
Is: “Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,”
what you're saying is courting the white supremacy people?
Subscribe to pewdiepie is a racist dog whistle.
The "sword and shield" bit is a Giggledygoop reference as well.
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
Wait....
maybe i'm misunderstanding something.
Is: “Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,”
what you're saying is courting the white supremacy people?
No. He made it a campaign strategy to amplify the memes that came out of his JRE interview.
The article lines in the post you quoted has deets.
“I don't think there's any danger of the memes counterbalancing the primary message of the campaign,” Yang told BuzzFeed News in an interview earlier this week. “Because the primary message of the campaign is reaching thousands of people all the time. And again, people are smart. They can tell the difference between reality and a bunch of images that clearly put together to get a laugh.”
...Yang’s embrace of 4chan started going south earlier this month, after Yang's deputy Chief of Staff Carly Reilly tweeted, “UBI (universal basic income) is feminist.” The remark irked some on 4chan’s Politically Incorrect (/pol/) board, home to some of the community’s more hardcore white nationalists. They lashed out, infiltrated a pro-Yang Discord server, and started leaking screenshots, hoping to destabilize the Yang Gang
The “YangGang” itself is also well... pretty racist
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
Wait....
maybe i'm misunderstanding something.
Is: “Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,”
what you're saying is courting the white supremacy people?
Subscribe to pewdiepie is a racist dog whistle.
Which is part of the whole thing. Unless you're constantly keeping up with the ever-shifting morass of dumb references white supremacists use to identify themselves to one another, that just looks like a silly joke. And then when people are trying to explain 'yeah, this is an actual racist thing. He said it because he's a racist signaling to other racists.' the immediate assumption you're led to make is 'that's dumb, it's just a meme, you must be overreacting. More liberal joke police/left-wing moral panic over nothing!' - so you reject the idea that 'subscribe to pewdiepie' could be a white supremacy reference, reinforce the right-wing narrative that liberals are Fun Police who hand-wring over every little thing for no reason, and drift further away from real information and towards the Alt-Right-O-Sphere, all without anyone but the left ever appearing to say anything to you about race at all.
He is primarily known for his relatively innocuous meme and video game commentary videos, though he “has flirted with if not endorsed the alt-right neo-Nazi movement and antisemitism,” says Evan Balgord, the executive director of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network. As recently as last December, he came under fire for endorsing YouTuber E;R, whose channel featured videos of unedited Adolf Hitler speeches and a gag poking fun at the death of Charlottesville protester Heather Heyer. As a result of the exposure from PewDiePie, E;R gained 15,000 subscribers, leading many to accuse PewDiePie of “flirting with alt-right culture and sending a dangerous message to his millions of followers, many of whom are teenagers,” as Vox’s Aja Romano put it.
In 2017, PewDiePie released a video featuring a sign that said “Death to all Jews”; in another from the same year, he said the n-word during a live stream. Then, last December, he came under fire for endorsing YouTuber E;R. Yet it would be a stretch to say that his content is directly catering to people with racist or white supremacist views, says Lorenz. “Most of his shit is extremely benign,” she says. “Most of it is meme reviews. It’s just that he’s speaking to this hyper-online group of people.”
[...]
It’s also worth noting that many have argued, with respective to PewDiePie specifically, that his use of “ironic” anti-Semitic or racist humor in his videos may serve as a gateway for subscribers to start seeking out more overtly extremist content.
[...]
“The problem isn’t PewDiePie, the problem is these hard-right fringe communities that are PewDiePie-adjacent,” Lorenz says. “The fact that when you watch PewDiePie videos, you’re maybe led to Ben Shapiro [a far-right commentator who has appeared in a PewDiePie video], and those lead to more and more extreme content.
PewDiePie is a dumb internet personality who occasionally says problematic stuff but is largely innocuous on the surface, but who is linked to and promotes more extreme and dangerous alt-right personalities in a way that leads his audience towards alt-right radicalization, often through behavior and language that doesn't look obviously bigoted on its face. Given the subject of the thread, I'm sure this sounds familiar.
And a white supremacist yelled his name like a slogan while murdering dozens of muslims in a racially-motivated mass shooting, because being a doofy edgelord idiot with a big audience and white supremacist friends is not actually harmless.
Abbalah on
+13
WhiteZinfandelYour insidesLet me show you themRegistered Userregular
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
Yikers
Like the sub to pewdiepie shit even before christchurch was racist double speak, but now? jesus.
That article was posted before the Christchurch shooting. Also, that quote appears to be from some schmuck that doesn't have any official connection to Yang. The article doesn't really make the case that Yang is actually courting 4chan specifically or internet people in general. He just doesn't seem to be opposed to having memes made about him. So... I'm ambivalent about the idea that he's responsible for any harassment his "followers" perpetrate.
WhiteZinfandel on
+1
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
Yikers
Like the sub to pewdiepie shit even before christchurch was racist double speak, but now? jesus.
That article was posted before the Christchurch shooting. Also, that quote appears to be from some schmuck that doesn't have any official connection to Yang. The article doesn't really make the case that Yang is actually courting 4chan specifically or internet people in general. He just doesn't seem to be opposed to having memes made about him. So... I'm ambivalent about the idea that he's responsible for any harassment his "followers" perpetrate.
Yes, when you deny absolutely everything it is quite easy to be ambivalent. Yang has embraced 4chan completely.
“I don't think there's any danger of the memes counterbalancing the primary message of the campaign,” Yang told BuzzFeed News in an interview earlier this week. “Because the primary message of the campaign is reaching thousands of people all the time. And again, people are smart. They can tell the difference between reality and a bunch of images that clearly put together to get a laugh.”
If you can't see it when it's outlined clearly in his campaigns own words then I feel like you're being intentionally obtuse.
"Subscribe to Pew Die Pie" didn't originate from the Christchurch shooter.
jungleroomx on
0
WhiteZinfandelYour insidesLet me show you themRegistered Userregular
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
Yikers
Like the sub to pewdiepie shit even before christchurch was racist double speak, but now? jesus.
That article was posted before the Christchurch shooting. Also, that quote appears to be from some schmuck that doesn't have any official connection to Yang. The article doesn't really make the case that Yang is actually courting 4chan specifically or internet people in general. He just doesn't seem to be opposed to having memes made about him. So... I'm ambivalent about the idea that he's responsible for any harassment his "followers" perpetrate.
Yes, when you deny absolutely everything it is quite easy to be ambivalent. Yang has embraced 4chan completely.
“I don't think there's any danger of the memes counterbalancing the primary message of the campaign,” Yang told BuzzFeed News in an interview earlier this week. “Because the primary message of the campaign is reaching thousands of people all the time. And again, people are smart. They can tell the difference between reality and a bunch of images that clearly put together to get a laugh.”
If you can't see it when it's outlined clearly in his campaigns own words then I feel like you're being intentionally obtuse.
"Subscribe to Pew Die Pie" didn't originate from the Christchurch shooter.
I never said it did. The post I responded to made it sound like Preacher didn't realize that the quote predates the Christchurch shooting.
As for that quote, it's exactly what I was thinking of when I wrote that. I read it multiple times. We're not supposed to accuse each other of bad faith, btw. The mods have clarified that if you suspect someone is arguing in bad faith, the thing to do is report them and then not engage.
"Person suffers harassment on twitter for criticizing famous person"
Well, yeah. That's how it goes, unfortunately.
The causal link that makes it Yang or Rogan's fault has yet to be demonstrated, though.
If your fan base is filled with and acts like geese, that doesn't happen by accident.
If your fan base is thousands or millions of people, some of them are inevitably going to be geese no matter who you are or what you espouse.
I mean, ask Rinda.Vas@amgreetings.com what she thinks of fans of Penny Arcade.
Who and why?
In 2003, PA did a comic with a risque version of Strawberry Shortcake. American Greetings Cease & Desisted them and got the comic removed. Tycho responded with This post:
Strawberry Shortcake Comic Removed
If you have any questions about why, feel free to raise them with Rinda E. Vas, Corporate Counsel for the American Greetings Corporation.
We’re currently trying to figure out exactly how the concepts of Parody and Satire work to protect the sorts of things we do, to better arm ourselves against this kind of crap. Virtually everyone believes that what we did is protected, indeed, I believe that myself - but I’m not going to bet the farm on it until I have a bit more than Internet hearsay to back myself up with.
Her name in the post is a link that goes directly to her email address. This would probably fall under "inciting a harassment campaign" under 2019 standards.
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
Wait....
maybe i'm misunderstanding something.
Is: “Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,”
what you're saying is courting the white supremacy people?
Subscribe to pewdiepie is a racist dog whistle.
Which is part of the whole thing. Unless you're constantly keeping up with the ever-shifting morass of dumb references white supremacists use to identify themselves to one another, that just looks like a silly joke. And then when people are trying to explain 'yeah, this is an actual racist thing. He said it because he's a racist signaling to other racists.' the immediate assumption you're led to make is 'that's dumb, it's just a meme, you must be overreacting. More liberal joke police/left-wing moral panic over nothing!' - so you reject the idea that 'subscribe to pewdiepie' could be a white supremacy reference, reinforce the right-wing narrative that liberals are Fun Police who hand-wring over every little thing for no reason, and drift further away from real information and towards the Alt-Right-O-Sphere, all without anyone but the left ever appearing to say anything to you about race at all.
He is primarily known for his relatively innocuous meme and video game commentary videos, though he “has flirted with if not endorsed the alt-right neo-Nazi movement and antisemitism,” says Evan Balgord, the executive director of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network. As recently as last December, he came under fire for endorsing YouTuber E;R, whose channel featured videos of unedited Adolf Hitler speeches and a gag poking fun at the death of Charlottesville protester Heather Heyer. As a result of the exposure from PewDiePie, E;R gained 15,000 subscribers, leading many to accuse PewDiePie of “flirting with alt-right culture and sending a dangerous message to his millions of followers, many of whom are teenagers,” as Vox’s Aja Romano put it.
In 2017, PewDiePie released a video featuring a sign that said “Death to all Jews”; in another from the same year, he said the n-word during a live stream. Then, last December, he came under fire for endorsing YouTuber E;R. Yet it would be a stretch to say that his content is directly catering to people with racist or white supremacist views, says Lorenz. “Most of his shit is extremely benign,” she says. “Most of it is meme reviews. It’s just that he’s speaking to this hyper-online group of people.”
[...]
It’s also worth noting that many have argued, with respective to PewDiePie specifically, that his use of “ironic” anti-Semitic or racist humor in his videos may serve as a gateway for subscribers to start seeking out more overtly extremist content.
[...]
“The problem isn’t PewDiePie, the problem is these hard-right fringe communities that are PewDiePie-adjacent,” Lorenz says. “The fact that when you watch PewDiePie videos, you’re maybe led to Ben Shapiro [a far-right commentator who has appeared in a PewDiePie video], and those lead to more and more extreme content.
PewDiePie is a dumb internet personality who occasionally says problematic stuff but is largely innocuous on the surface, but who is linked to and promotes more extreme and dangerous alt-right personalities in a way that leads his audience towards alt-right radicalization, often through behavior and language that doesn't look obviously bigoted on its face. Given the subject of the thread, I'm sure this sounds familiar.
And a white supremacist yelled his name like a slogan while murdering dozens of muslims in a racially-motivated mass shooting, because being a doofy edgelord idiot with a big audience and white supremacist friends is not actually harmless.
Probably also worth noting that actions like pewdiepie are the natural outgrowth of the white supremacist suit movement. The nazis realized that they could not get many people with everyone being a tattooed skinhead. So they purposefully covered up the tattoos and went to bat for looking respectable. The Shapiros and proud boys of the world are the direct result of this. And the natural progression of that is a need for media to funnel ears down the pipeline.
And in order to do that you need “neutral” media sources to promote your content and speakers while not being openly white supremacist
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
If its an hour of uninterrupted time for Bernie to talk about how he wants to do things better, i say go for it.
Like, we cant afford to lose this election to another 4 years of Trump. That means we have to get out there and convince everybody to vote for a Democrat and a long series of purity tests before you can be allowed in "the left club" is the reason why we lose so goddamn always.
If its an hour of uninterrupted time for Bernie to talk about how he wants to do things better, i say go for it.
Like, we cant afford to lose this election to another 4 years of Trump. That means we have to get out there and convince everybody to vote for a Democrat and a long series of purity tests before you can be allowed in "the left club" is the reason why we lose so goddamn always.
Well, that and voter suppression and gerrymandering and disinformation (of exactly the type Rogan spreads!) and voter apathy and foreign interference and a complicit national media and overfocus on national rather than local and state office and...
An excess of purity testing is not that high on the list of why the Democrats lose elections, but even insofar as it is, "don't credulously host white supremacists as though their ideology is a legitimate, valuable belief system that people 'just disagree' about" is a hell of a lenient test which really only a demands a 'no more than 30 roach legs per jar of peanut butter' level of purity.
If its an hour of uninterrupted time for Bernie to talk about how he wants to do things better, i say go for it.
Like, we cant afford to lose this election to another 4 years of Trump. That means we have to get out there and convince everybody to vote for a Democrat and a long series of purity tests before you can be allowed in "the left club" is the reason why we lose so goddamn always.
Well, that and voter suppression and gerrymandering and disinformation (of exactly the type Rogan spreads!) and voter apathy and foreign interference and a complicit national media and overfocus on national rather than local and state office and...
An excess of purity testing is not that high on the list of why the Democrats lose elections, but even insofar as it is, "don't credulously host white supremacists as though their ideology is a legitimate, valuable belief system that people 'just disagree' about" is a hell of a lenient test which really only a demands a 'no more than 30 roach legs per jar of peanut butter' level of purity.
That's on the interviewer rather than the candidate though
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
If its an hour of uninterrupted time for Bernie to talk about how he wants to do things better, i say go for it.
Like, we cant afford to lose this election to another 4 years of Trump. That means we have to get out there and convince everybody to vote for a Democrat and a long series of purity tests before you can be allowed in "the left club" is the reason why we lose so goddamn always.
Well, that and voter suppression and gerrymandering and disinformation (of exactly the type Rogan spreads!) and voter apathy and foreign interference and a complicit national media and overfocus on national rather than local and state office and...
An excess of purity testing is not that high on the list of why the Democrats lose elections, but even insofar as it is, "don't credulously host white supremacists as though their ideology is a legitimate, valuable belief system that people 'just disagree' about" is a hell of a lenient test which really only a demands a 'no more than 30 roach legs per jar of peanut butter' level of purity.
That's on the interviewer rather than the candidate though
When the interviewer's audience is small enough for the candidate's audience to drown it out (Sanders' interview is almost up to 9 million views, and, again, an 'average' JRE episode only gets around 1.5 million), the candidate is platforming the interviewer just as much as the other way around.
If its an hour of uninterrupted time for Bernie to talk about how he wants to do things better, i say go for it.
Like, we cant afford to lose this election to another 4 years of Trump. That means we have to get out there and convince everybody to vote for a Democrat and a long series of purity tests before you can be allowed in "the left club" is the reason why we lose so goddamn always.
Well, that and voter suppression and gerrymandering and disinformation (of exactly the type Rogan spreads!) and voter apathy and foreign interference and a complicit national media and overfocus on national rather than local and state office and...
An excess of purity testing is not that high on the list of why the Democrats lose elections, but even insofar as it is, "don't credulously host white supremacists as though their ideology is a legitimate, valuable belief system that people 'just disagree' about" is a hell of a lenient test which really only a demands a 'no more than 30 roach legs per jar of peanut butter' level of purity.
That's on the interviewer rather than the candidate though
When the interviewer's audience is small enough for the candidate's audience to drown it out (Sanders' interview is almost up to 9 million views, and, again, an 'average' JRE episode only gets around 1.5 million), the candidate is platforming the interviewer just as much as the other way around.
So if Sanders gets little pull its bad he went on and if he gets a lot thats bad too for different reasons, gotcha
Posts
Why would you expect anyone to defend the behaviour of this forum circa 2003?
She might have a bad opinion of Penny Arcade fans in 2003? Fuck, I've got a bad opinion of them.
I'm not expecting anyone to defend anything. Brainleech asked a question and I provided clarifying facts.
I don't think anyone was defending that behavior. Best I can tell, Baudattitude was supporting my statement that when a fanbase is large, some of them are going to be geese regardless of what they're a fanbase for.
Oh, that was undoubtedly a dick move on Tycho and Gabe's part, and I would definitely consider it incitement to harass a person who was likely just doing what their bosses told them to. T & G have undoubtedly been silly geese about tons of things, just like we all have, and it's no surprise to me that their fans are willing to harass when directed to. That doesn't mean I'm okay with what they did, and it mostly serves to underline the toxicity of fandom, which is a nice segue into talking about how entertainment and entertainers influence their audience.
We see this kind of shit every time anyone (especially women) dare to criticize someone or something that millions of people like. Eventually those people become the responsibility of the entertainer. If they do something on your behalf, even if you didn't tell them or want them to, it's your job in no uncertain terms to explicitly tell them that kind of behavior is unacceptable. And Rogen, by having on gibbering homunculi like Alex Jones, Gavin McIness, and Jordan Peterson and making them seem normal, is telling his audience that there's actually nothing wrong with them. You cannot claim that this kind of shit doesn't lead to more harm, even if you're one of the people who sees through them.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Except Bernie would be exposing the poisonous nature of those very guests he'd be enemies of. Something I would think he'd find it in his best interests politically to do since he's not running as a Republican.
It not being easy isn't a good excuse to not do it. Running for president is harder than that, and Bernie Sanders is ok doing that. And it's not like his staff can't give him insight, Briahna Joy Gray has been on Rogan's show before and she's his press secretary. Fighting bigotry is supposed to be something Bernie's good at.
I don't see how this would be a fruitless discussion, as it would be something Bernie would be concerned about in theory and it would be a new experience for Rogan.
Rogan's being a Fox taking head because he's humanising, normalising and giving softball interviews to the bad actors on those very same conservative networks. He may have his own style but it remains the same outcome by signal boosting the conservative All-Stars.
You realize the "Fox news" people will accuse Rogan of being a "leftist talking head" because of all the liberal folks he has on too right?
The point is that's not actually a defence because it wasn't acceptable then either. The argument rests on the idea of "Well, would you criticize this forum then?" to which the answer is "Hell yes".
More to the point, the actions of our hosts in the following years shows that having a toxic fanbase is a choice - they hired Tube as community manager, who then instituted policies to force out toxic elements. While yes, there are always going to be a few geese who don't get the message, the PA team actively works to remove toxicity, as we saw when they disinvited a couple of racist, transphobic podcasters from presenting at PAX West this year.
Having a toxic fanbase is a choice.
Sweeping generalizations that focus on a single area of similarity will go over great if the person delivering them is speaking to an already sympathetic audience (e.g. Trump on migrants from Mexico) but they're also extremely easy to pick apart if they're delivered to a hostile or even ambivalent or questioning audience.
The question isn't would you criticize this forum, it's would you criticize Gabe and Tycho and hold them accountable for this forum's behavior. In this case it's easy to say yes because they actually did directly encourage it. In the case of some geese on twitter attacking someone that criticized Yang, that line can't be drawn. He didn't directly encourage that behavior. Unless someone has a video of him doing so (which should be easy to find, amirite?), the causal link is pretty speculative and vague.
It's 4chan.
That behavior is expected and encouraged. If you associate with 4chan and your followers engage in normal 4chan behavior, you can't do this weak defense of "well I didn't directly say for them to do it."
It's 4chan.
Everybody with a following is going to have a fringe element of that following that will seek to defend them online
Yang is not being accused of encouraging that fringe
He’s being accused of having a following that is more than usually made up of assholes, such that his fringe is meaner and scarier than normal
Tycho and Gabe obviously agreed that their fanbase was problematic because they took steps to change that
Yang could take steps to change that too, but he isn’t
So does Alex Jones bear responsibility for the actions of the man who shot up that pizzeria that Jones kept saying was part of a child sex trafficking ring?
Does Bill O'Reilly bear responsibility for the murder of George Tiller, who he repeatedly singled out as a "baby killer?"
Does Donald Trump bear responsibility for the uptick in hate crimes and racially-motivated harassment and violence because of his racist and inflammatory rhetoric?
Are we supposed to give them all free passes because they sort of encouraged this behavior but they didn't explicitly say "hey go out and do this thing?"
Gabe and Tycho themselves felt a measure of responsibility for the behavior of these forums. How do I know this? Because they fucking hired Tube and told him to get us to get our shit together or they would shut us down. In this, they are a lot more responsible than anyone else I named because they recognized the association between us and them. Though it could also be argued that they only had us clean up our behavior after they themselves grew up a bit and became more responsible, but again... not something we can say about those others I listed.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Okay, I don't really follow Yang closely. Has he really courted 4chan? Because I can agree that's a bad idea.
Yes, I would - because it's ultimately a space whose rules and structure they define (hence why I called them our hosts, because they are.) Again, they also acknowledge their role and responsibility - that's why we conduct ourselves under the loving graces of Tube and his moderators, why certain phrases are verboten here, and why one of the oldest rules is "no brigading on other sites". One of the major problems with online communities is that their owners don't take responsibility, and the communities become toxic and hostile. If your fanbase responds to criticism with death threats, you fucked up somewhere.
These forums are a different case though, of a community drifting away from its founders to the point that we mostly don't even care about them anymore. I wouldn't blame Tycho and Gabe for anything our forum does today, though it may have been different in the early days. For the most part the reason the PA forums have the culture they do is because of conscious decisions on the part of the mod team over the course of many years. Good moderation is absolutely mandatory for a community to maintain a positive culture over time, IMO.
Who is the liberal equivalent of Gavin Mcinnes or Jordan Petersen and when did he have them on?
A host who provided a safe space for a more or less equal mix of left/ right personalities probably would probably be seen as rightist/leftist by their respective opposition and both would be mostly wrong.
That isn’t Rogan. When your mix is one-part run-of-the-mill Conservative, one part mainstream Progressive and one part far-right brute squad leader it becomes obvious which out of those three the show is there to support.
Well see that's the thing isn't it? Anyone that i name will seem perfectly reasonable and middle of the road "mainstream" to you, or the people already on that side of the fence.
Lets take Cornell West for example. He was just on there a few weeks ago.
Read up.
That's a pretty good article that's completely on subject when you try to court white supremacists and other shitbags.
“Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,” he said. “I think every American in his or her 20s has known someone deeply affected by these issues. “I am a Gamer for life. Yang is our Shield. The memes are our Sword. Also, subscribe to PewDiePie,” he said.
Yikers
Like the sub to pewdiepie shit even before christchurch was racist double speak, but now? jesus.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I don't know a lot about Cornel West. What ethnic or religious group does he hate? Does he espouse some sort of...black ethnonationalism, I guess? Is he the opposite of Ben Shapiro because when Ben Shapiro blamed the Israel/Palestine conflict on the Palestinians on the grounds that "The Palestinian Arab population is rotten to the core" and "Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage", West was saying the same transparently racist things about the Israeli Jewish population instead? Is West the opposite of Gavin McInnes because he founded a far-left organization that glorifies and engages in politically-motivated violence in the name of a racial supremacy ideology?
Because if not, then he's not the liberal equivalent of the alt-right and it looks an awful lot like you're trying to operate from a frame where the dangerous left-wing mirror of white supremacy is just 'opposing white supremacy'.
Wait....
maybe i'm misunderstanding something.
Is: “Yang talks about suicides, drug addictions, and the debilitating financial burden amongst the American working class,”
what you're saying is courting the white supremacy people?
Subscribe to pewdiepie is a racist dog whistle.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I've talked about it in other threads, but West has some really toxic views around race, especially about what being "black" actually means. That said, West's positions are nowhere near those of Shapiro, Peterson, or Harris.
The "sword and shield" bit is a Giggledygoop reference as well.
No. He made it a campaign strategy to amplify the memes that came out of his JRE interview.
The article lines in the post you quoted has deets.
The “YangGang” itself is also well... pretty racist
Which is part of the whole thing. Unless you're constantly keeping up with the ever-shifting morass of dumb references white supremacists use to identify themselves to one another, that just looks like a silly joke. And then when people are trying to explain 'yeah, this is an actual racist thing. He said it because he's a racist signaling to other racists.' the immediate assumption you're led to make is 'that's dumb, it's just a meme, you must be overreacting. More liberal joke police/left-wing moral panic over nothing!' - so you reject the idea that 'subscribe to pewdiepie' could be a white supremacy reference, reinforce the right-wing narrative that liberals are Fun Police who hand-wring over every little thing for no reason, and drift further away from real information and towards the Alt-Right-O-Sphere, all without anyone but the left ever appearing to say anything to you about race at all.
Which is also how Rogan's show works.
Because 'subscribe to pewdiepie' actually is a white supremacist meme, to the point that the Christchurch shooter yelled it on video while he livestreamed himself killing 50 people in a white-supremacy-motivated mass shooting at a mosque., and looking into why might help give you some perspective on why Rogan's show is a problem even though he spends a lot of his time talking about martial arts and drugs instead of politics.
From the article I linked:
PewDiePie is a dumb internet personality who occasionally says problematic stuff but is largely innocuous on the surface, but who is linked to and promotes more extreme and dangerous alt-right personalities in a way that leads his audience towards alt-right radicalization, often through behavior and language that doesn't look obviously bigoted on its face. Given the subject of the thread, I'm sure this sounds familiar.
And a white supremacist yelled his name like a slogan while murdering dozens of muslims in a racially-motivated mass shooting, because being a doofy edgelord idiot with a big audience and white supremacist friends is not actually harmless.
That article was posted before the Christchurch shooting. Also, that quote appears to be from some schmuck that doesn't have any official connection to Yang. The article doesn't really make the case that Yang is actually courting 4chan specifically or internet people in general. He just doesn't seem to be opposed to having memes made about him. So... I'm ambivalent about the idea that he's responsible for any harassment his "followers" perpetrate.
Yes, when you deny absolutely everything it is quite easy to be ambivalent. Yang has embraced 4chan completely.
“I don't think there's any danger of the memes counterbalancing the primary message of the campaign,” Yang told BuzzFeed News in an interview earlier this week. “Because the primary message of the campaign is reaching thousands of people all the time. And again, people are smart. They can tell the difference between reality and a bunch of images that clearly put together to get a laugh.”
If you can't see it when it's outlined clearly in his campaigns own words then I feel like you're being intentionally obtuse.
"Subscribe to Pew Die Pie" didn't originate from the Christchurch shooter.
I never said it did. The post I responded to made it sound like Preacher didn't realize that the quote predates the Christchurch shooting.
As for that quote, it's exactly what I was thinking of when I wrote that. I read it multiple times. We're not supposed to accuse each other of bad faith, btw. The mods have clarified that if you suspect someone is arguing in bad faith, the thing to do is report them and then not engage.
Probably also worth noting that actions like pewdiepie are the natural outgrowth of the white supremacist suit movement. The nazis realized that they could not get many people with everyone being a tattooed skinhead. So they purposefully covered up the tattoos and went to bat for looking respectable. The Shapiros and proud boys of the world are the direct result of this. And the natural progression of that is a need for media to funnel ears down the pipeline.
And in order to do that you need “neutral” media sources to promote your content and speakers while not being openly white supremacist
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
If its an hour of uninterrupted time for Bernie to talk about how he wants to do things better, i say go for it.
Like, we cant afford to lose this election to another 4 years of Trump. That means we have to get out there and convince everybody to vote for a Democrat and a long series of purity tests before you can be allowed in "the left club" is the reason why we lose so goddamn always.
Well, that and voter suppression and gerrymandering and disinformation (of exactly the type Rogan spreads!) and voter apathy and foreign interference and a complicit national media and overfocus on national rather than local and state office and...
An excess of purity testing is not that high on the list of why the Democrats lose elections, but even insofar as it is, "don't credulously host white supremacists as though their ideology is a legitimate, valuable belief system that people 'just disagree' about" is a hell of a lenient test which really only a demands a 'no more than 30 roach legs per jar of peanut butter' level of purity.
That's on the interviewer rather than the candidate though
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
When the interviewer's audience is small enough for the candidate's audience to drown it out (Sanders' interview is almost up to 9 million views, and, again, an 'average' JRE episode only gets around 1.5 million), the candidate is platforming the interviewer just as much as the other way around.
So if Sanders gets little pull its bad he went on and if he gets a lot thats bad too for different reasons, gotcha