Mason  🏃‍♂️ ✂️

The definition of "violence" is not that unclear to me.

So you don’t believe that nonphysical violence is possible?

Criminal threats are possible, sure.

But surely you agree that there’s such a thing as harmful words, right? You just don’t like the term violence there?

I think virtually any strong opinion that turns out to be wrong has the potential to cause harm. I don't trust the sway of public opinion to identify them.

what about intentionally bad faith “opinions”, though? At what point is it okay to say “you have lied and hurt people X times, so no, we’re not going to let you have this platform”? We can’t 100% automate detecting them but like. Why pretend to be fooled on principle?

I just think — and believe I've observed — that people have a very hard time discerning between "I think you're incredibly wrong" and "I think you're arguing in bad faith."

I agree with you, it’s hard to know for sure. But is *amplifying* every speech act really the best we can do in response? Especially when the bad faith is driving such harmful and hateful agendas?