But (1) is actually false, and people strongly disagreeing with something en masse is not the same thing as "heresy"
Sure. And if the "controversial ideas" are not being used as excuses to block efforts to make the group of people in our community less homogenous, then it's probably not one of the topics I'm talking about.
-
-
I think this definition is a slippery slope. For example, our public transit infrastructure plays a big role in racial segregation in cities. When discussing transit, should it be unacceptable to propose ideas that might exacerbate the problem?
-
Would it be inappropriate to say “yes, this proposal increases racial and socioeconomic segregation, but the safety and cost benefits outweigh those problems?”
-
I think it would probably be ok if, when you say that, a lot of people got upset and you were inundated with replies. The idea that "sometimes I get attacked when I say this" = "it's impossible to talk about it" is just privilege talking.
-
I'm not trying to discuss what should be allowed. Nor is Sam, I think. Certainly I think criticism should be allowed. That's not the point. An overzealous reaction to those ideas will suppress discussion of them, which will ultimately be bad for everyone.
-
And, yes, it's a privilege to be heard and to have my ideas thoughtfully considered. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be a goal.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I still don't think this conversation "proves
@sama's point" - if anything, quite the contrary ;) -
I don't think this one does : ) Thanks for engaging with me. But I've seen other less civil ones.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.