Criticism would be discussing the actual words and meaning of anarchists and their platforms. Not blinding saying whatever the rich told you anarchy means, and then getting told “That’s not what we’ve been saying for 200 years.”
Well, ok, I get your point, and I’ll admit I didn’t read the rules before I commented - so let’s have a discussion here in this public forum…
In the context of rule 6: “You don’t have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is” the term “post” usually refers to top-level content added to the community, and not to comments made in reply to the content. So are you considering comments to be included within the term “post”? That’s not necessarily wrong per se, but I think it is different from the generally understood meaning.
I thought it was pretty clear from the way I wrote my comment that I wasn’t making an argument about the academic definition of anarchism. I don’t need you to “educate” me. My comment is a somewhat flippant (if you will) description of what anarchy means in a practical sense.
(more flippancy) Should I comment on the irony of an anarchist community having rules which they expect users to follow, written by an exclusive group of community leaders, enforced by moderators who have power over other users? or would that comment get me banned? Does this joke write itself?
I get that you want to have a community that is somewhat focused in topic and style, and in that context it makes sense to enforce some restrictions on the top-level content that is added to the community. But if you enforce strict guidelines on the conversation that happens in the comments especially to the point of excluding disagreement or criticism, then you are guilty of creating the “echo chamber” that @[email protected] mentioned.
Not every comm needs to be a debate comm. We don’t have the energy to debate and educate clueless libs who come here and go all like “rules in anarchism? ololo” every other comment.
There’s no “academic definition of anarchism”. There’s anarchism as a political movement, and there’s anarchy which some dictionaries define as chaos. Guess which one we support here.
You realize you’re in an anarchist comm, yes? Warning for rule 6
“Hey buddy we don’t take kindly to criticism around here!”
Just out here kicking your own ass, eh?
Not every space is meant to give you a platform by correcting your disinfo.
Criticism would be discussing the actual words and meaning of anarchists and their platforms. Not blinding saying whatever the rich told you anarchy means, and then getting told “That’s not what we’ve been saying for 200 years.”
There is a difference between good faith criticism and just trying to start an argument.
Well, ok, I get your point, and I’ll admit I didn’t read the rules before I commented - so let’s have a discussion here in this public forum…
I thought it was pretty clear from the way I wrote my comment that I wasn’t making an argument about the academic definition of anarchism. I don’t need you to “educate” me. My comment is a somewhat flippant (if you will) description of what anarchy means in a practical sense.
(more flippancy) Should I comment on the irony of an anarchist community having rules which they expect users to follow, written by an exclusive group of community leaders, enforced by moderators who have power over other users? or would that comment get me banned? Does this joke write itself?
I get that you want to have a community that is somewhat focused in topic and style, and in that context it makes sense to enforce some restrictions on the top-level content that is added to the community. But if you enforce strict guidelines on the conversation that happens in the comments especially to the point of excluding disagreement or criticism, then you are guilty of creating the “echo chamber” that @[email protected] mentioned.
Not every comm needs to be a debate comm. We don’t have the energy to debate and educate clueless libs who come here and go all like “rules in anarchism? ololo” every other comment.
There’s no “academic definition of anarchism”. There’s anarchism as a political movement, and there’s anarchy which some dictionaries define as chaos. Guess which one we support here.
And yes, “posts” means also comments.
oh, this must be why i have you tagged as ‘rule lawyer debate pervert’
randian techbros, i swear.
“Debate me bro! I just refuse to accept the terms of the debate! You must comply to my terms, or you lose!”
And, er, what are “the terms of the debate”?
Are they are Randroid too? uuugh
always with the ad hominem
Holy echo chamber, Batman!
Is banning Tankies and fascists on a liberal instance an echo chamber?
Banning people who refuse to have a meaningful and good faith conversion =/= echo chamber.