this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
926 points (98.2% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

26804 readers
3219 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ShortBoweledClown@lemmy.one 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well what I said was:

  • Musk claimed to be working to protect free speech
  • Musk’s actions are consistent with that goal
  • If fighting Meta isn’t consistent with that goal, then why are we fighting Meta?
[–] ShortBoweledClown@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No they aren't? He's trying to save himself from losing billions more dollars. It has nothing to do with free speech. As the other poster stated, it's about perceived IP theft.

Assuming 'we' is lemmy, Musks motivation is complete different, aka money. You restating the point you tried to make doesn't give it any more credence.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Did you notice the phrase “is consistent with”?

How do you suppose that differs in meaning from a phrase like “allows us to conclude that”?

[–] ShortBoweledClown@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But his actions aren't consistent with anything having to do with protecting freedom of speech. So you saying "is consistent with" is irrelevant.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Premise 1: Fighting the enemy of a person, group, or thing can be a way of protecting that person, group, or thing.

Premise 2: Meta is an enemy of free speech.

Conclusion 1: Fighting Meta can be a way to protect free speech. ( P1 + P2 => C1 )

Premise 3: When a specific action can be used as a way of creating a specific outcome, we can say that that action is consistent with having the goal of creating that outcome.

Conclusion 2: Fighting Meta is consistent with having the goal of protecting free speech. ( C1 + P3 => C2 )

Premise 4: Initiating a lawsuit against X is a way of fighting X.

Conclusion 3: Anyone engaged in a lawsuit with Meta is undertaking actions consistent with having the goal o protecting free speech. ( C2 + P4 => C3 )

Premise 5: Elon Musk is engaged in a lawsuit with Meta.

Conclusion 4: Elon Musk is behaving in a way consistent with having the goal of protecting free speech. ( C3 + P5 => C4 )

QED

Now, I you can take this argument down by knocking out any of the premises. It relies on all five premises. You can also disagree with the logical conclusions.

I would be curious to know what you think is the weakest of those premises.