• Azure@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    “We do not condone death threats and will continue to remove accounts when we believe their posts represent targeted harassment or a credible threat of violence. But not all heated language crosses the line into a death threat,” Graber said in a weekend thread. “Wisely or not, many people use violent imagery when they’re arguing or venting. We debated whether a “death threat” needs to be specific and direct in order to cause harm, and what it would mean for people’s ability to engage in heated discussions on Bluesky if we prohibited this kind of speech.”

    Well I was curious about Bluesky (they’re still on a waitlist when I check so even their beta has bad actors lol) but a space that hems and haws about death threats? You can be the rudest son of a bitch and never threaten harm! This reminds me of that stupid decision by the Supreme Court that “oh well they didn’t REALLY intend to kill you”. If someone threatens me, it becomes my job to decide if it was real or not? Wtf?

    Goddamn free speech absolutism has taken some crazy pills. I remember ‘fighting words’ concept, a death threat used to be understood as almost enough to warrant self-defense preemptively. Now everyone does it and “don’t really mean it”. 🙄

    • interolivary@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      And extremist right-wingers do mean it. Naturally they’ll claim they don’t because most other people aren’t sociopaths, but it’s no accident that the majority of political violence comes from the right.

      • Azure@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        yup! I also know there are some in ‘safe’ social groups who make the threats because they, as a member of that group, never (or so rarely they aren’t ACTUALLY worried) get attacked. But the groups they use death threats against DO experience such violence, (a fact that the free speech absolutist will argue against, while not even listening to the facts of the matter) and at the very least, I know I second guess the effort of engaging anyone who is willing to threaten to hurt me specifically. Or a question the value of talking with someone like that.

        So that is why free speech absolutists LIKE being allowed to make death threats: those who experience violence disengage (or leave) and no one arguing makes them feel in the right. “No one is disagreeing, it means I am correct! It has nothing to do with the shotgun I put in the face of anyone who talks to me!”

        It is horrifying.

    • cavemeat@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yup, because minorities hearing hatred and “plausible deniability” death threats all day is definitely not damaging at all.