• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cancel culture IRL

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dr. Keith said:
Cancel culture thrives on sharing.
Click to expand...
Sharing isn't shaming, is it? Granted, some ISF'ers who found what either Andy or Danielle did to be shameful now know about it. I cannot take credit for shaming either of them, though. I haven't said that either one should repent nor that either one should be punished.

ETA: I'm not sure how we can reasonably discuss "cancel culture" without discussing specific attempts at cancellation. Any ideas?
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
Sharing isn't shaming, is it? Granted, some ISF'ers who found what either Andy or Danielle did to be shameful now know about it. I cannot take credit for shaming either of them, though. I haven't said that either one should repent nor that either one should be punished.
Click to expand...

That seems a little "will no-one rid me of this turbulent priest?" You're admitting that you amplified the shaming, but that because you personally didn't say that you thought s/he should be shamed that you bear absolutely zero culpability if your actions happen to have facilitated the shaming.

ETA: I'm not sure how we can reasonably discuss "cancel culture" without discussing specific attempts at cancellation. Any ideas?
Click to expand...

How about discussing matters which are resolved? You yourself have admitted that when you posted the OP you had no idea at all how the situation would develop, although you imagined it going differently to how it did. I would have thought it trivially obvious that if you want to have a serious, fact-based discussion about a subject that the examples you should use to illustrate it should be ones about which the facts at the very least can be known.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
That seems a little "will no-one rid me of this turbulent priest?" You're admitting that you amplified the shaming, but that because you personally didn't say that you thought s/he should be shamed that you bear absolutely zero culpability if your actions happen to have facilitated the shaming.
Click to expand...
Come now. Did anyone here turn around and try to put pressure on Andy, Danielle, or their respective livelihoods? If so, I'll cop to culpability. If not, I won't.
 
"The fact that my actions could have caused harm of exactly the type I'm railing against is irrelevant because I'm unaware of whether or not they actually did".
 
d4m10n said:
"Made up quotes are cool and totally not strawmen."
Click to expand...

If you feel it's a straw man, you could explain your position better. As it is what you said was that you would only "cop to culpability" if someone here had "turn[ed] around and tried] to put pressure on Andy, Danielle, or their respective livelihood", all while implicitly conceding that that was a possible outcome, given that "some ISF'ers who found what either Andy or Danielle did to be shameful now know about it" due to your post. I think what I said was a reasonable paraphrase, but I'm open to you explaining how I'm wrong, and also to how you believe the ethics are substantially different between you posting that tweet here and someone re-tweeting it or indeed the woman in question making the tweet in the first place.

To me, they don't seem like different actions at all, they only differ in scale.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
lI think what I said was a reasonable paraphrase, but I'm open to you explaining how I'm wrong...
Click to expand...

Okay, how about you link the post where I was railing against the harms of cancel culture or (more on point) railing against the harms caused by discussions about specific cancellations.
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
And I don't know how to characterise your post other than "needlessly rude and not addressing what I actually said".
Click to expand...

You're accusing me of not addressing what you said? You -- Mister Mischaracterization. Surreal.

Skeptical Greg said:
I'm a little late to this dance, but was scrolling through the irst page and this caught my attention..

What is a Kroger subsidiary?
Click to expand...

Stores owned by Kroger but operated under different names (e.g., in Southern California, we have Ralphs).
 
d4m10n said:
Come now. Did anyone here turn around and try to put pressure on Andy, Danielle, or their respective livelihoods? If so, I'll cop to culpability. If not, I won't.
Click to expand...

Right. So you're saying that you didn't expect anyone to actually take that case seriously enough to get into a mob with torches and pitchforks either way, even when you give it a bit more exposure... yet you used it as an example of that anyway. And you managed to preach for a few days about how people should think before joining such a mob, yet somehow in all that time it never occurred to you that that's the whole reason why such cases don't get a mob, while cases where someone was genuinely an awful person do.

Oh wait, you were just doing the usual false equivalence dance, that is so usual when such defenses come up for why awful behaviour should have no consequences. Here's a totally non-equivalent case, let's pretend it's equivalent, so let's draw conclusions for the non-equivalent cases from it, right?
 
Last edited:
HansMustermann said:
So you're saying that you didn't expect anyone to actually take that case seriously enough to get into a mob with torches and pitchforks either way, even when you give it a bit more exposure...
Click to expand...

Anyone on a skeptic discussion forum wherein people purportedly value getting their facts straight. Since we hadn't yet heard from either Andy or the maskless people in the store, it's obviously premature to pick up our torches. (Unless you're British and your torch takes batteries.)

HansMustermann said:
And you managed to preach for a few days about how people should think before joining such a mob...
Click to expand...
I'm just glad you guys came to hear my sermons. The collection plates will be around shortly.

HansMustermann said:
Oh wait, you were just doing the usual false equivalence dance, that is so usual when such defenses come up for why awful behaviour should have no consequences.
Click to expand...
I fairly specifically disclaimed the idea that all cancellations are equivalent at post #110.
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
How did you make the leap from "Individual X ought not lose their job" to "Public accountability for bad actors is a lost cause," though?



Seems to me that some shamings and/or sackings are obvious overreactions, while others are appropriate reactions to (workplace) incapacity or (personal) immorality. Plenty of cases lie in a gray area as well, IMO. Can we discuss this topic without hand-wringing? I'd like to think so.
Click to expand...

What discussion where you hoping to spur by posting the original OP? It is noticeably light on content or prompts, just a link to an event.

What more is there to say about this incident? Some rando tried to gin up an internet mob to get some grocery store worker fired, and it failed. I suppose even the failed attempts of cancellation are part of the larger context of cancel culture, but it's hard to make a lot of conclusions using this example. It's definitely not an example of an unhinged cancel culture, because the public pretty quickly saw through the complaint and dismissed it as tedious nonsense. If anything, it's proof that the internet mob has some ability to see nuance and exercise at least some degree of skepticism.

Using the term "cancel culture" is begging the question. It's a term that presumes that social consequences for bad behavior is a somewhat recent development, which is obviously untrue. It assumes that this events are somehow connected, but the events often vary the spectrum of bad behavior. There are novel elements to modern taboos, such as the internet or the growing lack of patience for public racists and other bigots that previously would have been tolerated or even celebrated. Using the term assumes a connection to other cancellation events, when the only connection seems to be conservatives crying about it.

Cancel culture implies some connection between events like Brett Weinstein and Amy Cooper, which seems entirely spurious, other than right wing pundits will try to spin up a narrative about SJW wokescolds coming to take scalps.

Conservatives have been crying about "politically correct" culture for decades. There's nothing new about this behavior.
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
Here you go:
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't make sense to publicly shame this person, which is why the person that initiated it is being widely mocked for attempting to do so.

The story has gotten some publicity, but I don't see meaningful public shaming coming towards Kroeger Andy. The lion's share of the criticism seems pointed towards either Kroeger corporate policy or the person who posted the video.
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
Sharing isn't shaming, is it? Granted, some ISF'ers who found what either Andy or Danielle did to be shameful now know about it. I cannot take credit for shaming either of them, though. I haven't said that either one should repent nor that either one should be punished.

ETA: I'm not sure how we can reasonably discuss "cancel culture" without discussing specific attempts at cancellation. Any ideas?
Click to expand...

Maybe do a bit of basic research about the issue prior to posting and then post with a clear opinion on what you see and what is good or bad about it. Do something to start the discussion other than: Look at that! What the hell is that!?!
 
Dr. Keith said:
Maybe do a bit of basic research about the issue prior to posting and then post with a clear opinion on what you see and what is good or bad about it.
Click to expand...

Why, though? What's wrong with soliticing other people's opinions, especially while you're still mulling something over?
 
Last edited:
Derail on punching racists split to here.

Please keep to the topic of this thread, thank you.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: zooterkin
 
FWIW - I did not intend this thread to be about just one attempted "cancellation" but rather about the broader phenomenon of leveraging social platforms to get an offending individual demonetized, deplatformed, disemployed, or otherwise sanctioned IRL as the result of collective protest.

If there is an effort underway to ensure that the aforementioned tube racist gets sacked in addition to getting knocked TF out, that would be on topic, IMO.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom