Liberal Democracy thread.

Marvin the Martian

Starting here

In the context of a thread where the Ship is being held up as an exemplar of how restricting free speech can work for the common good, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to point out the fact that said “common good” has come at the price of removing or otherwise silencing all dissent.

I don’t wish to debate the Ships moderation policy there or here, merely to point out that any definition of “the common good” that is only actually good for those who agree with it and actively punishes and silences those who disagree isn’t particularly “common”. Is that ok?

ChastMastr

Just agreeing with @Marvin the Martian here.

Alan Cresswell

I'd disagree with the description of Ship policy as "restricting free speech". It's much more about enabling free speech, by allowing those normally excluded from public discourse to be heard, so diametrically opposed to restricting.

Marvin the Martian

It was pease (a member of the admin team) who so described it.