We did leave it....this was two days ago. It ended with me questioning his "disagreement on rewards" of thirty cents lol. Seriously...whatever. I'm tired. And now a bit sad to be honest. Maybe abuse is the wrong word, but it's shitty, how about that? It's very shitty to use flags instead of words to get a point across. And I don't really understand where this is coming from with you. I didn't flag him as you can see.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Perhaps it is shitty, but this is not a disagreement over which song is better, or whether or not you should drink bottled water or not. It's over the very hot button issue of vaccinations and whether or not they are safe.
People's lives hang in the balance and lots of people have personal experience with it, one side or the other. I'm not a bit surprised that someone wanted to flag emotionally charged posts against vaccinations.
What I am surprised at though is you guys browbeating this guy with bogus rules on how to flag and a requirement for dialogue (which he has done). So I stepped in. I don't really agree with his tone but I'm not the tone police.
I'm sure you're tired, it's a lot of argument over nothing really. But I hope you guys will take future flags in a better spirit, especially super tiny ones.
I really like your posts, and usually find I agree with you, or am quite comfortable agreeing to disagree with you.
I, however, don't agree with you here, although I do appreciate you standing up for an underdog.
He flagged, and was not flagged back, even though he was insulting, even accusatory. I find the restraint shown by his victims both extraordinary, and markedly compassionate.
Hell, he practically accused Mary of malpractice, manslaughter, and murder - even genocide.
I don't find them at fault here even an iota. The 'browbeating' seemed to me reasonable advice, as he will not long last on this platform if he continues flagging whales that can crush him with one vote.
You know this is true. What @canadian-coconut told him was not a threat, but good advice. If it was a threat, she'd have carried it out, and not bothered to tell him it was bad for him to flag whales.
She'd just have taught him.
I don’t believe I ever accused anyone of murder, or genocide. That’s hyperbolic. And if she ever told her patients that they should avoid vaccines, then In my opinion that is malpractice. But there is nothing in her post that would lead me to think she did that.
Also, I have to take issue with the notion that I should never flag a whale, lest they crush me. That, to me, betrays a much bigger problem with the platform than anything I’ve done here.
Am I to assume that if you’ve been here longer, made more friends, accumulated more cash, that your content is better? That it is intrinsically deserving of its rewards? I guess I can only dissent if it’s the little guy talking?
I don’t think it’s really worth patting anyone on the back for not engaging in flag abuse against me. In fact, I don’t really think it shows much restraint at all to repeatedly make threats (I’ll give you an opportunity to remove your flags, and if you don’t I’m flagging you for abuse?).
Y’all don’t have to agree with my convictions about vaccines, or my opinion of this post, but let’s get off our high horses, please. Threats are rude, just as rude as anything I’ve written for sure.
Well said
Not acting on a threat does not make it any less of a threat. Look I honestly read it as a threat, I think it's a reasonable interpretation but I've mentioned elsewhere that I concede I could be wrong about it's intent. I guess that's the thing about intent, especially via text, but again, reasonable interpretation.
I know the guy was rude, but my response was need, the flags were legit. I don't defend the content of his speech, I never did. But I don't dismiss rude people on the basis of their rudeness. The insistence of all parties to thrash this issue out is all the more reason to make the central points clear.
Flagging is fine. Disagreements are fine. Threats should be taken seriously (and confirmed obviously!). There is no platform consensus on flagging and no one can claim to "own" it.
There isn't consensus, because flaggots exist. Her cautions to @americaurusrex are spot on, because if he did that to @berniesanders, he'd end up like @skeptic - or like @berniesanders himself, after @dan was through with him, and you know it.
She didn't threaten him, she warned him of very real dangers to his account.
Yea maybe I'd take that point of the danger of ending up like @skeptic (though, he's nasty af) if it wasn't couched in a rejection of the flags because of the content, not some objective advice.
I don’t think we need to get too bogged down with whether or not people demanding I remove my flags are being threatening or not.
For one thing, they have every right to threaten to flag me. I’m a big boy, I can take it. I think the broader point is that expending all this energy to convince me to remove flags, because my reasons don’t mesh with your vision of the platform, and making your vision of the platform out to be some requirement I have to follow, is not in good taste. Just like I’m sure you find my flags in poor taste.
I didn’t really take the response to my flags as friendly advice, but I’m happy to entertain the idea that that’s the spirit with which it was intended.