• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PAX uninvites Colin Moriarty (PAX refuses refunds, Colin to refund 20 people out of own pocket)

zeorhymer

Gold Member
Nov 9, 2013
1,298
752
610
San Francisco, CA
God damn. You are the extreme left that people are afraid of and don't want to associate with.

Society should do this....people should be smarter....social media isn't a big deal...."evil" people should be destroyed.

Fuck man, nothing is your fault and you are trying to wash your hands clean of this, but you are the epitome of identitarianism / authoritarianism movement.
 

Spukc

Member
Jan 24, 2015
9,236
4,485
555
Bruh........Bill Cosby, R. Kelly, Harvey Weinstein (and the MANY other people that got caught up in the #metoo movement), CBS VP "Hayley Gold" (said the Las Vegas people murdered don't deserve sympathy because most country music fans are Republican gun toters. She was fired), Rashard Mendenhall (NFL player that was mad that people were celebrating the death of Osama Bin Laden. He lost all his endorsement deals), Gilbert Gottfired (made offensive jokes about the Japense Tsunami after many died, but didn't realize that most of Aflac's insurance business was done in Japan. He was the voice of the Aflac duck. He was fired). The list goes on and on!

YES, I'm very proud that social media played a part in all of these folks getting damaging consequences to their words and/or actions.
No offense man but i am glad most of the people on this planet are not like you.
We would still be hunting witches.
 
Jun 26, 2013
3,408
1,769
680
Bruh........Bill Cosby, R. Kelly, Harvey Weinstein (and the MANY other people that got caught up in the #metoo movement), CBS VP "Hayley Gold" (said the Las Vegas people murdered don't deserve sympathy because most country music fans are Republican gun toters. She was fired), Rashard Mendenhall (NFL player that was mad that people were celebrating the death of Osama Bin Laden. He lost all his endorsement deals), Gilbert Gottfired (made offensive jokes about the Japense Tsunami after many died, but didn't realize that most of Aflac's insurance business was done in Japan. He was the voice of the Aflac duck. He was fired). The list goes on and on!

YES, I'm very proud that social media played a part in all of these folks getting damaging consequences to their words and/or actions.
"Here's a list of people's careers getting ruined. Therefore, my argument is correct."

This is both an ad hoc and false equivalence argument, but I'm not surprised to see this coming from a hyper-authoritarian.
 

joe_zazen

Member
May 2, 2017
1,374
949
355
This is something that our 21st-century society will have to learn to engage with. Many of us will have to learn how to view social media and understand that even though 5,000 people are hounding you, it doesn't actually mean you will be destroyed. Sometimes it's just a bunch of jerks that are vocal and creative enough to come up with an interesting hashtag. If there's no meat to their complaints, it'll eventually blow over.
The problem, as i see it, is damaged people without a working conscience using the social media to try to destroy people they target. And there are these sociopaths on the right, left, and everywhere in-between.

Best thing would be to have a sociopath/psychopath ‘defective empathy conscience’ test and ban these people from social media (and running for public office, controlling major corps, or having high level military jobs while we are at it).

sociopaths—while their consciences are defective and cannot create and maintain human relationships—are not with out feelings. They can and do get deeply attached to causes and ideas, and will fight for them. And because they have a lot of anger, and rarely are able to hold a job, they have a lot of time and energy. They are ~ 5% of the population...psychopaths are too busy running the world and making money and accumulating power to post on social media.

I could be wrong, but i think that is the real issue with social media: defective people of all political stripes wanting to hurt and maim. How to identify and neutralise their influence?

Anyway, thats my theory, because i dont believe normal people with working consciences would hound a mentally ill person to death and be ok with their actions ‘post mortem’, so to speak, even if it did advance the rights of bisexual porn stars.
 

Xaero Gravity

Member
May 12, 2013
9,151
3,193
735
God damn. You are the extreme left that people are afraid of and don't want to associate with.

Society should do this....people should be smarter....social media isn't a big deal...."evil" people should be destroyed.

Fuck man, nothing is your fault and you are trying to wash your hands clean of this, but you are the epitome of identitarianism / authoritarianism movement.
Careful, he's going to end up unfairly labeling you a racist, as is the modus operandi for folks like him.
 

monegames

Member
Sep 26, 2014
2,193
1,774
530
It was a mutual agreement for him to leave. It was best for all parties. Greg has spoken on this publically already and it's clear both of those guys understood that their business relationship was over (and so too was their real friendship over).
At this point I don't think there was ever a real friendship. I believe Greg was a user, that latched on to Colin during the early days of Beyond. He kept up the pretense of friendship until their business relationship ended. Colin even reached out to him I think it was last year or so and asked him to go for lunch and Greg didn't even respond, until there was a big thread about it at the Kinda Funny reddit or their forums. He went on to make a long post about how he had moved on from that part of his life and how he cried in his wife's arms about how his business might be gone, during the whole women's day tweet fiasco.

I was a pretty big Greg fan during Beyond and the early days of Kinda Funny. Thought Colin was a bit too negative on most stuff. But, the whole thing flipped my view of them both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mckmas8808

DragoonKain

Member
Nov 13, 2013
1,928
1,166
795
The problem with social media destroying people's careers is who is deciding whose careers should be destroyed. It's any moron with a blue check mark, and if you spend any time on social media you'd realize that 75% of the people in this world are morons. Just total idiots. It doesn't mean they're bad, just not bright. Social media has given any moron who signs up credibility based on their follower count. So if some nutjob who has a blue check mark and 150k followers decides some normal everyday guy "needs to go" or be doxxed or fired from their job based off a tweet that they didn't like in their unhinged mind, then they have the power to make it happen.

And being that so many people go to social media for the strict purpose of getting angry, it's just feeding a monster giving these people that kinda pull.
 

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
41,556
4,353
1,630
No offense man but i am glad most of the people on this planet are not like you.
We would still be hunting witches.
Hunting witches? Really? That's how you view those situations?

"Here's a list of people's careers getting ruined. Therefore, my argument is correct."

This is both an ad hoc and false equivalence argument, but I'm not surprised to see this coming from a hyper-authoritarian.
Ad hoc? It's literally what I was talking about. Social media had a huge effect on every one of those situations. In some of them it literally started on Twitter. So yeah.....I'm not surprised when someone makes a great point that you disagree with you do the same lame response that 50% of the internet does.

The problem, as i see it, is damaged people without a working conscience using the social media to try to destroy people they target. And there are these sociopaths on the right, left, and everywhere in-between.

Best thing would be to have a sociopath/psychopath ‘defective empathy conscience’ test and ban these people from social media (and running for public office, controlling major corps, or having high level military jobs while we are at it).

sociopaths—while their consciences are defective and cannot create and maintain human relationships—are not with out feelings. They can and do get deeply attached to causes and ideas, and will fight for them. And because they have a lot of anger, and rarely are able to hold a job, they have a lot of time and energy. They are ~ 5% of the population...psychopaths are too busy running the world and making money and accumulating power to post on social media.

I could be wrong, but i think that is the real issue with social media: defective people of all political stripes wanting to hurt and maim. How to identify and neutralise their influence?

Anyway, thats my theory, because i dont believe normal people with working consciences would hound a mentally ill person to death and be ok with their actions ‘post mortem’, so to speak, even if it did advance the rights of bisexual porn stars.
I do agree with you that we have a lot of crazy people on social media whose main job is to take down people and ruin careers. That absolutely suck. I'm not sure how anyone can neutralize their influence though. But I don't think it's as hard as you think it is to post of Twitter and Facebook. It really doesn't take that long of a time. Someone can go on a Twitter campaign to get someone fired while holding a full-time job. Just give them small 5-8 minute pockets like old school smoke breaks, so that they can do their thing and in 2 weeks their task can be completed.

At this point I don't think there was ever a real friendship. I believe Greg was a user, that latched on to Colin during the early days of Beyond. He kept up the pretense of friendship until their business relationship ended. Colin even reached out to him I think it was last year or so and asked him to go for lunch and Greg didn't even respond, until there was a big thread about it at the Kinda Funny reddit or their forums. He went on to make a long post about how he had moved on from that part of his life and how he cried in his wife's arms about how his business might be gone, during the whole women's day tweet fiasco.

I was a pretty big Greg fan during Beyond and the early days of Kinda Funny. Thought Colin was a bit too negative on most stuff. But, the whole thing flipped my view of them both.
I think they were real friends while creating Kinda Funny. But to me it never felt the same as when they were on Beyond. You could feel the shift happening between them two. It was as if the pateron business was getting in the way of something. I could never understand why I felt like the chemistry was changing, but clearly the friendship behind the scenes wasn't what it appeared to be in front of the camera.
 
Last edited:
Jun 26, 2013
3,408
1,769
680
Ad hoc? It's literally what I was talking about. Social media had a huge effect on every one of those situations. In some of them it literally started on Twitter. So yeah.....I'm not surprised when someone makes a great point that you disagree with you do the same lame response that 50% of the internet does.
It's a fallacy as you're just listing a bunch of examples and then, use that to claim that ruining people's careers through social media is a great thing. It's also a false equivalence because Colin's tweet is nowhere near as bad as the examples you provided. The mob that was outraged was outraged on behalf of the so-called "victims" that never asked for it.

So no, you did not make a great point. You made a fallacious and extremely inadequate point. Therefore, my response is warranted and not the so-called "lame response" that "50% of the internet does" because obviously, you have the data that backs up your claim.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Godzilla Emu

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
41,556
4,353
1,630
Colin may be running his own convention at this rate.

Can you provide the same thing for Kinda Funny over the last 6 months? I'm curious if Colin is actually do as well or better than them since their split-up.

Thanks.

It's a fallacy as you're just listing a bunch of examples and then, use that to claim that ruining people's careers through social media is a great thing. It's also a false equivalence because Colin's tweet is nowhere near as bad as the examples you provided. The mob that was outraged was outraged on behalf of the so-called "victims" that never asked for it.

So no, you did not make a great point. You made a fallacious and extremely inadequate point. Therefore, my response is warranted and not the so-called "lame response" that "50% of the internet does" because obviously, you have the data that backs up your claim.
How can it be a fallacy, when I was making a point directly related to this comment.

"People's careers and lives have been destroyed by "social media BS." It's bad enough that extremists weaponize social media for their own agenda."

My follow-up to that comment was that some people's careers needed to be destroyed given what they did. And that social media doesn't always get it wrong and that it's not always "BS".
 

FranXico

Member
Dec 7, 2010
6,409
2,627
855
My follow-up to that comment was that some people's careers needed to be destroyed given what they did.
Who is to judge? Who decides which offenses should get ones career terminated, and which shouldn't?

Can't you see how dangerous that line of thought is?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Godzilla Emu

SpiceRacz

Member
Feb 27, 2017
297
253
290
Hazuki Dojo
Can you provide the same thing for Kinda Funny over the last 6 months? I'm curious if Colin is actually do as well or better than them since their split-up.
Last I checked Colin actually has 1000+ more patrons.

Kinda Funny is sitting around 4500 compared to CLS' 5800.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mckmas8808

Keihart

Member
Jun 23, 2013
2,255
146
475
Can you provide the same thing for Kinda Funny over the last 6 months? I'm curious if Colin is actually do as well or better than them since their split-up.

Thanks.



How can it be a fallacy, when I was making a point directly related to this comment.

"People's careers and lives have been destroyed by "social media BS." It's bad enough that extremists weaponize social media for their own agenda."

My follow-up to that comment was that some people's careers needed to be destroyed given what they did. And that social media doesn't always get it wrong and that it's not always "BS".
https://graphtreon.com/creator/kindafunny
 
Last edited:

Roufianos

Member
May 14, 2015
1,742
25
325
^ Haha, don't show that to Greg, he'll spend the night crying in his gf's arms.

They're trash without Colin. Tim's a host and Greg is loud and excitable and that's about it. Jared was the only person who could offer insight similar to Colin but obviously he's gone now too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mckmas8808

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
41,556
4,353
1,630
Who is to judge? Who decides which offenses should get ones career terminated, and which shouldn't?

Can't you see how dangerous that line of thought is?
Of course it's dangerous, but the good thing is social media is just a megaphone to bring attention to a cause or situation. Ultimately it's the companies that hire the talent (or the police in some cases) that will be doing the picking on whose career gets terminated.

Last I checked Colin actually has 1000+ more patrons.

Kinda Funny is sitting around 4500 compared to CLS' 5800.
WHOA!

And like I said earlier, sometimes the person in the middle of the storm can't pay too much attention to the noise on social media. In my opinion, this has actually worked out for Colin business-wise. And to some degree, I hope Greg Miller and his team learn from this. Just because the noise level gets really loud on social media, it doesn't mean you have to take huge measures to fix it. Sometimes things just blow over.

And Jared Petty gone now, this is a learning lesson for them. You can't just think it's okay to lose talent like that and think things will continue to be okay. They clearly disliked Colin's political views, but I wouldn't want to lose that kind of talent in that way. To the point where Colin can't even guest host with Greg once a month or do some kind of crossover Youtube podcast where it's Kinda Funny meets The Last Stand. They could have taken that crossover show on the road once or twice a year and it could have been fun. :(

Kinda Funny is down 15% over the last 6 months, whereas Colin's podcast is up 16% over the same time period. Numbers don't lie. There are so many video game conversations over the last 2 years where they NEEDED Colin's voice and libertarian viewpoint to diversify the show. Developer Crunch, MK11 and Sony changing the clothing on female video game characters, did Battlefield 5 go woke, etc. Welp! It is what it is.

Does anybody know if Colin's co-host actually got better over the last year?
 

iconmasterX

Member
Jan 27, 2018
3,797
5,350
625
Can you provide the same thing for Kinda Funny over the last 6 months? I'm curious if Colin is actually do as well or better than them since their split-up.
Edit: I see @Keihart has anticipated me.

Neither publicizes the dollar amount, but the trends are pretty telling.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mckmas8808

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
5,405
6,559
615
Bruh........Bill Cosby, R. Kelly, Harvey Weinstein (and the MANY other people that got caught up in the #metoo movement), CBS VP "Hayley Gold" (said the Las Vegas people murdered don't deserve sympathy because most country music fans are Republican gun toters. She was fired), Rashard Mendenhall (NFL player that was mad that people were celebrating the death of Osama Bin Laden. He lost all his endorsement deals), Gilbert Gottfired (made offensive jokes about the Japense Tsunami after many died, but didn't realize that most of Aflac's insurance business was done in Japan. He was the voice of the Aflac duck. He was fired). The list goes on and on!
so wait a minute, three men who used their power to rape women over decades are equivelant to an NFL player who thinks it is gross to see Americans openly cheering bloodlist? or a comedian who made one bad joke?

this is why SJWs are crazy. they see everything as the same, no nuance.
 

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
41,556
4,353
1,630
It's gotten better. They're hitting their stride now, I would say.
I might download a few podcast episodes and check it out for this weekend.

so wait a minute, three men who used their power to rape women over decades are equivelant to an NFL player who thinks it is gross to see Americans openly cheering bloodlist? or a comedian who made one bad joke?

this is why SJWs are crazy. they see everything as the same, no nuance.
No you weren't paying attention at all! Like literally. The commonality to all of those people is that social media to a large degree helped kill all of their careers. They were my examples of people that deserved to have their careers ruined with the help of social media.

I was answering another poster that said he would never want to see someone lose their career via social media in this way. These people and their situations were my evidence as to when someone deserves to lose their career or sponsorships.
 
  • Like
Reactions: #Phonepunk#

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
5,405
6,559
615
The commonality to all of those people is that social media to a large degree helped kill all of their careers. They were my examples of people that deserved to have their careers ruined with the help of social media.

I was answering another poster that said he would never want to see someone lose their career via social media in this way. These people and their situations were my evidence as to when someone deserves to lose their career or sponsorships.
i disagree with Golbert Gottfried (who doesn't seem to be cancelled, he still does work) and Rashard might be out of football but he is a writer/story editor for an HBO show, not exactly cancelled. Cosby/Weinstein are pariahs in a much more serious way. i disagree w grouping these people all together as equally deserving of having their careers ruined.
 

Petrae

Member
Nov 19, 2006
5,867
2,170
1,275
47
West Springfield, MA
www.youtube.com
i disagree with Golbert Gottfried (who doesn't seem to be cancelled, he still does work) and Rashard might be out of football but he is a writer/story editor for an HBO show, not exactly cancelled. Cosby/Weinstein are pariahs in a much more serious way. i disagree w grouping these people all together as equally deserving of having their careers ruined.
Gottfried had to struggle to remove the stigma that came with his tsunami tweets and getting unceremoniously dumped by AFLAC. He’s not all the way back— hence his decision to do smaller projects (like with AVGN) and e-begging on Cameo— but he’s not the outcast he was for awhile.

The problem with social media is that users don’t seem to learn from the idiocy... errr... “mistakes” of others. People still post stupid, stupid shit and attach their real names/employers to everything they post, thinking nothing will happen. Until it does.
 
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: mckmas8808

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
41,556
4,353
1,630
i disagree with Golbert Gottfried (who doesn't seem to be cancelled, he still does work) and Rashard might be out of football but he is a writer/story editor for an HBO show, not exactly cancelled. Cosby/Weinstein are pariahs in a much more serious way. i disagree w grouping these people all together as equally deserving of having their careers ruined.
I wasn't saying they were canceled for life. Just that their careers at the time of bad thing said or done were ruined.
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
4,950
3,766
625
I might download a few podcast episodes and check it out for this weekend.



No you weren't paying attention at all! Like literally. The commonality to all of those people is that social media to a large degree helped kill all of their careers. They were my examples of people that deserved to have their careers ruined with the help of social media.

I was answering another poster that said he would never want to see someone lose their career via social media in this way. These people and their situations were my evidence as to when someone deserves to lose their career or sponsorships.
I can't shake the feeling that this falls under "its ok when we do it" for way too many people. For every one person who financially benefits or is fairly harmed by social media, how many people with even half way decent jobs are afraid to say anything remotely political anymore because of the risk that some crazy far left mob will start a crusade to get them fired, review bombed, etc.?
 

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
41,556
4,353
1,630
I can't shake the feeling that this falls under "its ok when we do it" for way too many people. For every one person who financially benefits or is fairly harmed by social media, how many people with even half way decent jobs are afraid to say anything remotely political anymore because of the risk that some crazy far left mob will start a crusade to get them fired, review bombed, etc.?
I completely agree with you. I'd just throw in there that the crazy far right mob has had the same ability to get people fired and/or in trouble too. It's not limited to the far left.
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
4,950
3,766
625
I completely agree with you. I'd just throw in there that the crazy far right mob has had the same ability to get people fired and/or in trouble too. It's not limited to the far left.
That is true. But when these things happen, the chance off it being cause by the far right is probably akin to the chances that a mass shooter is a female.
 

IaN_GAF

Member
Sep 20, 2013
623
31
375
Edgy enough to go all errrmahgerrd-milkshake-hype to your little buddies on Twitter, but then when the target of your harassment actually responds you switch your channel to private.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TechJunk

enlyzer

Member
Oct 17, 2016
206
264
330
No one "deserves" to have his or her career ruined. This is reactionary garbage - the same animus behind the HUAC, the Hollywood blacklist, etc. - disguised as progressive action.

If one commits a crime, like that slimeball producer, or is a serial predator, there are judicial avenues to be pursued. They are to be investigated, indicted and judged by their peers. If their guilt is to be proven beyond reasonable doubt, their liberty will be forfeited and they will serve their sentence. This is why we have a State, with police powers and the monopoly of force.

There's nothing more progressive than respect for individual freedom married to the rule of law. Anti-abortion fanatics can picket Planned Parenthood, but they don't get to prevent women from having the procedure. Christian conservatives may think gays are degenerate, but they don't get to prevent LGBTQ people from making use of all the rights available to all Americans.

Conversely, opaque and diffuse mobs should not be able to harass a person's ability to earn their keep and threaten their livelihood. I know nothing about this gentleman, but a civilized and free society should not condone the ruination of someone's career over a bad joke or a terrible tweet.
 

peter42O

Member
Aug 9, 2014
2,610
290
445
No one "deserves" to have his or her career ruined. This is reactionary garbage - the same animus behind the HUAC, the Hollywood blacklist, etc. - disguised as progressive action.

If one commits a crime, like that slimeball producer, or is a serial predator, there are judicial avenues to be pursued. They are to be investigated, indicted and judged by their peers. If their guilt is to be proven beyond reasonable doubt, their liberty will be forfeited and they will serve their sentence. This is why we have a State, with police powers and the monopoly of force.

There's nothing more progressive than respect for individual freedom married to the rule of law. Anti-abortion fanatics can picket Planned Parenthood, but they don't get to prevent women from having the procedure. Christian conservatives may think gays are degenerate, but they don't get to prevent LGBTQ people from making use of all the rights available to all Americans.

Conversely, opaque and diffuse mobs should not be able to harass a person's ability to earn their keep and threaten their livelihood. I know nothing about this gentleman, but a civilized and free society should not condone the ruination of someone's career over a bad joke or a terrible tweet.
Pretty much this.
 

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
41,556
4,353
1,630
That is true. But when these things happen, the chance off it being cause by the far right is probably akin to the chances that a mass shooter is a female.
I guess it depends on who you follow on Social Media and what industries you are interested in. I've seen many times where the far right got someone fired or changed the direction someone's career was going in (for better or worse).

- Jemele Hill (ex-ESPN commentator) left ESPN due to the far right-leaning on her for not talking about sports enough and her hate for the current President.
- Ludacris (Rapper) lost his Pepsi endorsement deal due to Bill O'Reilly sparking a protest against his music (too profane and too violent).
- When Michael Vick (NFL quarterback) got released from prison, there were many right-wing radio stations and bloggers that were saying he shouldn't be able to get his job back due to him fighting dogs.
- Speaking of the NFL, Colin Kaepernick (former NFL quarterback) still doesn't have a job due to the far right-wing within America. To think he "all of a sudden" can't find a backup job at least in the league is silly. He's been blacklisted.
- And for a quick second, it felt like right-wing radio exploded when Whoopi Goldberg (comedian and TV Host) made a sexual joke about President Bush (the son) at a fundraiser. The Slim-Fast drink company got rid of her in a hurry.

But for some reason all these situations (and there are many more) get swept under the rug because it doesn't fit "The Narrative".
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
23,078
21,784
1,045
I guess it depends on who you follow on Social Media and what industries you are interested in. I've seen many times where the far right got someone fired or changed the direction someone's career was going in (for better or worse).

- When Michael Vick (NFL quarterback) got released from prison, there were many right-wing radio stations and bloggers that were saying he shouldn't be able to get his job back due to him fighting dogs.
There were plenty of Left Wing Animal Rights activists as well. He was mutually despised for what he did from all sides.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SpiceRacz

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
41,556
4,353
1,630
There were plenty of Left Wing Animal Rights activists as well. He was mutually despised for what he did from all sides.
There are, but it wasn't mutual. That I can tell you for sure! I'd say at a minimum it was 70% to 30% (numbers from my butt I know) to right-wing people that wanted him out of the NFL vs. left-wing.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
23,078
21,784
1,045
There are, but it wasn't mutual. That I can tell you for sure! I'd say at a minimum it was 70% to 30% (numbers from my butt I know) to right-wing people that wanted him out of the NFL vs. left-wing.
100% (lowball number from mine) of the AR community, and everyone and their mother who loves dogs, wanted him gone and not back in the NFL.

Anyways, this is a pointless argument. He did a scummy ass thing, but it's over and done with.
 
Last edited:

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
4,950
3,766
625
I guess it depends on who you follow on Social Media and what industries you are interested in. I've seen many times where the far right got someone fired or changed the direction someone's career was going in (for better or worse).

- Jemele Hill (ex-ESPN commentator) left ESPN due to the far right-leaning on her for not talking about sports enough and her hate for the current President.
- Ludacris (Rapper) lost his Pepsi endorsement deal due to Bill O'Reilly sparking a protest against his music (too profane and too violent).
- When Michael Vick (NFL quarterback) got released from prison, there were many right-wing radio stations and bloggers that were saying he shouldn't be able to get his job back due to him fighting dogs.
- Speaking of the NFL, Colin Kaepernick (former NFL quarterback) still doesn't have a job due to the far right-wing within America. To think he "all of a sudden" can't find a backup job at least in the league is silly. He's been blacklisted.
- And for a quick second, it felt like right-wing radio exploded when Whoopi Goldberg (comedian and TV Host) made a sexual joke about President Bush (the son) at a fundraiser. The Slim-Fast drink company got rid of her in a hurry.

But for some reason all these situations (and there are many more) get swept under the rug because it doesn't fit "The Narrative".
No, it really does not depend on who you follow. For every individual celebrity there are untold thousands of people who know if they speak their mind they might be dependent on unemployment checks to survive. Anyone who says something that might trigger the left leaning twitter crowd is at risk.

But to be clear, I'm only talking about regular people and not celebrities who put themselves in the public light. I would assume in that realm it would be more down the middle.
 

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
41,556
4,353
1,630
No, it really does not depend on who you follow. For every individual celebrity there are untold thousands of people who know if they speak their mind they might be dependent on unemployment checks to survive. Anyone who says something that might trigger the left leaning twitter crowd is at risk.

But to be clear, I'm only talking about regular people and not celebrities who put themselves in the public light. I would assume in that realm it would be more down the middle.
Maybe the left-leaning twitter crowd is very vocal, whereas the right-leaning corporate offices and jobs in middle America aren't vocal but the consequences are equally risky for a progressive to speak their mind and live their true life publicly. Even today, just being openly gay will get you fired in many jobs in "fly-over" country. Being pro "Black Lives Matter" in some settings can get you the stink eye because many in conservative America thinks that means you are anti-police.

It can be bad on both sides is all I'm saying.
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
4,950
3,766
625
Maybe the left-leaning twitter crowd is very vocal, whereas the right-leaning corporate offices and jobs in middle America aren't vocal but the consequences are equally risky for a progressive to speak their mind and live their true life publicly. Even today, just being openly gay will get you fired in many jobs in "fly-over" country. Being pro "Black Lives Matter" in some settings can get you the stink eye because many in conservative America thinks that means you are anti-police.

It can be bad on both sides is all I'm saying.
They are not equally risky. In the context of regular people you are comparing someone who might lose a job, with people at risk of losing a job and never getting another one above minimum wage because future employers can use Google and say "I don't want that backlash."

I'm so tired of the both sides defense of professed do gooders who will harm anyone if the cause is right. I understand what you are saying, but when I see middle class people getting attacked for wrong think, I take no solace in knowing that some other person I also disagree with is a dick too.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Spukc

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
41,556
4,353
1,630
Cancelling his Fireside Chats due to fears that someone might misuse knowledge of his home address:


Understandable, I think.
What in the world!?!?! I just started downloading these since people in this thread started speaking well of Colin.

They are not equally risky. In the context of regular people you are comparing someone who might lose a job, with people at risk of losing a job and never getting another one above minimum wage because future employers can use Google and say "I don't want that backlash."

I'm so tired of the both sides defense of professed do gooders who will harm anyone if the cause is right. I understand what you are saying, but when I see middle class people getting attacked for wrong think, I take no solace in knowing that some other person I also disagree with is a dick too.
We'll just agree to disagree. But it's not a both sides defense.
 
Last edited:

Hecaton117

Neo Member
Dec 3, 2018
33
80
110

On the subject of people being afraid to speak about politics or other contentious issues for fear of losing their livelihood or because of the backlash I have this video from David Pakman who is a political commentator on youtube/twitch.

He talks about how whenever he goes into certain issues he gets an incredibly volatile response from a slice of the left that makes his online experience insufferable and results in him avoiding those topics because of that backlash. He makes a distinction here between the right that simply disagree with him which isn't noteworthy but expected, and points out how this particular slice of the left that he's talking about go all in on him for his positions that honestly I find to be perfectly reasonable positions to hold.

I think that any group that threatens rational discourse is a detriment to progress as a whole, regardless of their stated aims. If you can't even have a normal discussion or conversation without certain people going insane then I think for the sake of facilitating discussion those people need to have their influence limited as much as possible so discussion can occur.

If even someone like David Pakman who is probably one of the most progressive commentators I know avoids talking about issues which he gives examples of in the video because of people who cannot handle differing opinions on these subjects then I think that lends more credence to the idea that a certain segment of the left online are not actually a positive force but a negative one due to their overall influence on political/social discourse. The segment of the left that believes that anyone who criticizes their unassailable positions or holds ones they find to be anathema need to be destroyed.
 

Xaero Gravity

Member
May 12, 2013
9,151
3,193
735
Fireside Chats was a cool concept, but it's totally understandable as to why he considers it too risky to continue. At least his main content isn't getting cancelled.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Believer1
Aug 29, 2018
1,306
1,781
395
34
Bartow, Florida, USA

On the subject of people being afraid to speak about politics or other contentious issues for fear of losing their livelihood or because of the backlash I have this video from David Pakman who is a political commentator on youtube/twitch.

He talks about how whenever he goes into certain issues he gets an incredibly volatile response from a slice of the left that makes his online experience insufferable and results in him avoiding those topics because of that backlash. He makes a distinction here between the right that simply disagree with him which isn't noteworthy but expected, and points out how this particular slice of the left that he's talking about go all in on him for his positions that honestly I find to be perfectly reasonable positions to hold.

I think that any group that threatens rational discourse is a detriment to progress as a whole, regardless of their stated aims. If you can't even have a normal discussion or conversation without certain people going insane then I think for the sake of facilitating discussion those people need to have their influence limited as much as possible so discussion can occur.

If even someone like David Pakman who is probably one of the most progressive commentators I know avoids talking about issues which he gives examples of in the video because of people who cannot handle differing opinions on these subjects then I think that lends more credence to the idea that a certain segment of the left online are not actually a positive force but a negative one due to their overall influence on political/social discourse. The segment of the left that believes that anyone who criticizes their unassailable positions or holds ones they find to be anathema need to be destroyed.
There is nobody on this planet with 'progressive enough' views that some lunatic won't issue a death threat for not being progressive enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Off Duty Ninja

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
41,556
4,353
1,630
If even someone like David Pakman who is probably one of the most progressive commentators I know avoids talking about issues which he gives examples of in the video because of people who cannot handle differing opinions on these subjects then I think that lends more credence to the idea that a certain segment of the left online are not actually a positive force but a negative one due to their overall influence on political/social discourse. The segment of the left that believes that anyone who criticizes their unassailable positions or holds ones they find to be anathema need to be destroyed.
And there's 1,000s of those same crazy lunatics on the right also. Just go to Jemele Hill's Twitter page and you'll see 100s of them per day. This is something that us 21st Century, 1st world people will have to understand going forward. A few years back many of them considered themselves to be part of the "Tea Party". They swore Obama was born in Africa and that he was a Muslim and was against most slightly right leaning policies. Now that Trump is in office, you're seeing it from the exact opposite side where you see the craziest 20% of the left attacking people for things that are central-left policies and beliefs.

Every 5-10 years you'll see the pendulum swing back and forth with whose more aggressive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DigitalScrap