You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: My YouTube Channel Is On The Verge Of Deletion
If I recall your positions correctly , you are anti-regulation and pro-private property. By your own standard , you shouldn't have any issue with a private (non govt) company enforcing it's TOS in which you are "free to participate".
He hasn't said he has a problem with them enforcing their TOS. If he doesn't believe he's violated their TOS, then he's correct to call attention to the mistake that they're making and ask for support.
Nothing inconsistent about that. You're just bobbling the Xs and Os of it and then accusing him of hypocrisy.
In your mind, what? It's fair game for other people to complain to YouTube about him, but he's not allowed to ask his followers to show support? That's consistency to you?
Here is the inconsistency :
Stefan has been a private propery rights above all kind of guy all his career , what that leads to is the monopoly like FB/TW has over the digital town square.
Current situation is the logical outcome of his own philosophy and he is complaining against it ,
surely he is taking a subdued tone in his complaints because he still has hopes that situation is resolvable with youtube. It's the classical case of be careful what you wish for , it might just come true.
Here is Stefan ranting in favor of monopolies ...
Keep in mind , this doesn't stop here and FB/TW will censor all of the anti -establishment voices ( left or right) as they rolled out the phase 1 of demonetization last year.
Even if that's true it wouldn't be hypocrisy, unless he was trying to strip them if their property rights for some reason (which of course he isn't).
You're also assuming his "complaint" is based only around the idea of it being a large company. If this happened on Vimeo or if there was no monopoly sort of thing, he may still wish to not have strikes on his account.
And no, it's a pretty lousy assumption that property rights is what leads to centralization and monopolies. You realize we live under a state and that these platforms exist in a controlled/regulated environment right?
Seems like you just don't like Stefan lol.
Yes, Lol indeed.
That's the whole point they don't exist under appropriate regulation , if they did , such monopoly would not exist.
Under appropriate regulation ,maybe as a utility , political speech would be treated under first amendment /free speech mandate . Just like ISPs can't block Infowar for customers , FB shouldn't be able to block it as well.
It's pretty obvious he is complaining since youtube has a large audience. I don't see how your tangent about vimeo is relevant at all.
#notanargument
Oh, you're saying you want them to be controlled so that the controllers force them to let everyone use their platform? That seems awful to me and unlikely to work out as you want lol
But in any case you should think through what inconsistency/hypocrisy means. Stef would only be guilty of it if he said "free market / non aggression" and did otherwise. Asking for support to help stay on the platform is a non aggressive action.
The Vimeo thing is saying that the size and scope of the site has nothing to do with whether Stef's behavior violates free market / non-aggression
Lol.
Nice try, kiddo. That sentence wasn't intended as an argument. I was just adding a little flair to the end :p The arguments were up above it
Alright man. ..have a nice day
you too
Also if you try to find you can find many glaring u-turns he has taken from his own philosophy...off the top of my head , I am reminded of the time when he DMCAd someone ..while preaching he doesn't support copyright at all.
Bingo. I had a tremendous respect for Molyneux before his slide into hypocrisy that began at that DCMA incident. He has produced some great material and he is a deep thinker.
I asked several folks who interacted with him regularly like Dana Martin what is going on with Molyneux and nobody has a good answer. Dana said he just stopped communicating with her and she added others were "cut off" at roughly the same time in much the same way.
I do have to agree with the person who replied to you:
It's not property rights that cause that. Monopolies wouldn't last long if government didn't provide subsidies and protections that encourage them.
I would like to draw your attention to below..specifically the "above all" part.
Of course we need to have private property right but its all about balance.