When Should the Unethical Be Illegal?

[QuestioningMind]

Then you didn't address what I have said before: You are, out of your volition, making use of this forum where such a rule (which includes banning people) is enforced. This entails you don't actually mind much about such a rule, because otherwise you wouldn't be here. That would be contradictory.
If it is a big deal to someone else and not a big deal to you, it is only natural to act in accordance with what the other person wants.

No, I don't mind it that much as a rule. I think it's rather silly, but I didn't create the forum and whoever did can make whatever rules they want and ban anyone they want. It's just an online forum. That's a far cry from laws in a free democratic society in which I have a say.

And in the free democratic society that I'd prefer to live in, I wouldn't want a woman to be held legally liable just because she bruised some ex-boyfriend's ego by truthfully telling her girlfriends that the guy had the smallest stick she'd ever seen. Or to turn it around I wouldn't want a man to be held legally liable just because he bruised some ex-girlfriend's ego by truthfully telling his guy friends that she hardly ever wanted to have sex and wasn't very good at it when she did.

In a free society I don't think you should be able to be legally punished for speaking a truth, no matter how uncomfortable or embarrassed it might make anyone. I may think that the person speaking the truth is a complete jerk for doing so and I'd be eager to use my own freedom of speech to tell them so. But in a free society simply being a complete jerk isn't a crime.

I agree, that as far as I'm concerned if something's a big deal to someone else and I don't much care, it's natural for me to act in accordance with what the other person wants. But in a free society not everyone has to do what most other people would do naturally. That's part of living in a free society, accepting that not everyone is going to abide by what the majority of us consider to be social norms.

 

[Koldo]

No, I don't mind it that much as a rule. I think it's rather silly, but I didn't create the forum and whoever did can make whatever rules they want and ban anyone they want. It's just an online forum. That's a far cry from laws in a free democratic society in which I have a say.

You have chosen to be here, you have chosen to be in a place where your speech has those limits. You have a say by refusing to be here, but you chose to be here. Your participation here creates more content which in turn supports this forums and its' rules.

And in the free democratic society that I'd prefer to live in, I wouldn't want a woman to be held legally liable just because she bruised some ex-boyfriend's ego by truthfully telling her girlfriends that the guy had the smallest stick she'd ever seen. Or to turn it around I wouldn't want a man to be held legally liable just because he bruised some ex-girlfriend's ego by truthfully telling his guy friends that she hardly ever wanted to have sex and wasn't very good at it when she did.

In a free society I don't think you should be able to be legally punished for speaking a truth, no matter how uncomfortable or embarrassed it might make anyone. I may think that the person speaking the truth is a complete jerk for doing so and I'd be eager to use my own freedom of speech to tell them so. But in a free society simply being a complete jerk isn't a crime.

I agree, that as far as I'm concerned if something's a big deal to someone else and I don't much care, it's natural for me to act in accordance with what the other person wants. But in a free society not everyone has to do what most other people would do naturally. That's part of living in a free society, accepting that not everyone is going to abide by what the majority of us consider to be social norms.

It is a characteristic of free societies to enforce as a law what the majority consider to be a serious offense against the social norms. The question is where to draw the line, not if the line is to be drawn.

 

[QuestioningMind]

You have chosen to be here, you have chosen to be in a place where your speech has those limits. You have a say by refusing to be here, but you chose to be here. Your participation here creates more content which in turn supports this forums and its' rules.



It is a characteristic of free societies to enforce as a law what the majority consider to be a serious offense against the social norms. The question is where to draw the line, not if the line is to be drawn.

You have chosen to be here, you have chosen to be in a place where your speech has those limits. You have a say by refusing to be here, but you chose to be here. Your participation here creates more content which in turn supports this forums and its' rules.

Yes, I have. SO WHAT? This is an ONLINE FORUM. It's NOT a free society

It is a characteristic of free societies to enforce as a law what the majority consider to be a serious offense against the social norms. The question is where to draw the line, not if the line is to be drawn.

That's right. And I believe the line should be drawn at people speaking truths. I don't believe that people speaking truths should be considered a serious offense against social norms. In fact I'd say that people complaining about their ex boyfriend or girlfriend IS the norm.

 

[Koldo]

Yes, I have. SO WHAT? This is an ONLINE FORUM. It's NOT a free society

You can't say you are opposed to a system that imposes this limitation while at the same time supporting it. You are contradicting your words with your actions. It would be like saying you are against a given politician being elected while at the same time funding his campaign. It doesn't matter if it is an online forum. You are still supporting the very thing you claim to disagree with.

That's right. And I believe the line should be drawn at people speaking truths. I don't believe that people speaking truths should be considered a serious offense against social norms. In fact I'd say that people complaining about their ex boyfriend or girlfriend IS the norm.

For what reason?

 

[QuestioningMind]

You can't say you are opposed to a system that imposes this limitation while at the same time supporting it. You are contradicting your words with your actions. It would be like saying you are against a given politician being elected while at the same time funding his campaign. It doesn't matter if it is an online forum. You are still supporting the very thing you claim to disagree with.



For what reason?

 

[QuestioningMind]

You can't say you are opposed to a system that imposes this limitation while at the same time supporting it. You are contradicting your words with your actions. It would be like saying you are against a given politician being elected while at the same time funding his campaign. It doesn't matter if it is an online forum. You are still supporting the very thing you claim to disagree with.



For what reason?

You can't say you are opposed to a system that imposes this limitation while at the same time supporting it. You are contradicting your words with your actions. It would be like saying you are against a given politician being elected while at the same time funding his campaign. It doesn't matter if it is an online forum. You are still supporting the very thing you claim to disagree with.

Of COURSE it matters that it's an online forum. Someone ELSE created the forum and they can make whatever rules they want. It's not a democracy where I have a vote. And the rule that I'm opposed to is one that I think is silly, not some rule that I find to be terribly offensive. Thus I'm willing to use the forum even though I think one of the rules here is silly. It's like these friends I have, They have a rule where they ask everyone who comes into their house to remove their shoes. Personally I think it's kind of a silly rule - one that I don't have at my house - but they have every right to make whatever rules they want and I happen to like visiting these people, so even though I think the rule is kind of silly, I abide by it whenever I go over to their house.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

For what reason?

For the numerous reasons I've already mentioned. Living in a society with free speech means that sometimes you may hear things that offend you. In a free society people shouldn't have to worry about speaking a truth just because it might offend or embarrass someone.

 

[Koldo]

You can't say you are opposed to a system that imposes this limitation while at the same time supporting it. You are contradicting your words with your actions. It would be like saying you are against a given politician being elected while at the same time funding his campaign. It doesn't matter if it is an online forum. You are still supporting the very thing you claim to disagree with.

Of COURSE it matters that it's an online forum. Someone ELSE created the forum and they can make whatever rules they want. It's not a democracy where I have a vote. And the rule that I'm opposed to is one that I think is silly, not some rule that I find to be terribly offensive. Thus I'm willing to use the forum even though I think one of the rules here is silly. It's like these friends I have, They have a rule where they ask everyone who comes into their house to remove their shoes. Personally I think it's kind of a silly rule - one that I don't have at my house - but they have every right to make whatever rules they want and I happen to like visiting these people, so even though I think the rule is kind of silly, I abide by it whenever I go over to their house.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

They make whatever rules they want but they only stick around because users such as you and me keep creating content.

If you keep going to your friends' house, even worse if you enjoy going there and let it be known, you keep enabling them. You keep supporting their choice to enforce that rule. If you and other people would stop going there, they would reconsider that rule. You know that, right?

For what reason?

For the numerous reasons I've already mentioned. Living in a society with free speech means that sometimes you may hear things that offend you. In a free society people shouldn't have to worry about speaking a truth just because it might offend or embarrass someone.

When the other part can say the exact opposite, stating that is not helping much. I would like you to tell me why a free society should be like that.

 

[QuestioningMind]

They make whatever rules they want but they only stick around because users such as you and me keep creating content.

If you keep going to your friends' house, even worse if you enjoy going there and let it be known, you keep enabling them. You keep supporting their choice to enforce that rule. If you and other people would stop going there, they would reconsider that rule. You know that, right?



When the other part can say the exact opposite, stating that is not helping much. I would like you to tell me why a free society should be like that.

Because that would quite simply be RUDE. It's their house and they can make whatever rules they want. Remember earlier when we talked about if someone feels strongly about something and it really doesn't matter much to you, how it's only polite to do it their way? I like these people and they're my friends and I would never tell them that I think their rule is silly. In a free society I COULD tell them as much at the risk of embarrassing them, but I'm not a jerk, so I don't.

As far as this site goes, the same applies. The rule I think is silly doesn't bother me enough to not keep coming here. And the people who made this site can make whatever rules they want. If they had a rule I really didn't like I wouldn't try and get them to change it. If it really bothered me I'd create my own site where such a rule wouldn't apply.

When the other part can say the exact opposite, stating that is not helping much. I would like you to tell me why a free society should be like that.

Is not helping who much? Personally I think it helps society as a whole when individuals are free to speak their opinions or any truth, regardless if many or even most are offended or embarrassed by it. The limits placed on free speech should be few and far between. And one of those limits should NOT be penalizing someone for speaking a truth, just because it happens to embarrass somebody.

Why do you think that the law should protect people with fragile egos who get embarrassed by truths about themselves?

 

[Koldo]

Because that would quite simply be RUDE. It's their house and they can make whatever rules they want. Remember earlier when we talked about if someone feels strongly about something and it really doesn't matter much to you, how it's only polite to do it their way? I like these people and they're my friends and I would never tell them that I think their rule is silly. In a free society I COULD tell them as much at the risk of embarrassing them, but I'm not a jerk, so I don't.

As far as this site goes, the same applies. The rule I think is silly doesn't bother me enough to not keep coming here. And the people who made this site can make whatever rules they want. If they had a rule I really didn't like I wouldn't try and get them to change it. If it really bothered me I'd create my own site where such a rule wouldn't apply.

I have never mentioned anything about going out of your way to tell them their rule is silly. You could just stop going to their houses and if they ask you why you could say you don't like their rules. That's it. By doing what you are doing, you are supporting their rules.

When the other part can say the exact opposite, stating that is not helping much. I would like you to tell me why a free society should be like that.

Is not helping who much? Personally I think it helps society as a whole when individuals are free to speak their opinions or any truth, regardless if many or even most are offended or embarrassed by it. The limits placed on free speech should be few and far between. And one of those limits should NOT be penalizing someone for speaking a truth, just because it happens to embarrass somebody.

Why do you think that the law should protect people with fragile egos who get embarrassed by truths about themselves?

I will do the same thing you are doing. Hoping you get it.

Because in a free society people can get punished for going out of their way to offend others. That's how free societies are.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I have never mentioned anything about going out of your way to tell them their rule is silly. You could just stop going to their houses and if they ask you why you could say you don't like their rules. That's it. By doing what you are doing, you are supporting their rules.



I will do the same thing you are doing. Hoping you get it.

Because in a free society people can get punished for going out of their way to offend others. That's how free societies are.

I have never mentioned anything about going out of your way to tell them their rule is silly. You could just stop going to their houses and if they ask you why you could say you don't like their rules. That's it. By doing what you are doing, you are supporting their rules.

I LIKE going to their house and their silly rule is NOT that big a deal to me. Why the heck can't you grasp something so simple and basic? It's what we talked about BEFORE. If it's NOT a big deal to me, who wouldn't I just go along with it?

I will do the same thing you are doing. Hoping you get it.

Because in a free society people can get punished for going out of their way to offend others. That's how free societies are

Hold on! I spent time answering YOUR questions... it's your turn to answer MINE. Why do you think that the law should protect people with fragile egos who get embarrassed by truths about themselves?

 

[QuestioningMind]

I have never mentioned anything about going out of your way to tell them their rule is silly. You could just stop going to their houses and if they ask you why you could say you don't like their rules. That's it. By doing what you are doing, you are supporting their rules.



I will do the same thing you are doing. Hoping you get it.

Because in a free society people can get punished for going out of their way to offend others. That's how free societies are.

I have never mentioned anything about going out of your way to tell them their rule is silly. You could just stop going to their houses and if they ask you why you could say you don't like their rules. That's it. By doing what you are doing, you are supporting their rules.

Furthermore... IF I did as you suggest and I stop going, forcing them to ask me why, and I then inform them that I think their rule is silly, aren't I setting myself up to be sued if my telling them the truth about how I feel happens to EMBARRASS them? I mean it wasn't that big of a deal to ME, so I kind of had to go out of my to show my offense by not responding to their invitations, and I KNEW that they'd probably be embarrassed that I think their rule is silly... so according to YOUR logic, they have every reason to sue me, right?

 

[Koldo]

I have never mentioned anything about going out of your way to tell them their rule is silly. You could just stop going to their houses and if they ask you why you could say you don't like their rules. That's it. By doing what you are doing, you are supporting their rules.

I LIKE going to their house and their silly rule is NOT that big a deal to me. Why the heck can't you grasp something so simple and basic? It's what we talked about BEFORE. If it's NOT a big deal to me, who wouldn't I just go along with it?

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You either don't mind people establishing silly rules that you have no saying or you do.

If you think that people getting punished for offending others is a silly rule, just like the rule in your friends' house, then you don't mind it getting enforced in your country.

I will do the same thing you are doing. Hoping you get it.

Because in a free society people can get punished for going out of their way to offend others. That's how free societies are

Hold on! I spent time answering YOUR questions... it's your turn to answer MINE. Why do you think that the law should protect people with fragile egos who get embarrassed by truths about themselves?

I am not saying the law should protect people with fragile egos who get embarrassed by truths about themselves. What I am saying is that the law should punish those that harm others, be it physically or psychologically.

 

[Koldo]

I have never mentioned anything about going out of your way to tell them their rule is silly. You could just stop going to their houses and if they ask you why you could say you don't like their rules. That's it. By doing what you are doing, you are supporting their rules.

Furthermore... IF I did as you suggest and I stop going, forcing them to ask me why, and I then inform them that I think their rule is silly, aren't I setting myself up to be sued if my telling them the truth about how I feel happens to EMBARRASS them? I mean it wasn't that big of a deal to ME, so I kind of had to go out of my to show my offense by not responding to their invitations, and I KNEW that they'd probably be embarrassed that I think their rule is silly... so according to YOUR logic, they have every reason to sue me, right?

No, unless you either had done it in a public manner to expose them or chose to offend them while expressing your opinion about their rules. The mere act of explaining why you didn't go to their house anymore wouldn't count as an offense, particularly because they wanted to know the truth.

 

[QuestioningMind]

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You either don't mind people establishing silly rules that you have no saying or you do.

If you think that people getting punished for offending others is a silly rule, just like the rule in your friends' house, then you don't mind it getting enforced in your country.



I am not saying the law should protect people with fragile egos who get embarrassed by truths about themselves. What I am saying is that the law should punish those that harm others, be it physically or psychologically.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You either don't mind people establishing silly rules that you have no saying or you do.

If you think that people getting punished for offending others is a silly rule, just like the rule in your friends' house, then you don't mind it getting enforced in your country.

Do you honestly not comprehend that there's a difference between people establishing rules for their private residence or rules for a web forum that a person created and me having a say in the laws established in the democratic society that I live in? This is not MY web forum. I have absolutely zero say in what rules the person who did create this web forum decides they want to establish. But this is MY country that I'm a citizen of. And if you want to change the laws here so that a person can claim psychological damage sufficient to warrant punishment just because someone embarrassed them by speaking a truth then I am going to speak out against it. Because I don't think the laws should protect people who happen to have fragile egos.

I am not saying the law should protect people with fragile egos who get embarrassed by truths about themselves. What I am saying is that the law should punish those that harm others, be it physically or psychologically.

I disagree. Using the examples you gave, you ARE advocating for laws to protect people with fragile egos. A person telling someone for the first time that their spouse is cheating on them at a dinner party in front of others and a guy having his ex girlfriend tell her friends that his stick is the smallest she'd ever seen, do not in my opinion rise rise to the level of psychological damage that would warrant any sort of compensation. Why would my ex telling her friends that I have a small stick be SO psychologically damaging to me, unless I have a very fragile ego? The same goes for being told that my spouse is cheating on me in front of others. I may not prefer that others know about it, but I'd have to have a very fragile ego for it to embarrass me SO much that it causes me psychological damage.

I got embarrassed... so what? Everybody does and for different reasons. Embarrassment is ALL about ego... about fearing that you'll look bad in other people's eyes. So if having a truth about myself revealed is so embarrassing that it causes me psychological damage it's a clear indication that I have a fragile ego.

 

[QuestioningMind]

No, unless you either had done it in a public manner to expose them or chose to offend them while expressing your opinion about their rules. The mere act of explaining why you didn't go to their house anymore wouldn't count as an offense, particularly because they wanted to know the truth.

Okay, now that's weird. So if I embarrass them just in front of ME it's okay, but if I embarrass them in front of others I can be sued. Why? Is it not possible for me to embarrass them sufficiently just in front of myself that they would suffer psychological damage? Such psychological damage can only occur if a person is embarrassed in front of more than one person?

And seriously, you think that a person who could be SO horribly embarrassed by someone stating that they think that their No Shoes in The House rule is kind of silly doesn't have a fragile ego? Is YOUR ego so fragile that if I said, "Hey, I love you and I enjoy coming to your house, but I think your no shoes rule is kind of silly," in front of other people that you'd be so psychotically harmed that you'd deserve compensation?

 

[Koldo]

Okay, now that's weird. So if I embarrass them just in front of ME it's okay, but if I embarrass them in front of others I can be sued. Why? Is it not possible for me to embarrass them sufficiently just in front of myself that they would suffer psychological damage? Such psychological damage can only occur if a person is embarrassed in front of more than one person?

And seriously, you think that a person who could be SO horribly embarrassed by someone stating that they think that their No Shoes in The House rule is kind of silly doesn't have a fragile ego? Is YOUR ego so fragile that if I said, "Hey, I love you and I enjoy coming to your house, but I think your no shoes rule is kind of silly," in front of other people that you'd be so psychotically harmed that you'd deserve compensation?

It is possible to offend others directly with no one else close to make it worse. I didn't mean otherwise. What I meant though is that merely saying "Hey, I love you and I enjoy coming to your house, but I think your no shoes rule is kind of silly" doesn't count as an offense. When i mentioned 'exposing' I was thinking of letting others know something fairly more private.

 

[Koldo]

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You either don't mind people establishing silly rules that you have no saying or you do.

If you think that people getting punished for offending others is a silly rule, just like the rule in your friends' house, then you don't mind it getting enforced in your country.

Do you honestly not comprehend that there's a difference between people establishing rules for their private residence or rules for a web forum that a person created and me having a say in the laws established in the democratic society that I live in? This is not MY web forum. I have absolutely zero say in what rules the person who did create this web forum decides they want to establish. But this is MY country that I'm a citizen of. And if you want to change the laws here so that a person can claim psychological damage sufficient to warrant punishment just because someone embarrassed them by speaking a truth then I am going to speak out against it. Because I don't think the laws should protect people who happen to have fragile egos.

It is completely wrong to claim you have no say in the rules here. This is what I have been explaining to you. You support this forum and its rules by being here and creating content. It is the same thing at the end of the day, be it democratic government, private companies or websites.

I am not saying the law should protect people with fragile egos who get embarrassed by truths about themselves. What I am saying is that the law should punish those that harm others, be it physically or psychologically.

I disagree. Using the examples you gave, you ARE advocating for laws to protect people with fragile egos. A person telling someone for the first time that their spouse is cheating on them at a dinner party in front of others and a guy having his ex girlfriend tell her friends that his stick is the smallest she'd ever seen, do not in my opinion rise rise to the level of psychological damage that would warrant any sort of compensation. Why would my ex telling her friends that I have a small stick be SO psychologically damaging to me, unless I have a very fragile ego? The same goes for being told that my spouse is cheating on me in front of others. I may not prefer that others know about it, but I'd have to have a very fragile ego for it to embarrass me SO much that it causes me psychological damage.

I got embarrassed... so what? Everybody does and for different reasons. Embarrassment is ALL about ego... about fearing that you'll look bad in other people's eyes. So if having a truth about myself revealed is so embarrassing that it causes me psychological damage it's a clear indication that I have a fragile ego.

That's just your take on it. Your opinion as you have stated it. And I have absolutely no reason to agree with you. You are not really showing me any reason to agree with you.

 

[QuestioningMind]

It is possible to offend others directly with no one else close to make it worse. I didn't mean otherwise. What I meant though is that merely saying "Hey, I love you and I enjoy coming to your house, but I think your no shoes rule is kind of silly" doesn't count as an offense. When i mentioned 'exposing' I was thinking of letting others know something fairly more private.

Yet in a previous post you indicated that I could indeed be sued for it. That's the main problem I see with your proposed law, determining what should be considered an 'offense'. NONE of the examples you provided rise to the level of what I consider to be sufficient offense to warrant a law suit.

 

[QuestioningMind]

It is completely wrong to claim you have no say in the rules here. This is what I have been explaining to you. You support this forum and its rules by being here and creating content. It is the same thing at the end of the day, be it democratic government, private companies or websites.

That's just your take on it. Your opinion as you have stated it. And I have absolutely no reason to agree with you. You are not really showing me any reason to agree with you.

It is completely wrong to claim you have no say in the rules here. This is what I have been explaining to you. You support this forum and its rules by being here and creating content. It is the same thing at the end of the day, be it democratic government, private companies or websites.

I'd say it's completely right for me to claim that I have no say in the rules here. Never once have I been asked to vote on what the rules should be... nor should I be asked to, since it isn't a democracy. I have absolutely no power to change the rules. All I can do is - IF the rule offends me sufficiently - stop coming to this site. And me no longer coming to this site isn't going to cause the rules to change ONE BIT.

That's just your take on it. Your opinion as you have stated it. And I have absolutely no reason to agree with you. You are not really showing me any reason to agree with you.

Of COURSE it's just my opinion... just like YOU are voicing YOUR OPINION. In MY opinion NONE of the examples you gave rose to the level of harm that should allow someone to sue. I've yet to hear you tell me WHY you think your examples DO rise to the such a level of harm. One again you didn't answer my questions.

Would YOU feel SO mentally damaged just because an ex of yours told her friends that you have a small stick that you'd feel you should be paid money for the offense? Is your ego and your sense of masculinity so fragile that an ex's opinion of your size would psychologically damage you?