Comments on: The Spirit Of The First Amendment http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/29/the-spirit-of-the-first-amendment/ In a mad world, all blogging is psychiatry blogging Fri, 24 Jul 2015 12:35:36 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.3 By: Atorm http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/29/the-spirit-of-the-first-amendment/#comment-117398 Mon, 07 Jul 2014 19:53:44 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1299#comment-117398 I always do.

Report comment

]]> By: MugaSofer http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/29/the-spirit-of-the-first-amendment/#comment-28397 Thu, 16 Jan 2014 01:34:03 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1299#comment-28397 “A lot of people would argue that doxxing holds people “accountable” for what they say online. But like most methods of silencing speech, its ability to punish people for saying the wrong things is entirely uncorrelated with whether the thing they said is actually wrong. It distributes power based on who controls the largest mob (hint: popular people).”

You’ve been talking about the plight of us low-social-skills … people a lot recently. Any chance you’ll ever share these advanced social skills you learned during your Five Thousand Years?

Obviously, some of these techniques may be evil. But you have unparalleled access to the rationalist community, so I’m guessing the instrumental value could be high.

Oh, and I’m crazy curious, of course. Hmm, I think I’ll ask this on a few posts in the hope it’ll be seen.

Report comment

]]> By: Open Post And Link Farm: The Greatest Of All Imaginable Home Alone Posters Edition | Alas, a Blog http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/29/the-spirit-of-the-first-amendment/#comment-27453 Tue, 07 Jan 2014 23:25:19 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1299#comment-27453 […] The Spirit Of The First Amendment | Slate Star Codex […]

Report comment

]]> By: Anonymous http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/29/the-spirit-of-the-first-amendment/#comment-27044 Thu, 02 Jan 2014 19:13:06 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1299#comment-27044 A lawyer doesn’t need to endorse his clients position. He or she needs to not undermine it.

And if you can come up with a way that a lawyer can advocate one position in court and another outside without making his advocacy less convincing in a court room, we’d all love to hear it.

Report comment

]]> By: James http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/29/the-spirit-of-the-first-amendment/#comment-27034 Thu, 02 Jan 2014 18:04:49 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1299#comment-27034 Patrick:

I can justifiably get in trouble for expressing opinions on political questions that do not involve confidentiality …[L]et’s pretend I do eminent domain cases, and on the job I argue that a particular taking is justified, while off the I say eminent domain verges on tyranny. That would justifiably get me in trouble …Identical legal work from someone who did not look like a hypocrite would be more valuable than mine.

Accusations of hypocrisy would be unfair. Representing a client is not the same as morally endorsing the client or arguments made on the client’s behalf.

In the world where a lawyer must endorse her client’s cause, sophisticated lawyers will toe party lines, and unpopular causes will lack the advice which helps them to access legal rights. This seems bad.

We are better off with a norm of neutrality in legal practice, where lawyers do not morally judge their clients and are not morally judged for serving particular clients.

Report comment

]]> By: Anonymous http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/29/the-spirit-of-the-first-amendment/#comment-27028 Thu, 02 Jan 2014 15:40:31 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1299#comment-27028 How about you dispute the facts that Scott cited? Your link fails to dispute any of them.

Report comment

]]> By: hf http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/29/the-spirit-of-the-first-amendment/#comment-26999 Thu, 02 Jan 2014 07:11:03 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1299#comment-26999 You appear to be spreading lies about the “doxxing” of someone who was on the board of an atheist organization under her legal name. If you dispute the facts here, you should say so.

Report comment

]]> By: houseboatonstyx http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/29/the-spirit-of-the-first-amendment/#comment-26965 Wed, 01 Jan 2014 19:13:24 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1299#comment-26965 Bad argument gets counterargument.

The good argument does not have to be addressed to in-this-case-Phil, or on his forum, or even mention him by name. The point is to dissude other people from accepting that argument, from him or anyone else.

Report comment

]]> By: Paul Torek http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/29/the-spirit-of-the-first-amendment/#comment-26958 Wed, 01 Jan 2014 16:17:27 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1299#comment-26958 I don’t think that particular “coincidence” is a coincidence. AI that was supposed to be helpful, but actually makes the world a horrible place? Clippy.

Report comment

]]> By: Patrick Robotham http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/12/29/the-spirit-of-the-first-amendment/#comment-26867 Tue, 31 Dec 2013 17:27:50 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1299#comment-26867 What do you mean by “purged”? I’ve seen it refer to things as mild as losing one’s television show (and getting a new one later). Is doxxing the same as purging? Getting banned from an online forum? Getting black looks?

I don’t believe anyone should be shot or imprisoned or fined for publishing anything, but a de-facto rule of only aristocrats and fanatics publicly disagreeing with consensus (because ordinary folks wouldn’t think the cost is worth it) doesn’t strike me as being completely inimical to liberal society (at the very least, this rule seems to have been in force for at least the last 200 years in western society.)

I prefer communities where one can disagree with consensus and get a counterargument instead of harassment, punches and threats to one’s paycheck. I also prefer communities where people are civil to each other and do not commit elementary logical fallacies. None of these strike me as the last line of defense against an Orwellian dystopia.

Report comment

]]>