Gregory's ServerThis view is useful.
"Tolerance" is not an absolute. Refusing to abide by the terms -
e.g. promoting views that deliberately oppose those of tolerance -
constitutes a breach, and thus those actions are not covered.
Easy.
 8 comments
it's an apparently paradoxical structure that ceases to be a paradox if you see it as just a drawing. @munin exactly! Itβs a rule set, not a definition of physics. Heck, itβs not like itβs Russellβs paradox. Which, thinking this through, means that a Code of Conduct can be phrased as describing a behavioral contract amongst the members of a community, with the penalty for breach being ejection from the community. Heh. This has a lot of useful ancillary thoughts attached...  @munin You mean this (Toot in German, text in the picture in English) π :mastodon: https://chaos.social/@kubikpixel/109269794613841979 Aha, "A code of conduct is explicit documentation of a social contract" I like that framing a lot.  I saw a gay liberal Israel supporter post this exact same meme and almost threw the fuck up  @munin That's a great way to frame and look at it. That means tolerance is not something somebody has or not, but exists between people. A form of mutual relation that both (or all) parties necessarily need to contribute too. Like a dialogue. Communication can be one-way, monologues can be exchanged. But when one stops contributing to a dialogue, there is no dialogue anymore. So if one party ceases to uphold the shared value of tolerance, there is no tolerance present for anyone anymore. |
@munin sure, okay but what's going on with that cube