“The situation in the world is becoming so tense that I fear an outbreak of violence is inevitable.”
Now, was that a call to violence, or simply an observation on the state of things? Because what I said is essentially the same thing as the original comment.
The mod who removed it disagreed, I also disagree and would have removed it as well.
When ascertaining a threat, agencies use “immenence” as a primary marker. So saying something like “Hey, every now and then we need to guillotine these bastards.” Is fine.
Saying “Hey, every now and then we need to guillotine these bastards, how does Tuesday sound, does Tuesday work for you?” has a level of immenence that the first statement lacks.
The call to action is shedding blood, immediately. That’s removable.
Yea, God forbid we make statements that would be unappealing to advertisers.
You do know there is nothing illegal in most countries about talking about violence, right? Like, that rule is not for any legitimate legal reason, it’s there to keep websites sanitary.
Why the fuck are you so afraid of calls to action?
I didn’t realize he was a lemmy user but when I saw his pic i told my boyfriend that the bomber looks just like what i figure most extreme lemmy posters look like
Did the removed quote use quotation marks to indicate where the quote ended and the personal thoughts of OP began?
Because there is a considerable difference in intent depending on where quotation marks are used.
Similarly, it’s the difference capitalization makes between “helping your uncle Jack off a horse” and bestiality.
No offense, but it feels like OPs comment was removed because you considered it bestiality / a call to violence, when it very likely was just a poor usage of grammar.
I pasted the removed quote from the modlog and added the quotes around it to make it clear I was quoting it, the original removed comment had no quote marks at all.
Thanks for the explanation. That is what I was thinking.
His failure to use quotes is possibly no different than someone failing to capitalize the first letter of their uncle named jack.
Imo, this was far more likley a grammar error than an intentional alteration of the original Jefferson quote.
Like Abraham Lincoln said, those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves, and, under a just God, cannot long retain it. Of course that God being Jake Paul, Ohio rizz phantom tax.
First, not the mod who removed it.
Second, they weren’t quoting Jefferson to be quoting Jefferson, they were MANGLING Jefferson so they could make a call for violence.
The full quote:
https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/tree-liberty-quotation/
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.”
Removed quote:
“The Tree of Liberty needs watered from the blood of patriots and tyrants from time to time. I fear we are there.”
Saying “I fear we are there” is a direct call to violence, it’s not in the OG quote and that’s why it got removed.
No it’s not.
it can be interpreted as such, I could say the same about those numbers people associate with Nazism
“The situation in the world is becoming so tense that I fear an outbreak of violence is inevitable.”
Now, was that a call to violence, or simply an observation on the state of things? Because what I said is essentially the same thing as the original comment.
The mod who removed it disagreed, I also disagree and would have removed it as well.
When ascertaining a threat, agencies use “immenence” as a primary marker. So saying something like “Hey, every now and then we need to guillotine these bastards.” Is fine.
Saying “Hey, every now and then we need to guillotine these bastards, how does Tuesday sound, does Tuesday work for you?” has a level of immenence that the first statement lacks.
The call to action is shedding blood, immediately. That’s removable.
Its kinda funny to me, its like you can talk about how shitting is necessary for humans to live but don’t you dare say you’re gonna go take a dump.
That’s not a call to violence though, feel free to shit all over the place if that’s your deal. :)
Yea, God forbid we make statements that would be unappealing to advertisers.
You do know there is nothing illegal in most countries about talking about violence, right? Like, that rule is not for any legitimate legal reason, it’s there to keep websites sanitary.
Why the fuck are you so afraid of calls to action?
We take potential threats seriously, even more so after the fertility clinic bomber was found to be a lemmy user.
I didn’t realize he was a lemmy user but when I saw his pic i told my boyfriend that the bomber looks just like what i figure most extreme lemmy posters look like
You’ve got final say, so w/e, but my read of it is more akin to “well, fuck. Guess we’re at war again.”
No agency on either side.
Did the removed quote use quotation marks to indicate where the quote ended and the personal thoughts of OP began?
Because there is a considerable difference in intent depending on where quotation marks are used.
Similarly, it’s the difference capitalization makes between “helping your uncle Jack off a horse” and bestiality.
No offense, but it feels like OPs comment was removed because you considered it bestiality / a call to violence, when it very likely was just a poor usage of grammar.
I pasted the removed quote from the modlog and added the quotes around it to make it clear I was quoting it, the original removed comment had no quote marks at all.
Thanks for the explanation. That is what I was thinking. His failure to use quotes is possibly no different than someone failing to capitalize the first letter of their uncle named jack.
Imo, this was far more likley a grammar error than an intentional alteration of the original Jefferson quote.
Like Abraham Lincoln said, those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves, and, under a just God, cannot long retain it. Of course that God being Jake Paul, Ohio rizz phantom tax.