This ought to create some rage spirals today

GDaddy

Duke status
Jan 17, 2006
29,238
2,056
113
Carlsbad
You playing dumb.
The truth is a defense against slander. If she is a sperg then calling her a sperg is not unfair. Nor is it an act of violence.

I had to look the definition up because I hadn't seen the word until a couple minutes ago. Part of the definition actually refers to the actions of the individual. Nine times out of ten it will be those actions which draws the mockery.



'Sperg' is both a verb and a noun. It's almost always used for Internet purposes, and to sum up, it pretty much means a person with Aspeger's (or perceived to have it) that gets so dramatically passionate about a subject to the point where it's greatly aggravating to everyone else.
 

FecalFace

Duke status
Nov 21, 2008
42,338
2,105
113
The Californias
The truth is a defense against slander. If she is a sperg then calling her a sperg is not unfair. Nor is it an act of violence.
Is mocking a 15 year old girl's illness because you disagree with her, one of those things you want to bring to the 'marketplace of ideas'?

Do you call gay people fags too?
 

GDaddy

Duke status
Jan 17, 2006
29,238
2,056
113
Carlsbad
Nobody's mocking her illness. They're mocking her actions and opinions and her attitudes. All of which are completely mockable in the marketplace of ideas, in exactly the same way the opposing worldviews are mockable. You can tell because everyone who acts like that draws the same mockery regardless of who they are.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Ifallalot

FecalFace

Duke status
Nov 21, 2008
42,338
2,105
113
The Californias
Nobody's mocking her illness. They're mocking her opinions actions. Which are completely mockable in the marketplace of ideas, as evidenced by the mockery such actions and opinions draw regardless of the personal attributes of the person doing it.
There you go playing dumb again.

Do you call autistic children "spergs" in their faces and their parent's faces? IRL?

Nice.
 

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
88,736
17,842
113
And we're seeing once again exactly why Greta was chosen to be the mouthpiece.
 

FecalFace

Duke status
Nov 21, 2008
42,338
2,105
113
The Californias
And we're seeing once again exactly why Greta was chosen to be the mouthpiece.
Why not discuss global warming instead of calling her a sperg?

Nobody would criticize you for that.

But no, you want to be a bigoted POS and be accepted in the 'markeplace of ideas'.

Good luck with that.
 

GDaddy

Duke status
Jan 17, 2006
29,238
2,056
113
Carlsbad
It would be a very mean thing to do, and I wouldn't do it. But it's not out of bounds in the marketplace of ideas as you seem to think.

For your troubles. One of the questions on the recent edition of the Harvard-Harris poll which indicates how far you have to go before America enacts the hate speech laws to which you aspire.

"ISS1110 Which is closest to your view?"
2a.JPG
 

FecalFace

Duke status
Nov 21, 2008
42,338
2,105
113
The Californias
It would be a very mean thing to do, and I wouldn't do it. But it's not out of bounds in the marketplace of ideas as you seem to think.

For your troubles. One of the questions on the recent edition of the Harvard-Harris poll which indicates how far you have to go before America enacts the hate speech laws to which you aspire.

"ISS1110 Which is closest to your view?"
View attachment 83475

I'm not for government restricting speech.

I'm all for society dealing with the hate kooks.
 

GDaddy

Duke status
Jan 17, 2006
29,238
2,056
113
Carlsbad
I'm not for government restricting speech.
Everyone here understands that to be an untrue statement.

Moreover, the "marketplace of ideas" is a social construct, not a legal construct. The state reflects culture, it doesn't drive it. Well, (for the most part) not in America, anyway.
 

FecalFace

Duke status
Nov 21, 2008
42,338
2,105
113
The Californias
Moreover, the "marketplace of ideas" is a social construct, not a legal construct. The state reflects culture, it doesn't drive it. Well, (for the most part) not in America, anyway.
I'm talking about social constructs.

Not government restricting speech.

You make up an argument I didn't make and then argue against it.