I respectfully disagree with Mason Downey's Gina Carano Article and it's lack of a comment section.

@SUD123456: @horgen He's insulting someone's logical integrity without any explanation. Rule 2 and 6 on isles 197 & 200.

Lol. LJ probably predates everyone here. You can tell because of that username format which, as was explained to me back when I joined, was applied to all non-premium accounts at some point in the past.

I joined prior to the launch of the 360, and LJ was an old timer even then.

Jeez. He's terrible though. All he does is make jabs, putdowns and strawmen, when we've been so nice.

@horgen not helping tone down the rudeness just proves the political bias in this forum.

Are you still obsessing over me?

@SUD123456: Citation needed. Explain what you believe my internal logic to be, and why it is wrong.

In 3 paragraphs or less.

Please review the chain of comments. His argument is that we should be able to handle criticism of argument and there is no need of special snowflake consideration to insulate people from criticism. He then says that said criticism is not really material unless it crosses a line of stalking, outright threats, etc.

I asked if that logic now applies to Gina's case. He said no. That is logically inconsistent with his position. Indeed, at the time of Gina's post comparing her situation to Jews in Nazi Germany she has suffered no material consequence by the posters own yardstick. She had not lost her job, although apparently had been spoken too by her bosses on previous occasions. She initiated the entire string of events by sharing her political viewpoints publicly in the first place and then apparently sulked when she received blowback. This is the exact thing that the poster who is also the topic creator was criticizing in the first place with regard to the opinion piece.

If you do not follow the logic that is on you. Similarly, I did not criticize the posters logical integrity in general, rather I pointed out the logical inconsistency in his argument.

Last, your behavior is trolling and disruptive. Don't interject in a conversation if you don't follow it. It is not my duty to connect every logical dot for you if you don't understand. Moreover, a polite person might ask me to clarify what I was getting at instead of trolling me with rules.

@SUD123456: I can see the point you are making, however I believe that all of the supposed fans complaining about her directly resulted in her being fired. I can't prove it 100% of course.

When I say we always have the option to walk away, or not listen to it, im talking about the people on Twitter calling for someone to be cancelled every time they post something deemed offensive. This also applies to those offended by comments.

If I get super offended at something you or anyone else here says, I also have the option to walk away as well. It hasn't happened yet though.

Nobody is holding a gun to these people's heads and forcing them to read Gina's tweets. Instead, some people take it upon themselves to purposefully harass people for their political views.

That being said, your cryptic message prior to this made me really examine my logic. And I did uncover a serious flaw in it, but not the one you were thinking of. I'll post again later today to explain, just need to do some actual work first today. :)

No she was given several warnings that she didn't heed so I don't think blaming fans is the right thing to do. She was upsetting consumers and was asked to stop. She didn't. This is all on her.

@LJS9502_basic: I guess that's where we'll just agree to disagree, because I don't think fans should be able to do that, and we shouldn't encourage that behavior.

People need to not be so thin skinned that they feel the need to get someone fired for her tweets. Which they were not forced to read in the first place.

You're against consumer rights?

@LJS9502_basic: I'm for consumers right to boycott, do whatever they please.

I am also against companies having the right to fire an employee over what they post to their own social media account, as long as its clear their views do not represent the company they work for.

Unless said tweets break a law, and said person has been charged and convicted of breaking said law.

If you say stupid shit on a public forum, your employer can and probably should fire you, regardless of the particular political stance. Whether this is the result of their own judgment or outside pressure is irrelevant. This is certainly nothing new or unexpected.

What you're describing would likely be an infringement on the companies right of expression and speech. There are exceptions for protected classes like being black, female, etc. You can't force a company to employ a Neo-Nazi, as being a Nazi isn't a protected class.

Voicing their opinion is basically what they're doing.

Companies have a right to fire employees. Without unionization they don't need a reason.

You're aware that moderators are here on a voluntarily basis?

Jsprunk got mad at a post I made to another user which violated nothing and responded with insults. Wilddog has joined the party. And they trolled me so I've been ignoring the both of them.

@horgen: My point exactly. Leftist's only follow the rules when it suits them.

I'll wash my hands of this thread and look for friendlier soils. It's kinda dead anyway.

Go on. Look for friendlier soils. No one here is stopping you.