Couple thoughts from my comfy chair: I think that anyone that cares about sorting out the kinds of offensive material should, like VidAngel, create their own derivative stream with all the things that might offend called out. That way, people that are offended by various words, topics, or attitudes can skip the episodes that contains those things, without ever having had to hear them. Personally, I am becoming an "offense and pain" junkie. I take a deep breath and listen to people with whom I disagree, and I encourage them to be free in their choice of vernacular. I seek out the feeling of discomfort that comes with being energetically and/or intelligently disagreed with, because I always come through the experience, not only unharmed, but a better version of David L. Willson, either by having adjusted my perspective, or by having understood the other fellow's perspective better than I did. Are there things I turn off? Yep. Anything I think I can't learn from. Ain't nobody got time for that.
I can't *wait* to listen to Spaceman's episode! I love to see 'lostnbronx' appear in my inbox, even if he did leave the 'digest' subject line <poke>. His name reminds me of the time he spent a few weeks reading me his stories while I drove to and from work. And, that is a happy memory. -- David L. Willson Teacher, Engineer, Evangelist RHCE+Satellite CCAH Linux+ LPIC-1 SUSE_CLP LFCS Mobile 720-333-LANS(5267) http://sofree.us This is a good time for a r3VOLution. ----- Original Message ----- > I have to disagree with this to a point. > I think that having an explicit tag for the odd contextual swear word > is fine, and I may want to listen to those episodes, so I'm not > going to filter out episodes on the basis of the explicit tag. > However, having just listened to the episode in question, I would > not want to listen to gratuitous swearing for the sake of swearing, > or - in this case - name calling. > The language doesn't bother me, but the (and I think this term was > used in the episode comments) _aggressive_ nature of the language > used - e.g. "you're a political f---wit", and the very offensive use > of the term "retard". > I do believe that spaceman was making a really good point, but I > think it ended up being diluted by the tone used. > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 6:50 PM x1101 < x1...@gmx.com > wrote: > > I concur, HPR is a network for people to express themselves, and > > while I strongly believe in a censorship-free HPR, that doesn’t > > mean > > that we have the right to force someone to listen to explicit > > material if they do not wish to. This ‘explicit’ tag gives people a > > piece of information to make that choice for themselves. I know > > that > > I will always tag my shows as ‘explicit’, because I don’t keep > > track > > of my language. While I appreciate that there are other things that > > folks might find offensive outside of technically explicit > > language, > > its a good start. > > > Keep the vulgarity, keep the tag, and let us all decide for > > ourselves > > what we want to produce and what we want to listen to. > > > /x1101 > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Hpr mailing list > > > Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org > > > http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org > > -- > Sent from my portable digital telecommunications device. > Please forgive brevity and any mistakes. > _______________________________________________ > Hpr mailing list > Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org > http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
_______________________________________________ Hpr mailing list Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
