Criminal huggers

[Farm Boy]

It's full title is Something Awful LLC. That stands for Limited Liability Company. They sell a product (as opposed to selling you as a product; see previous discussion) which is essentially unlimited entertainment. You can buy it, or you can't. You seem to want to present this as some sort of social justice question, but you haven't yet demonstrated why it should be treated any differently than any other form of cost-based entertainment, like spending $9 on a 90-120 minute movie or spending $60 on a 4-120 hour video game. If you have disposable income and the desire, you can make the purchase. If you don't, you don't. Simple as that.

Now, it's certainly true that stupid behavior comes with financial costs, but that's true of any long-term service or membership, as pretty much any EULA will attest to. So, given that entertainment is a commodity in our capitalist utopia, will you please explain to me why paying for it is such a grievous social injustice?

My original post that seemed to trip your trigger was a response. The full exchange would have gone something like this so you don't have to scroll up -

1. My somewhat tongue in cheek question on why one would directly pay to post on a forum board(intent may not have come across)

2. A reply that the fee keeps people such as one of our CFC posters off of the site.

3. My response that a board that claims(according to consensus in the thread previously) to be liberally minded using a fee to limit access is engaging in a very old and not liberally minded tool to create exclusivity and that the contradiction made me unhappy.

- Take that for what you will. I have no problem with direct sale of a product. You are correct in that regard. If the goal of the forum board is to promote free and egalitarian exchange of ideas(it doesn't have to be, though some may have hinted in that direction I could be wrong), then I would be concerned that a fee based system may have the side effect of silencing and excluding some voices that may be valuable additions for no other reason that lack of disposable income.

 

[Symphony D.]

Well, if you go around shouting "you fool! don't you realise that if the product is free, then you are the product!!!!" whenever someone watches commercial TV or reads a free magazine, then you would at least be consistently crazy.

It's more that I don't particularly like the idea of people manipulating me for profit. I also dislike rabid nationalists, sports teams, toxoplasmosis, and my own DNA-based cellular structure.

3. My response that a board that claims(according to consensus in the thread previously) to be liberally minded using a fee to limit access is engaging in a very old and not liberally minded tool to create exclusivity and that the contradiction made me unhappy.

- Take that for what you will. I have no problem with direct sale of a product. You are correct in that regard. If the goal of the forum board is to promote free and egalitarian exchange of ideas(it doesn't have to be, though some may have hinted in that direction I could be wrong), then I would be concerned that a fee based system may have the side effect of silencing and excluding some voices that may be valuable additions for no other reason that lack of disposable income.

Isn't this a thing most "free and egalitarian exchange of ideas" promoting "liberal" institutions of higher learning do?

 

[Farm Boy]

Isn't this a thing most "free and egalitarian exchange of ideas" promoting "liberal" institutions of higher learning do?

To an extent, sure. Let's take Northern Illinois University for example. They charge a significant amount of currency for an education. They have to under the current system in order to be able to offer the service. They do, however, take what steps they can to ameliorate this socioeconomic exclusivity. Merit based scholarships are available specifically to low income students. They have a robust CHANCE program designed specifically to admit low income and socially disadvantaged students that would otherwise be excluded. Loans on more beneficial terms than the free market are available.

True - these things aren't perfect and don't solve the basic problem in its entirety, but they do address the issue of intent. Which is what I was attempting to discuss.

 

[Crezth]

1. My somewhat tongue in cheek question on why one would directly pay to post on a forum board(intent may not have come across)

2. A reply that the fee keeps people such as one of our CFC posters off of the site.

I don't suppose it occurs to you that my reply was also "tongue in cheek?" :I

I don't think Something Awful particularly cares about "free, egalitarian exchange of ideas." I do think that the guy who runs the website cares about publishing entertainment in various media, and exercises some discretion in its distribution. If you want to call that socioeconomic discrimination... well, you're absolutely right. But so is giving cars only to people that can afford them.

True - these things aren't perfect and don't solve the basic problem in its entirety, but they do address the issue of intent. Which is what I was attempting to discuss.

So I presume you're in favor of imperfect measures meant to address socioeconomic inequality e.g. affirmative action?

 

[Farm Boy]

So I presume you're in favor of imperfect measures meant to address socioeconomic inequality e.g. affirmative action?

To the extent that institutionalized racism/sexism(which affirmative action is) may actually reduce racism/sexism in the long run, yes I can agree with it as a policy. It's something that needs carefully monitored though, as the tool itself is undesirable at its base.

 

[Mise]

To the extent that institutionalized racism/sexism(which affirmative action is) may actually reduce racism/sexism in the long run, yes I can agree with it as a policy. It's something that needs carefully monitored though, as the tool itself is undesirable at its base.

I like you, you're good.