He does that kind of thing quite often.
Will Elite Trader please take a stand against dangerous anti-vaxxer bullshit?
- Thread starter Frederick Foresight
- Start date
- Status
He does that kind of thing quite often.
This is not true in all circumstances.
For example, when I say that all flora and fauna in Australia is trying to kill you, I would not be able to be proven false, because too many people in Australia have been killed by flora and fauna for this to be a lark.
It's the same thing with Florida, which is the USA version of Australia.
Saw palmettos, coral snakes, alligators, poison frogs...The sun...
Same shit, different continent.
We do not have to prove what is already evident, by evidence. Both places will try to kill you. So a statement along the lines that Florida and Australia is totally safe for the children to run free and unfettered is false.
We do not have to prove it. Look at the bones!
Magna
Administrator
I just came across this study released a few weeks ago from Johns Hopkins University. Its summary "concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument."
Now I am not arguing for or against its conclusions, simply that if you had publicly been against lockdowns which were imposed throughout many parts of the world you would have been declared a threat to society, unpatriotic, and banned from most social media for spreading dangerous misinformation.
My point is that "dangerous misinformation" is often in the eyes of the beholder and turns out to be the truth a short time later. So despite the OP's claim that these things are obvious to determine I have to keep asking the question of what standard should be used at ET to censor ideas you disagree with, ideas you don't like. And please be specific.
Now I am not arguing for or against its conclusions, simply that if you had publicly been against lockdowns which were imposed throughout many parts of the world you would have been declared a threat to society, unpatriotic, and banned from most social media for spreading dangerous misinformation.
My point is that "dangerous misinformation" is often in the eyes of the beholder and turns out to be the truth a short time later. So despite the OP's claim that these things are obvious to determine I have to keep asking the question of what standard should be used at ET to censor ideas you disagree with, ideas you don't like. And please be specific.
You're confused about what he's complaining about versus the info you've just posted about "lockdowns" in a study nor do you understand the purpose of "lockdowns" and what has occurred in society as a whole without lockdowns as governments use other tools (e.g. 1/2 capacity occupancy, targeted outbreak areas) instead of "full lockdowns of everyone".
Most of us know what standard is being used here at ET to manage members that have ideas that disagree with other members and management itself in its relationship to obvious trolling of misinformation and the fact that you guys have banned members for trolling dangerous ideas ad nauseum implies that you do in fact have some kind'uv of standard for censoring (bans) the members here at the forum.
- My point, is I believe the OP is asking you guys to strengthen your standards, have a public-specific policy in your TOU about the misinformation/disinformation during a Pandemic, and make them more consistent.
Then again, you'll just need to reach out to the OP by private message to ask the OP what specific type of "dangerous misinformation" is he complaining about just in case you and I are both wrong about what he's complaining about.
He may just have changed his mind about reaching out to you guys in the "Feedback" thread and now only want to talk about it privately with ET management...
Some people are willing to be more specific in private message versus doing it here in "Feedback" which typically lead to more arguments, disagreements, and eventual a thread closure.
Hint: The OP did use the phrase "dangerous anti-vaxxer" in this thread title. My bet is that he's talking about something involving that topic.
wrbtrader
Last edited:
So it's either detailed specificity or nothing? That black and white?
The other social media seem to have derived some standards of conduct, and they didn't rely on me to arrive at them. As I already noted in my prior post, how about not letting imbeciles talk about bullshit global conspiracies and the dangers of (proven) vaccines, while touting malaria and worm drugs as the answer to the pandemic? Is that specific enough?
Anti-vaxxers are prolonging the pandemic for everyone. How is that not dangerous?
[Edited by Magna:] There is something fundamentally wrong with the structure of FF's quote of my post, so best I explain it here for easy reference to all. When you quote someone who is referencing an article, podcast, video, etc. be sure to clarify the ATTRIBUTION so it is unmistakable where the quoted words are coming from. In other words, don't muck it up like FF did here by implying that I said those 3 things when in my post I made it clear they were examples Joe Rogan gave in his video.
It was not my intent to misquote you. I was responding from my phone, so I took a shortcut. In any event, you asked if these ideas were false. I responded. In fact, you then agreed with Rogan's claims when you wrote that all three points turned out to be true, so the statements become as attributable to you as they do to Rogan. Why are we splitting hairs here? You get the point, right?
It was not my intent to misquote you. I was responding from my phone, so I took a shortcut. In any event, you asked if these ideas were false. I responded. In fact, you then agreed with Rogan's claims when you wrote that all three points turned out to be true, so the statements become as attributable to you as they do to Rogan. Why are we splitting hairs here? You get the point, right?
We make the assumption that everybody is intelligent enough to make their own decision about what's misinformation/disinformation about vaccines.
In reality, many here are not intelligent enough to do that and the forum about trading then becomes dangerous to those individuals being misinformed about vaccines by those that are intentionally posting the misinformation.
At some point, you just need to let people be ignorant instead of trying to have them policed or protected. Thus, just be satisfied that you're not that ignorant about the Pandemic and what's needed to end a Pandemic.
- I've studied Pandemics...they bring out the worst in people when a Pandemic occurs in an unhealthy society (physically and mentally).
They're the same individuals doing it today with their anti-vaccine rhetoric here at ET forum on full view in the public.
Just protect yourself and your family...do not rely on any information that's posted on this ET forum to impact your decisions about your health. Most of it is just opinions / views...
Dangerous anti-vaccine bullshit as you made an alert about it within your thread title.
wrbtrader
- Status