sigh.

[taiki]

So I've been keeping up with the Penny Arcade Dickwolf debacle(See here Major Warning: Discusses rape).

Phil Plait once gave a talk on the tone argument in a skepticism context. You can find it here. He talks about Skepticism and how to turn people to the light. He brings up several basic questions. First off, what are you trying to

Comments

[dr_teng]

Many people would (and have) said that any illegal actions aren't civil. If you were a business owner and you had people protesting your business by occupying it, would you consider that civil? I find that unlikely. My point here is that civility isn't a requirement and never has been. Non-violence is an entirely different matter so linking the two really makes no sense.

It doesn't matter who had "more" of an effect. Without Malcolm X, the civil rights movement wouldn't have went as far as it did. He's considered one of the most important civil rights activists of all time by a great many people, so it's not like you can ignore his contribution. Just because MLK is considered more highly doesn't mean much, it's not a game of who scored the most points. Their cumulative effect was what mattered. It's a fairly common belief that so many people warmed up to MLK because there were more extremist factions, the whole good cop/bad cop situation.

Ah, I see what you mean. Yeah, many people have issues with tying their form of presentation to their own opinion. I've went through phases where I was a total troll, completely civil, to my current mix of a bit of both, so I'm fairly detached from how I present my message. I simply find extensive critique of an already weak community somewhat counter-productive.