White Privilege

[Northstar]

Thats called voicing an opinion. I am sorry you dont like mine.

The point is, you're saying you don't want to tell anyone how to do things in this case, but have no problem doing just that any other time.

I also have no problem with you voicing your opinion and I don't even dislike yours.

What I clearly meant by generations, is to say there is only 3-4 people in your family between you and the time of slavery and founding of the united states.

That still doesn't add up unless we're imagining some bizarre scenario where each generation waits until they're 50 to have kids.

You are misintepreting my statements. When did I state that the descendents are directly responsible for reparations.

If I'm misinterpreting them, and @Imari is misinterpreting them, perhaps it's time for you to clarify what exactly you're getting at. 💡

There is a big difference from climbing out of poverty to middle class then the established middle class with inherited assets and wealth.

The point is sitting around on your butt waiting for a handout is the best way to make sure things never change. How do you think the Asian-American population changed their image?

Also, middle class people don't get much for inheritance, the average barely covers the cost of the funeral for the person that just died.

Please watch the episode of explained on Netflix before commenting. You clearly dont understand fully what I am referring to.

I will get right on that once you fork out the money for a subscription!

 

[PocketZeven]

The point is, you're saying you don't want to tell anyone how to do things in this case, but have no problem doing just that any other time.

I also have no problem with you voicing your opinion and I don't even dislike yours.



That still doesn't add up unless we're imagining some bizarre scenario where each generation waits until they're 50 to have kids.



If I'm misinterpreting them, and @Imari is misinterpreting them, perhaps it's time for you to clarify what exactly you're getting at. 💡



The point is sitting around on your butt waiting for a handout is the best way to make sure things never change. How do you think the Asian-American population changed their image?

Also, middle class people don't get much for inheritance, the average barely covers the cost of the funeral for the person that just died.



I will get right on that once you fork out the money for a subscription!

I never tell people what to do, but I will tell them my opinion. I only suggest what is possible and what would work better in my opinion. If you think I tell people what to do, I must apologise, because that is not what I want at all. Something works best if it is on their own free will.

Actually it should add up. When was your great, great grandfather born?

To clarify I have spoken about the racial wealth gap and it was often claimed it was caused by primeraly cultural differences and not white privilege etc. I never thought or heard about reparations for slavery before. And even if I heard about it at the time, I would probably react exactly like most did. The video however explains very clearly how the wage gap evolved over the past 150 years. So my conclusion was that there is legitimacy in the claim. But if it should be paid or not or by whom, is not for me to decide.

I think you underestimating the average inheritance for the middle class. I havent found numbers yet, but I count middle class as homeowners and they should leave on average an substantial inheritance.

 

[Carbonox]

There is a big difference from climbing out of poverty to middle class then the established middle class with inherited assets and wealth. Please watch the episode of explained on Netflix before commenting. You clearly dont understand fully what I am referring to.

You do realize you're repeatedly requesting that people pay money to see the argument you're in favor of? That's not how a fair and balanced debate works - if the video's behind a subscription paywall and you think it's worth sharing, you either summarize it yourself for everyone to see, or leave it.

 

[Northstar]

I never tell people what to do, but I will tell them my opinion. I only suggest what is possible and what would work better in my opinion. If you think I tell people what to do, I must apologise, because that is not what I want at all. Something works best if it is on their own free will.

Perhaps you should try reading some of your posts from the gun thread, they seem at odds with this.

Actually it should add up. When was your great, great grandfather born?

Not sure on the exact dates, but my Grandma was born in Germany around 1940 and my great-grandma died in 2004. There really is no way your numbers work out.

I think you underestimating the average inheritance for the middle class. I havent found numbers yet, but I count middle class as homeowners and they should leave on average an substantial inheritance.

https://www.newretirement.com/retirement/average-inheritance-how-much-are-retirees-leaving-to-heirs/

While it appears that the “average” inheritance is between $100,000 and more than $1 million, these numbers can be incredibly misleading.

Because the very rich have so much more money than the middle and lower classes, the average inheritance numbers are incredibly lopsided.

When you break down average inheritance by the economic status of the household, the numbers look very different. According to analysis by Demos:

• The least wealthy group of families have received, on average, $6,100 in inheritance.
• The wealthiest 1 percent of families have received, on average, $2.7 million in inheritance.

A further breakdown of these numbers reveals that: “the wealthiest 1 percent of families have inherited $447 for every $1 the least wealthy group of families has. Those in the middling wealth ranges—$25k-$50k, $50k-$100k, and $100k-$250k—have received inheritances of $14.8k, $22.5k, and $51.4k respectively.”

So, the wealthiest in the United States are able to leave behind very large inheritances and this skews the average numbers to be nowhere near average for the majority of retirees.

 

[Imari]

Ignorance is when you interpet a post incorrectly.

It's not necessarily ignorance. The post could be poorly written and not express what the writer intended.

You all make valid points, but you misunderstood my post and want to make clear I may have worded it to seem I was advocating it as the decendants deserving it.

See? You acknowledge that you worded it in such a way that it could be misunderstood. That's not ignorance on my part, that's me not being a mind reader and only being able to infer from what you write.

I am not a US citizen or even black, why would I be advocating for it?

Are you saying that nobody who isn't from the US or black would advocate for reparations? That seems quite narrow minded. People can believe whatever they want to believe.

As far as you not being black, this is the first I've heard of it. It's not relevant, but it's not exactly part of your profile.

Realize that at the most the USA is only 3-4 generations of people between us and the founding of the USA! 153 years is only 2 generations between you and the abolishment of slavery. So that literally means your grandfather did still feel any repercussion of that time.

No. A generation is generally considered to be around about 20 years. There's an argument for it being a bit longer now as people tend to have their first children in their twenties instead of their teens, but that's what a generation is. 153 years is of the order of 7 generations. Founding of the USA is on the order of 11 or 12 generations.

Lets say someone found a 200 year old treasure worth a million dollars, that according to documents is found on property that was owned by the @Imari family. Do you have legitimacy to claim to that treasure? Yes of course, but so do the current owner of the property or the one who found the treasure.

No, I don't. The land and it's contents was sold to the current owner. Think of a better example.

The jokes about the mongol times, roman times is inaccurate, because the descendants of slaves or slave owners in the USA could still be traced within reasonable accuracy. It wasnt that long ago guys.

Yeah, it was. You need to go back and review your idea of a generation and how many people there are between now and slave times. If you think it's two, then it seems like it wasn't that long ago. But that's incorrect.

What I clearly meant by generations, is to say there is only 3-4 people in your family between you and the time of slavery and founding of the united states.

And that's wrong.

Let's look at an example. My brother was born in 1984. My father was born in 1962. My grandfather was born in 1941. My great-grandfather was born in 1919. My great-great-grandfather was born in 1899. My great-great-great-grandfather was born in 1880. My great-great-great-great-grandfather was born in 1858.

Now unless my counting is really wrong, that's more than 3 or 4.

Actually it should add up. When was your great, great grandfather born?

You really, really need to do the math for this yourself instead of just assuming.

 

[mustafur]

South Africa on the other hand, has it's members of the government wanting to straight out murder white people for their privilege.

 

[Tornado]

Realize that at the most the USA is only 3-4 generations of people between us and the founding of the USA!

What I clearly meant by generations, is to say there is only 3-4 people in your family between you and the time of slavery and founding of the united states.

Actually it should add up. When was your great, great grandfather born?

My great grandfather and grandmother both lived until they were 92 years old. That's already three generations removed from me, and that still tops out in the mid and late 1910s, respectively. Slavery was abolished over 50 years before that.



For that matter, with how few people in America actually owned slaves, there's no way that you can even reasonably trace descendants from them. Unless there was some extensive sister marrying happening for generations, there's way too a wide net of people who would be legally descended from slaveowners at this point without ever having anything to do with it. Just because you can trace yourself to Jefferson Davis or whatever doesn't mean you can't also trace yourself to any of the scores of European immigrants who started entering the US after the Civil War was over.

 

[BobK]

The jokes about the mongol times, roman times is inaccurate, because the descendants of slaves or slave owners in the USA could still be traced within reasonable accuracy.

What makes you think it's "jokes"? If it's valid in the one case, why not the other?

 

[PocketZeven]

It's not necessarily ignorance. The post could be poorly written and not express what the writer intended.



See? You acknowledge that you worded it in such a way that it could be misunderstood. That's not ignorance on my part, that's me not being a mind reader and only being able to infer from what you write.



Are you saying that nobody who isn't from the US or black would advocate for reparations? That seems quite narrow minded. People can believe whatever they want to believe.

As far as you not being black, this is the first I've heard of it. It's not relevant, but it's not exactly part of your profile.



No. A generation is generally considered to be around about 20 years. There's an argument for it being a bit longer now as people tend to have their first children in their twenties instead of their teens, but that's what a generation is. 153 years is of the order of 7 generations. Founding of the USA is on the order of 11 or 12 generations.



No, I don't. The land and it's contents was sold to the current owner. Think of a better example.



Yeah, it was. You need to go back and review your idea of a generation and how many people there are between now and slave times. If you think it's two, then it seems like it wasn't that long ago. But that's incorrect.



And that's wrong.

Let's look at an example. My brother was born in 1984. My father was born in 1962. My grandfather was born in 1941. My great-grandfather was born in 1919. My great-great-grandfather was born in 1899. My great-great-great-grandfather was born in 1880. My great-great-great-great-grandfather was born in 1858.

Now unless my counting is really wrong, that's more than 3 or 4.



You really, really need to do the math for this yourself instead of just assuming.

Ignorance isalso if you make quick assumptions. I did not advocate that decendants should pay for reparations. Before jumping the gun you could have asked who should pay and why should descendants pay or receive it. I agree I write poorly, but that is because english is my second/third language.

It isnt about narrowmindedness. It is saying it isnt my place (in my opinion) to have a say (only opinion)in advocating, because I have no beef in the discussion. I dont suffer or benefit from the racial wealth gap. That what I was saying by stating I am neither black or american. Like the discussion about gun control I have ever only stated my opinion, but can not influence it or understand it fully. Thats why I ask so many questions.

Like I stated that laws around "treasure trove" is far from settled. Apparantly there have been instances where the original owner received the asset, but also the finder and current property owner in some instances. So according to the law your statement is not entirely correct.

In my case my great great grandfather was born in around 1865-1870 I guess I made a wrong assumption. My assumption was that my father represents a generation, my grandfather 1 generation and etc. My great grandmother was the youngest child and only died in 2003 and she was born in 1901.

It depends heavily if one of your (great) grandfathers was the younger, middle or oldest child. But my point remains the same that it was only 153 years ago. Some americans always act like the usa has long traditions and the constitution and its amendments are almost like it as old as the bible while it is only 231 years old and slavery only abolished 153 years ago.

My great grandfather and grandmother both lived until they were 92 years old. That's already three generations removed from me, and that still tops out in the mid and late 1920s, respectively. Slavery was abolished 60 years before that.



For that matter, with how few people in America actually owned slaves, there's no way that you can even reasonably trace descendants from them. Unless there was some extensive sister marrying happening for generations, there's way too a wide net of people who would be legally descended from slaveowners at this point without ever having anything to do with it. Just because you can trace yourself to Jefferson Davis or whatever doesn't mean you can't also trace yourself to any of the scores of European immigrants who started entering the US after the Civil War was over.

I stated between you and the founding. That is 242 years and I calculated approximately on average of 60 years of age for a "generation" of people. I used the wrong word "generation" for the lack of a better word. But hopefully you understand better what I meant.

And on the case of descendants. I never stated that the current descendants should pay reparations. That is an assumptions others made in this thread. Please watch the episode of explained, if you have netflix.

Perhaps you should try reading some of your posts from the gun thread, they seem at odds with this.



Not sure on the exact dates, but my Grandma was born in Germany around 1940 and my great-grandma died in 2004. There really is no way your numbers work out.



https://www.newretirement.com/retirement/average-inheritance-how-much-are-retirees-leaving-to-heirs/

In the gun threads I only shared my opinion. Did I ever advocate you should hand in your guns? I questioned the need for guns as protection and the corrolation between mass shootings and gunownership. My conclusion was that reducing gunownership will reduce mass shootings. This was argued with other combination of solutions (mental healthcare) and I agreed. So how is at odds?

My great great grandfather was born around 1865-1870. To clear the confusion I meant in between

Those numbers already corroborate my point. The average wealth that is inherited between black and white families (excluding super wealthy) should have a large difference. An average of 25k inheritance for the middle class is quite substantial. Quite some more then an average funeral. My guess is that inheritances is in the black community is substantially lower.

What makes you think it's "jokes"? If it's valid in the one case, why not the other?

Because it was acknowledged as a joke:

My great to the n-th power grand-mollusc was exploited and enslaved by the arthropods. This has led directly to my difficulties within human society only 400 million years later. I expect compensation and a formal apology from the arthropodian descendants within the week.

Frankly, I'm surprised it took them so long to recognise and correct this egregious wrong.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Didn't Americans throw the Japanese Americans into internment camps and try to bomb their home country out of existence in WW2? How are they faring? What about the Vietnamese, many of who were at war with the U.S. in the last 50 years?

 

[mustafur]

Didn't Americans throw the Japanese Americans into internment camps and try to bomb their home country out of existence in WW2? How are they faring? What about the Vietnamese, many of who were at war with the U.S. in the last 50 years?

Both of those groups are have higher incomes then the average white: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

This page on wikipedia is quite detailed it has nearly every individiual racial group, I found it quite odd that Australian Americans are the 3rd wealthiest lol.

 

[PocketZeven]

Didn't Americans throw the Japanese Americans into internment camps and try to bomb their home country out of existence in WW2? How are they faring? What about the Vietnamese, many of who were at war with the U.S. in the last 50 years?

You cant compare casualties of wars with slavery. If the japanese americans or vietnamese were enslaved multiple decades, while their owners got rich, I think they would be talking about reparations as well.

 

[mustafur]

You cant compare casualties of wars with slavery. If the japanese americans or vietnamese were enslaved multiple decades, while their owners got rich, I think they would be talking about reparations as well.

Who said anything about Slavery and reparations, he just asked how they where fairing in society, granted that leaves it a little open but I would assume he is reffering to financials as implicated most in this thread.

 

[Tornado]

I stated between you and the founding. That is 242 years and I calculated approximately on average of 60 years of age for a "generation" of people. I used the wrong word "generation" for the lack of a better word. But hopefully you understand better what I meant.

The problem is in the context of the thing you are arguing, generation is the correct word and the time period you are trying to make it fit is what is wrong. I am not 3-4 people removed from the founding of the United States. My father isn't even 60 years old now. 3-4 people in my ancestry doesn't even get me within half a century of when slavery was legal in the United States. My great grandfather, who approached a hundred years old before he died, might not have even known anyone who was a slave or a slave owner. Granted, that would probably be much less true for someone of the generation before him, but we're still talking all the way back in WWI.

And on the case of descendants. I never stated that the current descendants should pay reparations. That is an assumptions others made in this thread.

I didn't say you were talking about reparations, since I wasn't talking about reparations. I was taking issue with your claim that "the descendants of slaves or slave owners in the USA could still be traced within reasonable accuracy." No it can't. That ship sailed probably around WWII; if not fifty years earlier when tens of millions of immigrants came to America from Europe and China. What makes someone a descendant of a slave or a slave owner? What makes it so clear cut whether they have been affected by slavery?

Maybe we can be extremely broad strokes and say that nearly everyone living in America who is black probably has slavery in their ancestry at some point. What if they marry someone who is Hispanic? If they marry someone who is Asian? What if they married someone who was native American? What if they marry someone who is a European immigrant? What if they married someone from Canada? What if they marry Jefferson Davis VII? Are their children then descendants from slavery, despite half of their family having absolutely nothing to do with slavery? Because if the answer is yes than the joke on the previous page about people who were descended from people terrorized by Romans or Mongols stops being a joke and starts being the exact same thing. 150 years have passed, with half a dozen or more separate instances of people potentially intermingling with groups of people completely unrelated to the "slaves" and "slaveowners" ones and starting families.
And if Abe Lincoln's great great great grandaughter and Jefferson Davis' great great great grandson got married in 2018, do they check the "descended from slave owners" checkbox on their census paperwork?




"My great grandfather was a slave" is a fairly direct link. "My great grandfather owned slaves" is a fairly direct link. You can trace that line to you. Past that it gets pretty blurry. "One of my great great great great great grandfathers on my father's side owned slaves, but then moved North and every generation after that married a post-Civil War European immigrant while my mother's side was largely Native American" is not. And you may consider that far fetched, but it's certainly less so than the small amount of slave owners in the South simply staying in the South indefinitely and only marrying other former slave owners for 150 years.

Please watch the episode of explained, if you have netflix.

Vox Media.

 

[Johnnypenso]

You cant compare casualties of wars with slavery. If the japanese americans or vietnamese were enslaved multiple decades, while their owners got rich, I think they would be talking about reparations as well.

These are examples of people who, in my father's lifetime and my lifetime, were subject to incredible hardship and racism and yet overcame it very quickly through hard work and a focus on family and education. If you want to get into an Olympics of Oppression then no comparison will ever measure up, but I wasn't talking about reparations, rather the fact that those groups, and others who have been the subject of oppression, racism and war, have been able to overcome their hardships and be successful in America and other places.

 

[PocketZeven]

The problem is in the context of the thing you are arguing, generation is the correct word and the time period you are trying to make it fit is what is wrong. I am not 3-4 people removed from the founding of the United States. My father isn't even 60 years old now. 3-4 people in my ancestry doesn't even get me within half a century of when slavery was legal in the United States. My great grandfather, who approached a hundred years old before he died, might not have even known anyone who was a slave or a slave owner. Granted, that would probably be much less true for someone of the generation before him, but we're still talking all the way back in 1920.


I didn't say you were talking about reparations, since I wasn't talking about reparations. I was taking issue with your claim that "the descendants of slaves or slave owners in the USA could still be traced within reasonable accuracy." No it can't. That ship sailed probably around WWII; if not fifty years earlier when tens of millions of immigrants came to America from Europe. What makes someone a descendant of a slave or a slave owner? What makes it so clear cut whether they have been affected by slavery?

Maybe we can be extremely broad strokes and say that nearly everyone living in America who is black probably has slavery in their ancestry at some point. What if they marry someone who is Hispanic? If they marry someone who is Asian? What if they married someone who was native American? What if they marry someone who is a European immigrant? What if they married someone from Canada? What if they marry Jefferson Davis VII? Are their children then descendants from slavery, despite half of their family having absolutely nothing to do with slavery? Because if the answer is yes than the joke on the previous page about people who were descended from people terrorized by Romans or Mongols stops being a joke and starts being the exact same thing. 150 years have passed, with half a dozen or more separate instances of people potentially intermingling with groups of people completely unrelated to the "slaves" and "slaveowners" ones and starting families.
And if Abe Lincoln's great great great grandaughter and Jefferson Davis' great great great grandson got married in 2018, do they check the "descended from slave owners" checkbox on their census paperwork?




"My great grandfather was a slave" is a fairly direct link. "My great grandfather owned slaves" is a fairly direct link. You can trace that line to you. "One of my great great great great great grandfathers on my father's side owned slaves, but then moved North and every generation after that married a post-Civil War European immigrant while my mother's side was largely Native American" is not. And you may consider that far fetched, but it's certainly less so than the small amount of slave owners in the South simply staying in the South indefinitely and only marrying other former slave owners for 150 years.


I don't watch videos people post in this thread in lieu of an argument they don't or can't make themselves. I'm certainly not going to watch a 16 minute documentary on Netflix apparently made by Vox Media (of all people) to buttress your point when you don't seem to grasp how far back you'd have to go in the ancestry of people living today to find someone who even knew anyone else with any direct experience with slavery in the US. If I watch the video and find it dumb then my only recourse is to then argue points that you seemingly saw in the video with you who is pushing it; which seems to be what is happening now anyway.

You are missing my point it is only 153 years ago. I incorrectly used "generations" (which I acknowledged I was very wrong in the use) when I actually meant to say that 3-4 could have lived in those 240 and 150 years. And almost 100% of african americans in the usa are descendants from slaves.

If you dont take the time to watch it then you will probably misunderstand my point. I highly recommend watching it. What is wrong with Vox media anyway?

These are examples of people who, in my father's lifetime and my lifetime, were subject to incredible hardship and racism and yet overcame it very quickly through hard work and a focus on family and education. If you want to get into an Olympics of Oppression then no comparison will ever measure up, but I wasn't talking about reparations, rather the fact that those groups, and others who have been the subject of oppression, racism and war, have been able to overcome their hardships and be successful in America and other places.

You are misunderstanding the point. Watch it if you can and then we can continue the discussion properly.

I was talking about a generation of 500.000 people who were in slavery for decades and with 40 million descendants. You cant compare that with a minority with only a few years to a decade of hardship during wartime.
My family grew up during communist China and Japanese rule, but they overcame hardship too.

You do realize you're repeatedly requesting that people pay money to see the argument you're in favor of? That's not how a fair and balanced debate works - if the video's behind a subscription paywall and you think it's worth sharing, you either summarize it yourself for everyone to see, or leave it.

That is true. But you should also concider that I cant summarize a 16min video in a short forum post. It is the same when one wants to dicuss a movie or videogame for that matter. One has to pay to see how wonderfull or bad a game or video is to join the discussion. I clearly posted to recommend people to watch it. However I got reactions of people who didnt watch it at all. It is almost like me stating that Frodo was not the hero of LOTR and people debating me that I am wrong, without even reading the books or seeing the movie.

For the ones who think watching is worthwhile I gladly want to talk about it. For the ones who dont bother to watch, I cant fairly debate or discuss the matter.

People tend to judge even before watching content only because of a certain suggestive titel or statement. I remember the Movie and TV show "Dear white people" was bombarded with negative reviews, before the people even watch it. Both the TV and movie are actually quite good and criticises the nuances and also hypocracy in racism from both sides in modern day youth.

edit: added comment @Carbonox

 

[Carbonox]

If you dont take the time to watch it then you will probably misunderstand my point. I highly recommend watching it. What is wrong with Vox media anyway?



You are misunderstanding the point. Watch it if you can and then we can continue the discussion properly.

It costs money. Quit ignoring this point while continuing to insist on the same thing over and over.

Also, where do reparation advocates draw the line of reasonability? Will a proven descendant of a slave owner, who's currently homeless, be expected to pay money to Obama? If a slave owner descendant is mixed race, does the non-white blood within them mitigate this moral/financial responsibility?

 

[PocketZeven]

It costs money. Quit ignoring this point while continuing to insist on the same thing over and over.

Also, where do reparation advocates draw the line of reasonability? Will a proven descendant of a slave owner, who's currently homeless, be expected to pay money to Obama? If a slave owner descendant is mixed race, does the non-white blood within them mitigate this moral/financial responsibility?

I commented above on your post.

What is your point with the money? If I discuss a movie or videogame on this forum you will need to pay for it as well? If I reference a book that talks about a certain subject in american history am I forbidden to dicuss it in this thread because it costs money? Heck your internet subsciption cost money, tv subscription and your education!

If people dont have netflix they should ignore my post, because they are not able to watch it anyways. What compells you to criticize me, because you dont want to pay for netflix? It is like stating that you cant debate about GTsport on this forum, because people need to pay money to play it.

I never stated that descendants should pay any reparations. That was an assumption made by somebody else. I already repeatedly stated that clearly.

Who said anything about Slavery and reparations, he just asked how they where fairing in society, granted that leaves it a little open but I would assume he is reffering to financials as implicated most in this thread.

He was directly comparing the financial succes of black descendants of slavery with vietnamese and japanese americans who suffered during WW2 and the vietnamese war. I only stated that isnt a fair comparison.

edit: added comment @mustafur

 

[Rallywagon]

We arent debating video games are we Pocket. No, we are talking about an assertion you made on media that is behind a pay wall. Give at least a synapses about it or stop using it to try and justify a stance. It isnt up to us to pay for your point.

 

[PocketZeven]

We arent debating video games are we Pocket. No, we are talking about an assertion you made on media that is behind a pay wall. Give at least a synapses about it or stop using it to try and justify a stance. It isnt up to us to pay for your point.

If I started the convorsation about some interesting point I have seen in a book. The same could be said about that buying the book is a paywall. I am sorry If I assumed that many have Netflix here, but I cant see what the issue is with a paywall? If you dont have acces to netflix then dont comment on my post. It is that easy.

Please define paywall in this instance? There might be a misunderstanding in language here. Is netflix concidered a paywall? Having internet can be considered a paywall, having a TV, PC or smartphone can be considered a paywall? According to the definition wikipedia Netflix is not concidered a paywall: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paywall

I dont see the problem with me trying to share an interesting mini-doc I have seen and posting an opinion about it. Isnt it the choice of the other people to watch it or not?

Like my example before, if I assert that GOT is the best TV show ever, would you criticize me for starting a discussion about media behind a HBO paywall?
Or if I stated that "the art of the deal" is a literary masterpiece, I am forbidden to discuss it, because it is behind a paywall (it isnt free on the internet, but you need to buy it)?

Remember that newspapers used to cost money. Is that also a paywall? So I wouldnt be allowed to discuss it here, because people need to pay for it?

 

[Johnnypenso]

If I started the convorsation about some interesting point I have seen in a book. The same could be said about that buying the book is a paywall. I am sorry If I assumed that many have Netflix here, but I cant see what the issue is with a paywall? If you dont have acces to netflix then dont comment on my post. It is that easy.

Please define paywall in this instance? There might be a misunderstanding in language here. Is netflix concidered a paywall? Having internet can be considered a paywall, having a TV, PC or smartphone can be considered a paywall? According to the definition wikipedia Netflix is not concidered a paywall: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paywall

I dont see the problem with me trying to share an interesting mini-doc I have seen and posting an opinion about it. Isnt it the choice of the other people to watch it or not?

Like my example before, if I assert that GOT is the best TV show ever, would you criticize me for starting a discussion about media behind a HBO paywall?
Or if I stated that "the art of the deal" is a literary masterpiece, I am forbidden to discuss it, because it is behind a paywall (it isnt free on the internet, but you need to buy it)?

Remember that newspapers used to cost money. Is that also a paywall? So I wouldnt be allowed to discuss it here, because people need to pay for it?

If you have to pay money to get access, it's behind a pay wall.

 

[PocketZeven]

If you have to pay money to get access, it's behind a pay wall.

Internet=paywall
theatre=paywall
school=paywall
tv=paywall
bluray=paywall
book=paywall
magazine=paywall
etc....

 

[Johnnypenso]

Internet=paywall

It is but I think we can safely assume that anyone that can read that and/or participate here has already crossed that hurdle and so your point is moot.

 

[PocketZeven]

It is but I think we can safely assume that anyone that can read that and/or participate here has already crossed that hurdle and so your point is moot.

So in your logic I cant reference any literature, movies, books, TV shows that arent free?

 

[rono_thomas]

So in your logic I cant reference any literature, movies, books, TV shows that arent free?

Would you not quote from a book, or lemme guess we would have to read it all?

 

[PocketZeven]

Would you not quote from a book, or lemme guess we would have to read it all?

No you cant, I just found out, apparantly you cant reference anything that is behind a paywall?? And books cost money and you cant discuss content that others dont have free acces to.

 

[McLaren]

But you should also concider that I cant summarize a 16min video in a short forum post. It is the same when one wants to dicuss a movie or videogame for that matter. One has to pay to see how wonderfull or bad a game or video is to join the discussion.

Yes you can, people do it all the time. If someone can share on Wikipedia the entire plot of Venom that currently requires you to go to a theater to see, you can summarize a 16 minute video and share exactly what it's conveying to us. Best yet, if it's on Netflix, you can pause it to keep up with its content. We do it here on video games & other media all the time. I have not played GT Sport, but I have read enough posts from hundreds of users to get an idea of the game and what it contains.

You're smart enough to do the same for the rest of us to share your video reference. Perhaps if your post is compelling enough, someone here may actually fork out the money to see what the documentary really is about.

 

[PocketZeven]

Yes you can, people do it all the time. If someone can share on Wikipedia the entire plot of Venom that currently requires you to go to a theater to see, you can summarize a 16 minute video and share exactly what it's conveying to us. Best yet, if it's on Netflix, you can pause it to keep up with its content. We do it here on video games & other media all the time. I have not played GT Sport, but I have read enough posts from hundreds of users to get an idea of the game and what it contains.

You're smart enough to do the same for the rest of us to share your video reference. Perhaps if your post is compelling enough, someone here may actually fork out the money to see what the documentary really is about.

At least you arent trying to hide behind the dumb argument of a paywall. If somebody genuinly wants to know more of the content on netflix I can write up a summary. However it will take some time as I am not a talented writer.

 

[Rallywagon]

At least you arent trying to hide behind the dumb argument of a paywall. If somebody genuinly wants to know more of the content on netflix I can write up a summary. However it will take some time as I am not a talented writer.

It's not a dumb argument. It's part and parcel of debate. You made a claim, it's on you to provide the proof. Its neither my job to do your research nor is it my job to pay for it. Since you want to keep referring to it, it's on you to provide it.

 

[Johnnypenso]

So in your logic I cant reference any literature, movies, books, TV shows that arent free?

How about this for a rule of thumb? If you have a point to make link directly to the source and don't have that source behind a paywall. This is an open forum with members from around the world. Trying to make your case with information that's behind a a wall likely going to exclude a massive number of people from the discussion.