Calling someone a white supremacist doesn’t a white supremacist make.

You are arguing disingenuously. Since it is about their particular thoughts, and not how they are expressed (ie, profanity, insults, etc) it is indeed thought policing. It is banning someone for their political opinion. You cannot get much more fascist than that. The policy itself is a display of intolerance.

Yay inclusivity. Kicking people from forums for what they think. So progressive and not at all fascist.

House prices are solely based upon what people are willing to pay to buy it, and further, higher values means they have to pay more to buy said house, and pay more in property taxes to live in said house.

How is ‘caging humans’ uncivil and racist?  Are you suggesting that we abolish prisons because they are uncivil?  Don’t break a countries’s laws and then they won’t cage you.  Pretty simple concept.

Without NPCs the most you could call it is a FPS with ‘rpg elements’.

Counterpoint. Nobody ‘deserves’ to be credited for doing their job and I find the whole practice odd. Why does my smartphone not come with a list of credits? Did the engineers who designed it not work hard as well?  It is all rather arbitrary.  

What political opinions does he have that make him an alt-right white nationalist? Opinions he has personally expressed, not guilt by association, or imaginary dog-whistles. Actual words. You won’t be able to name any, because he isn’t. Sure, he acts like a frat-bro, but if you call him alt-right is to essentially…

Not running spell check is completely amateurish and should lead to being written up, and fired if it happens repeatedly. Grammatical errors and other mistakes are one thing, but when you are literally writing on a device that puts big red underlines on misspelled words, there is absolutely no excuse.

The Beyonce thing only makes clear that Beyonce fans are spiteful little minions who are trying to spin normal social behavior into a slight due to their obsession with an overhyped celebrity.

I can’t think of a louder race bait then accusing someone on the internet of being racist.... because they commented on someone’s grammar.

I gave the yardstick. It is rather simple. ‘Do onto others...’. If you don’t consider it morally acceptable when you are the target of an action, then it is not morally acceptable to enact that action on others. That is as close to objective as you can get on the topic.

Now you are moving the goalposts. First you exclude the president. Fine. So we do an even comparison and stick to journalists. What do you do? You create another criteria to exclude someone you dislike and justify why it is okay to harass him. ‘He’s knows powerful people so that makes him fair game’.  And that is what…

According to basically everyone? The only people who can say otherwise would be those who also say it is perfectly moral for other people to steal from them or and family. However those who steal also tend to express great moral outrage when others steal from them.

Way to take the easy way out. What about Tucker Carlson himself? He gets hateful harassment. He doesn’t get mocked for being gay, but are you suggesting that is the only inappropriate form of harassment? I’d argue that messages like ‘I hope you die’ and such would fall under the category of harassment. And the…

You completely missed the nuance about the $2 example, which furthers my point. You see a poor person and a rich person and so see it as greater harm on a poor person. You are the one looking simplistically at it. It is not about harming Gates. It is about taking $2 from Gates that would have gone to his charity. The…

“The open Internet has lead to the greatest increase in conspiracy theorism in modern history.”

“Section 51 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 abolished the common law criminal offences of sedition and “leasing-making”. The latter offence, also known as “lease /ˈliːz/ making”, was considered an offence of lèse-majesté or making remarks critical of the monarch of the United Kingdom. The…

Yea, the morally gray examples are mastabatory bullshit. They don’t exist in the real world. And further, such examples rely on perfect knowledge of a situation.

Yes, you stop the disease from spreading by letting them speak. Nothing outs a conspiracy nut faster than their own words.