• ArcticPrincess@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Okay, how do you assess that harm has occurred?

        I claim that your post just harmed me. You should be excluded from the social contact.

        You violated the rules my god laid down. Harmful to me and all my fellow believers. You’re out.

        Your flagrant homosexuality is harming my children. Excluded.

        Your campaign to take away my guns is harming me and all my descendants. I was just minding my own business until you came along with your intolerant gun removal policies. Excluded! Burn him.

        This only solves the dilemma in a trivial way, if harm is transparent and uncontentious. It doesn’t address the real dilemma, which is widespread disagreement about what should and shouldn’t be tolerated.

        • irmoz@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Diffuse sanctions carried out by the community. And if the community all falls in agreement with such lunacy, you have much bigger problems than how you handle tolerance.

      • Scribbd@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        To exapand on the original who: all of us. We are all executors of the social contract.