I’ve not watched any of this, however there were investigations and "investigators interviewed Pormanove and one of his co-streamers who both appeared to be victims of violence and humiliation. They “strongly denied being victims of violence, stating that the events were staged in order to `generate a buzz’ and make money.” ". That seems to me that this was simulated torture, or at the very least consensual torture. I’ve watched and enjoyed many episodes of Jackass and I’d consider some of the things they did to be a form of torture… this just seems to be the natural progression of that genre of ‘shock entertainment’, which unfortunately went too far in this case.
I like that. That’s a good strawman. You compared a Kick stream focused on and containing only torture that literally killed a person to an artistic form of expression, a movie that was screened at Cannes and won many awards and is ranked second on the list of the Sundance Film Festival’s Top 10 films of All Time.
Obviously, I don’t think you’re a big enough idiot to have meant that seriously, it was clearly satirical.
That’s a good summary of my point, though I’m not sure why you think it’s a “strawman” and it certainly wasn’t satirical.
A strawman fallacy involves misrepresenting someone’s argument to make it easier to attack. I, however, accurately represented your argument and then used an **analogy ** to highlight its flaws. An analogy is a rhetorical tool used to explain a concept by comparing it to something similar. In this case, I was responding directly to your question about why it matters if torture is simulated, and if it’s ok to be streamed.
My point, which you seem to have somehow missed, is that we have a clear precedent for broadcasting simulated torture. And, as you so helpfully pointed out, simulated torture not only is ok to be streamed, but it can also receive acclaim and awards.
I’m glad we agree that simulated torture can be broadcast.
lol, so now I can go into pointing out your logical fallacies… but, honestly I’ve already spent more than enough time on this conversation with someone who is clearly very toxic. Thanks for the quick response and for validating my initial impression that you’re someone whose opinion I can happily live without, and welcome to my blocked list.
the dude died on stream , and then the people who tortured him to death sat around after he died, still streaming his dead body , and talked about what to tell the police, before they called emergency services. and here you guys are, arguing in their favor, calling it censorship that Kick is getting fined, and debating on whether the torture is “simulated”.
Uh, what’s does that matter? Is it ok to stream shit like that if it’s simulated?
Should we not be able to watch Reservoir Dogs because there’s simulated torture in it?
Would you watch a torture scene if you’re not sure it is simulated or not?
In a movie? It’s Surely fake. On a livestream? I won’t be so sure.
I’ve not watched any of this, however there were investigations and "investigators interviewed Pormanove and one of his co-streamers who both appeared to be victims of violence and humiliation. They “strongly denied being victims of violence, stating that the events were staged in order to `generate a buzz’ and make money.” ". That seems to me that this was simulated torture, or at the very least consensual torture. I’ve watched and enjoyed many episodes of Jackass and I’d consider some of the things they did to be a form of torture… this just seems to be the natural progression of that genre of ‘shock entertainment’, which unfortunately went too far in this case.
I like that. That’s a good strawman. You compared a Kick stream focused on and containing only torture that literally killed a person to an artistic form of expression, a movie that was screened at Cannes and won many awards and is ranked second on the list of the Sundance Film Festival’s Top 10 films of All Time.
Obviously, I don’t think you’re a big enough idiot to have meant that seriously, it was clearly satirical.
That’s a good summary of my point, though I’m not sure why you think it’s a “strawman” and it certainly wasn’t satirical.
A strawman fallacy involves misrepresenting someone’s argument to make it easier to attack. I, however, accurately represented your argument and then used an **analogy ** to highlight its flaws. An analogy is a rhetorical tool used to explain a concept by comparing it to something similar. In this case, I was responding directly to your question about why it matters if torture is simulated, and if it’s ok to be streamed.
My point, which you seem to have somehow missed, is that we have a clear precedent for broadcasting simulated torture. And, as you so helpfully pointed out, simulated torture not only is ok to be streamed, but it can also receive acclaim and awards.
I’m glad we agree that simulated torture can be broadcast.
Removed by mod
lol, so now I can go into pointing out your logical fallacies… but, honestly I’ve already spent more than enough time on this conversation with someone who is clearly very toxic. Thanks for the quick response and for validating my initial impression that you’re someone whose opinion I can happily live without, and welcome to my blocked list.
oh no!
anyway.
Not a straw man. An actual point.
the dude died on stream , and then the people who tortured him to death sat around after he died, still streaming his dead body , and talked about what to tell the police, before they called emergency services. and here you guys are, arguing in their favor, calling it censorship that Kick is getting fined, and debating on whether the torture is “simulated”.
deleted by creator