Warp wrote:
>   Being more lenient of criticism of the "majority" and stricter of criticism
> of a "minority" is a double standard 

Not necessarily. If the minority of 10 people say something that offends 
10,000 people, should they be punished 1000 times as much as if the 10,000 
people say something that offends the 10 people?

In other words, it doesn't come down to "lenient" or "strict" unless someone 
gets offended. If I criticize you in a way that doesn't upset you, we don't 
have this sort of conversation.

But if I issue criticism that offends some people, I'm much more likely to 
offend someone in a "majority" than a "minority."  I might say something 
that offends some minority of which there are 5000 who might hear it, take 
offense, and complain about it. Or I might say something equally offensive 
that any of 100million people might hear, take offense, and complain about. 
If there's a 0.001% chance of anyone being sufficiently offended as to take 
it to court, then guess which criticism is treated more strictly?

So, basically, I think you have to count the number of people who might be 
offended in with the severity of the offense to make any sense out of 
"strict" or "lenient".

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message