Foreign nationals
Under the new harassment policies being implemented in January, Twitch has effectively identified foreign nationals who have migrated to another country (e.g., to the United States) as a protected group (the term "immigration status" is invoked as an example of what constitutes a protected class). The policy later states that saying "[protected group] should not be allowed to vote" constitutes "[a call] for subjugation, segregation or exclusion." It seems to me that this policy entails that anyone who advocates enforcing the voting requirements of probably every single nation on earth (i.e., every nation prohibits non-citizens from voting) is guilty of hateful conduct.
More concretely, supposing I were to say, "Non-U.S. citizens should not be allowed to vote in U.S. elections," it seems to me that this would make me guilty of hateful conduct under the terms of the policy. By extension, anyone in favor of upholding the U.S. Constitution as it stands would be guilty of hateful conduct. I'm sure this is not the intent of the policy, and I doubt that it would be enforced in this way. Still, this does seem to be a section of the policy that might need some more work.
japanselm
shared this idea
-
anisaalexander
commented
Err, I consider the policy may have some ambiguities. While advocating for enforcing voting requirements might be a concern, it's essential to consider the context and intent behind the policy :) Twitch likely aims to address genuine cases of harassment rather than penalize respectful discussions or differing opinions)) I mean that what is said above is considered a call for subjugation, segregation, or exclusion, or at least that is how I see it. On https://samploon.com/free-essays/immigration/ I checked more essays about immigration and its issues. Immigration is a complex issue, and policies surrounding it vary from country to country. We must have open discussions and consider different perspectives when discussing immigration. I consider that while protecting vulnerable groups from harassment is crucial, we must ensure policies don't unintentionally stifle legitimate discussions on immigration matters. Unfortunately, striking the right balance between promoting inclusivity and allowing diverse opinions can be challenging.
-
japanselm
commented
Under the new harassment policies being implemented in January, you have effectively identified foreign nationals who have migrated to another country (e.g., to the United States) as a protected group (the term "immigration status" is invoked as an example of what constitutes a protected class). The policy later states that saying "[protected group] should not be allowed to vote" constitutes "[a call] for subjugation, segregation or exclusion." It seems to me that this policy entails that anyone who advocates enforcing the voting requirements of probably every single nation on earth (i.e., every nation prohibits non-citizens from voting) is guilty of hateful conduct.
More concretely, supposing I were to say, "Non-U.S. citizens should not be allowed to vote in U.S. elections," it seems to me that this would make me guilty of hateful conduct under the terms of the policy. By extension, anyone in favor of upholding the U.S. Constitution as it stands would be guilty of hateful conduct. I'm sure this is not the intent of the policy, and I doubt that it would be enforced in this way. Still, this does seem to be a section of the policy that might need some more work.