I would completely agree on that, if his general blog would be what was posted. But this is an unrelated informative article, which is why I don't think discrediting critique of the person is valid.
Especially since the 'offenses' seem impressively minor in this case.
I agree that this is an unrelated article, but he opened this can of worms himself by inserting dogwhistles in it. Which is unfortunate, because the information in there is actually useful and something I would gladly link in the "Library" section of my blog. But I can't do that now, otherwise I'd be platforming speech that wants me dead.
Would you care to explain to me how "consooome" and "soyware" imply your death?
In my vocabulary those are a joking reference to overconsumption and a play on bad software that serves as spyware, which social media sites arguably often are imo.
If you argue that you associate these words with people that want you dead it would seem to me that that is your narrow personal perspective. I certainly don't want you dead.
Sorry, that was definitely bad wording on my part. But still, I think my hesitancy to platform people who openly use the vernacular of people who actually do want that is reasonable. I obviously don't know Luke Smith and have no idea on what he actually wants, but I know the people who use those words and what they want.
