tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post5264540790466842357..comments2024-03-18T22:21:33.261-07:00Comments on The Debate Link: Free Speech and Discriminatory MotiveDavid Schraubhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-1034322869783493432016-12-13T07:33:59.369-08:002016-12-13T07:33:59.369-08:00My issue is that it looks to me like the standards...My issue is that it looks to me like the standards for anti-semitism being adopted here aren't well-suited for adjudicating harassment. When you're monitoring trends, having some false positives or using views that are very debatably anti-semitic in and of themselves as a proxy for anti-semitism is probably fine. You don't need exact, fine-tuned precision for that purpose. When you are trying to adjudicate individual cases of alleged harassment, though, all of a sudden that kind of imprecision becomes a serious problem, especially when there are free speech issues at stake. <br /><br />To use a really strained analogy, BMI is a reasonably good measure for tracking the rate of obesity in a population, but an awful one for determining whether an individual is obese. Pillsyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01269452554612705292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-89674475227222059012016-12-08T17:04:23.565-08:002016-12-08T17:04:23.565-08:00Very cogent argument, as usual. Thanks for breakin...Very cogent argument, as usual. Thanks for breaking this down; I hadn't placed this matter in the larger legislative context.bookworm914https://www.blogger.com/profile/14401809945292061820noreply@blogger.com