Comment

I think the disagreement is about whether presenting a work as-is is reproducing that work. I would say no-- unless you gain partial authorship by modifying it in a substantial manner, you are just presenting it. I think presenting works that contain views that we disagree with today can be (but is not always) okay. This gets pretty close to the line as it is being presented seemingly in line with its original intent as a joke and not as a form of commentary (I see why you might call that “reproducing” it). Overall it does not bother me since I have a fairly high tolerance for historical nastiness being presented rather than removed.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Jean_le_Flambeur@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
In my personal opinion a good way would be to contextualize it, for example in the Bod text:

“Here is an old text I found, it contains a nasty slur I dont endorse in any way but I leftbit in for historical accuracy”

Its not uncritically using a slur or editing out, there is a middle ground

source
- Feathercrown@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  That’s probably the most reasonable approach, yeah
  
  source
  - over_clox@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    OP here, I have since edited my post to add such advised disclaimer. 👍
    
    source
    Feathercrown@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    o7
    
    source
Jean_le_Flambeur@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
So if I tell that story to my friends, without contextualizing, it wouldn’t normalize the usage of that word?

Or is the difference for you that he posted a photo, not just the text?

source
- Feathercrown@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  Interesting question. I think it being a screenshot does matter to me, yes-- I view screenshots of other sites as a separate artifact from the text body. This could be because they are clearly separated from the “voice” of the speaker, or because they cannot be edited as easily. The slur in the image was mildly surprising, yet I was relieved to see it was not reproduced in the text of the post. I guess it’s kind of similar, in my view, to listening to a song that has the n-word in it vs singing a song that has the n-word in it.
  
  source
  - Jean_le_Flambeur@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    Understandable take, although op stated he didn’t remove it in the body text, it was automatically removed by Lemmy
    
    source
    Feathercrown@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    Oh, I don’t feel great about that…
    
    Also, lemmy has content filters?? TIL.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - over_clox@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    I do think I’ll make this my final comment on this posted document, to add to whatever historical context anyone wants or cares to take from it.
    
    This is not a screenshot, it came from a yellow pamphlet slap full of ‘memes’ from the 70s/80s before the word meme was even a thing. This was legit half moldy old paper funnies from long ago, shad during the Xerox office copier era.
    
    I scanned some of them in on my potato 300dpi scanner like 20 years ago, including this one. Ultimately I ended up losing most of the contents of that old hard drive to drive failure, but this one document interested me.
    
    Why? Not even the funny factor, but the fact that I couldn’t get official OCR software of the time to even read the damn text. So, I wrote my own G-D experimental OCR software in QuickBasic 4.5, meant to read as best as possible potato quality scans.
    
    And this became my test document for my own adaptive OCR software, loosely 20 years ago. That’s the only reason this document even survives to this day, because it got copied from the old old folder into an experimental old OCR project folder, as the main working test sample, because potato…
    
    TL;DR - This is not a screenshot, I scanned it myself roughly 2 decades ago, nor do I still have the copy of a copy of a copy of however many copies it made on the Xerox machines of the day.
    
    source