Just a friendly reminder, Gawker did not out Thiel. He had a public profile on Friendster that clearly described him as interested in men. Gawker's editor at the time remarked that people like him thought the web was this super ultra secret bat cave, and that if you posted something there it wasn't really public.

You see no difference between someone sharing something on a social platform versus having that information plastered across the nation?

Social platforms are largely ways for people to plaster information across the nation. Just look at how Twitter is used these days.

>You'd have to be insane to actually argue (and it seems thats what you're doing)

I think it's unlikely we'll be able to have a productive conversation. Have a good day!

I don't see why not

Is doxxing people using information (publicly) available online ok then? Because that's what it really is, but worse, since the doxxing entity in question is a big media publication

If I post on my Facebook that I am married, I don't consider it doxxing if someone else posts about that. Social media should be considered social and public.

Does it matter? Do you think we should blacklist people if they allegedly hold or have at some point allegedly held unfashionable opinions?

What a horrible precedent.

Anyone can have "unfashionable" opinions. It's just that they can't also dictate how other people react to those opinions.

There's nothing more libertarian than holding people accountable by exercising free association, or in this case, freedom to not associate.

Do you think it's good for a democracy if someone's career is limited by their political beliefs?

Keep in mind too, these aren't fringe political beliefs. It's generally accepted in non-western countries that men and women are different, for example, yet somehow that's a fireable offense here.

The unemployed get to vote.

Well, it kinda delegitimizes their complaint about other peoples' thoughts and ideas.

Gawker was found (not over Thiel's outing, but anyway) guilty by the court. It might be a sad state of affairs that you need to have Thiel's kind of money to take down a gossip rag like Gawker, but... good riddance.

> What is it that Peter Thiel said previously about women voting?

Respect for capitalism declined rapidly in the US after women gained the vote.

What’s your point?

None, he answered the (presumably?) rhetorical question.

The comment was unclear whether “Respect for capitalism declined rapidly in the US after women gained the vote.” is a direct or indirect quote of Peter Thiel, or not a quote at all.

To clarify, it's an accurate summary of Thiel's views as expressed in this 2009 essay:

https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/educatio...