this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2023
399 points (97.6% liked)

Malicious Compliance

21350 readers
58 users here now

People conforming to the letter, but not the spirit, of a request. For now, this includes text posts, images, videos and links. Please ensure that the “malicious compliance” aspect is apparent - if you’re making a text post, be sure to explain this part; if it’s an image/video/link, use the “Body” field to elaborate.

======

======

Also check out the following communities:

!fakehistoryporn@lemmy.world !unethicallifeprotips@lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Psychlops@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Such an unbelievable ruling, but this is really the best possible response. If conservatives thought they were persecuted before…

[–] Billy_Gnosis@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't have an issue with any of this. Private Business owners can sell their products or services to whoever they want. Don't see what the big deal is. If you don't like it, there's plenty more competition willing to take your money.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Landmammals@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

MAGA isn't a protected class. This has always been allowed.

[–] Willer@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Honestly i would expect that a webdesigner would not wanna put up with my bullshit way earlier.

Understandable, have a nice day. but no we wanna make a scene.

[–] Kinglink@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)

You could always do this. But you'd be a damn idiot to antagonize half a potential customer base but ... Well that's one way to run a business.

[–] Yeller_king@reddthat.com 2 points 2 years ago

Nowhere close to half of Americans are Trump supporters.

[–] zouden@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Depending on where they're based it could be much less than half

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] HunterBidensLapDog@infosec.pub 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Now that #SupremeCourt says we can discriminate, I'm trying to figure out what to tag content. #NoMAGA #NoRepublicans #QueerOnly #NoBreeders #NoChristians

[–] PizzasDontWearCapes@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

My understanding is that businesses can refuse services which conflict with their beliefs, morals, etc, not broadly refuse to serve people

So you can't refuse someone for being a MAGA clown, but you could refuse to print MAGA shirts for a customer

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] bren42069@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

inb4 get woke go broke, rip their business. not a good look in the bud light era

[–] Kalkaline@lemmy.one 1 points 2 years ago

BudLight was pandering and got called on it by everyone that was paying attention. "Go woke, go broke" is clearly not a trend, just look at Twitter and Elon doing the opposite and losing fuckloads of money.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Billy_Gnosis@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I don't have an issue with any of this. Private Business owners can sell their products or services to whoever they want. Don't see what the big deal is. If you don't like it, there's plenty more competition willing to take your money.

[–] Kittengineer@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (8 children)

For me the difference is in refusing to serve someone because how they were born vs the choices they make.

Totally ok with the later, but the laws are supposed to prevent the former. Just like it being illegal to discriminate against someone just because they are black or white or Asian or whatever.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›