Malicious Compliance

19605 readers

2 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.

======

We ENCOURAGE posts about events that happened to you, or someone you know.
We ACCEPT (for now) reposts of good malicious compliance stories (from other platforms) which did not happen to you or someone you knew. Please use a [REPOST] tag in such situations.
We DO NOT ALLOW fiction, or posts that break site-wide rules.

======

Also check out the following communities:

[email protected] [email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

3298

Businesses can discriminate against their customers? Alright then... (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by minimar to c/maliciouscompliance

329 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] JudgeHolden 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Scarcely. Read the majority opinion. It specifically carves out an exception for "creative works" (or whatever the exact term is, I honestly don't remember) which in effect says that you cannot be forced by law to create something that espouses a position or creed with which you disagree.

As of right now I don't have a strong opinion on the ruling either way, but I think it's worth getting what it says right before we condemn it.

I lean towards thinking that it makes distinctions with which I agree, but I'm going to withhold judgement until I learn more about the arguments and we have a better sense of how it's going to play out in practice.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The Supreme Court is a fucking joke, none of their opinions deserve serious consideration. They're nothing but right wing ideologues pursuing their racist, sexist, homophobic, and anti-worker agenda.