Malicious Compliance

19593 readers

1 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:

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

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

2674

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

submitted 1 year ago by minimar@lemmy.world to c/maliciouscompliance@lemmy.world

350 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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

[–] yokonzo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I'm out of the loop, what did the SCOTUS do now?

[–] Jannes@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They allowed a company to discriminate against a gay customer for religious reasons, when they requested to make a website them. It's important to note that the supposed customer never actually contacted the company, is not gay and had been married to a woman for about 20 years. So this was all based on a lie

[–] bric@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

The court opinion wasn't based on any specific customer, if you read the SCOTUS opinion the website designer didn't even have a business designing websites, they were just challenging the law in case they decided to make a business that did.