coolcat13 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I will keep this general and in no way make implications to any member here . One has every right however to draw thier own conclusions . I think that in the face of injustice that it is our obligation to stand up and impose restrictions on those who provide hateful and destructive commentary . I am not saying that they should be silenced as they are free to speak I am saying that they should be countered when what they say could provoke hatred and violence towards another . for instance the KKk has the right to exist but thier rights end at saying that minorities should be hurt . I apply the same logic to those who say that homosexuality is an illness and that they should be put into mental institutions . Now here is what the topic represents ... should we stand by idly and allow people to make these assumptions which are both hateful and destructive or should we fire back as hard as the offenders .? apathy is a form of acceptance .One has only to see what apathy can do by reviewing the catastrophe that was wwll.So when rhetoric is said that inflames or attacks a certain group it should be strongly rebutted and so should the person or persons presenting the idea. so what do you think ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elderbear Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I will keep this general and in no way make implications to any member here . One has every right however to draw thier own conclusions . I think that in the face of injustice that it is our obligation to stand up and impose restrictions on those who provide hateful and destructive commentary . I am not saying that they should be silenced as they are free to speak I am saying that they should be countered when what they say could provoke hatred and violence towards another . for instance the KKk has the right to exist but thier rights end at saying that minorities should be hurt . I apply the same logic to those who say that homosexuality is an illness and that they should be put into mental institutions . Now here is what the topic represents ... should we stand by idly and allow people to make these assumptions which are both hateful and destructive or should we fire back as hard as the offenders .? apathy is a form of acceptance .One has only to see what apathy can do by reviewing the catastrophe that was wwll.So when rhetoric is said that inflames or attacks a certain group it should be strongly rebutted and so should the person or persons presenting the idea. so what do you think ??? The biggest challenge is to speak the truth while not acting like the opponent. We have a set of boundaries - and perhaps I (and the other mods) aren't doing enough to maintain them. I look forward to reading other opinions on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S0V13T Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I completely diasagree. I believe that all members are NOT created equal, and the forum rules should apply to some, but be waived for others. For example, if member A has contempt for homosexuals, masturbators. and "the Jews" then that is absolutely fine, and should not be censored, or questioned. Where as if member B takes offence at what member A says, and posts a retort then THEY should be the one that is silenced by being censored, have their posts deleted / edited by the powers that be. // Mirror Universe Topic, Mirror Universe reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I'm still trying to figure out who you guys are refering to ;) EDIT: Time for a serious reply. Let's tar and feather the offenders! c4 :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BorisP Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 I think that in the face of injustice that it is our obligation to stand up and impose restrictions on those who provide hateful and destructive commentary . I am not saying that they should be silenced as they are free to speak I am saying that they should be countered when what they say could provoke hatred and violence towards another . for instance the KKk has the right to exist but thier rights end at saying that minorities should be hurt . I apply the same logic to those who say that homosexuality is an illness and that they should be put into mental institutions . Now here is what the topic represents ... should we stand by idly and allow people to make these assumptions which are both hateful and destructive or should we fire back as hard as the offenders .? apathy is a form of acceptance .One has only to see what apathy can do by reviewing the catastrophe that was wwll.So when rhetoric is said that inflames or attacks a certain group it should be strongly rebutted and so should the person or persons presenting the idea. so what do you think ??? Where is this hatred you speak of? I see no members of our forums who are hateful. People are kind and courteous. Understanding and courteous. I think you mischaracterize these people. Perhaps you have misinterpreted something they said? Perhaps you are jumping to conclusions? Perhaps you are too close to the subject and cannot think clearly? I am certain that if you chose to discuss with this unnamed individual you could get something resolved. Gathering a lynch party doesn't really solve the problem. It only removes the messenger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 I think that in the face of injustice that it is our obligation to stand up and impose restrictions on those who provide hateful and destructive commentary . I am not saying that they should be silenced as they are free to speak I am saying that they should be countered when what they say could provoke hatred and violence towards another . for instance the KKk has the right to exist but thier rights end at saying that minorities should be hurt . I apply the same logic to those who say that homosexuality is an illness and that they should be put into mental institutions . Now here is what the topic represents ... should we stand by idly and allow people to make these assumptions which are both hateful and destructive or should we fire back as hard as the offenders .? apathy is a form of acceptance .One has only to see what apathy can do by reviewing the catastrophe that was wwll.So when rhetoric is said that inflames or attacks a certain group it should be strongly rebutted and so should the person or persons presenting the idea. so what do you think ??? Where is this hatred you speak of? I see no members of our forums who are hateful. People are kind and courteous. Understanding and courteous. I think you mischaracterize these people. Perhaps you have misinterpreted something they said? Perhaps you are jumping to conclusions? Perhaps you are too close to the subject and cannot think clearly? I am certain that if you chose to discuss with this unnamed individual you could get something resolved. Gathering a lynch party doesn't really solve the problem. It only removes the messenger. Moderator Warning: Content deleted for lack of courtesy, civility and/or respect. c4 :thinking: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BorisP Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Quote from page 3 of C4 flaming thread. "I didn't come to this forum to fight." Quote from post made minutes ago "Are you finally taking your meds now?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S0V13T Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 What are you trying to accomplish by attacking c4, boris? You yourself are guilty of many many contradictions and paradoxes, we all are. Thankfully, more people are interested nit picking an ep of voyager and time travel, then they are in peoples posts. We don't wanna start no nuclear fight - we just want to have a beach party tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Please do not send me anymore Moderator Edit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Moderator Warning: Post deleted for lack of courtesy, civility and/or respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beawulf Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 i've seen more fear than hatred, fear of jews, fear of gays... and i certainly have seen alot of contempt I understand your point coolcat and I think you are right. no rights have ever been won by being silent. but I dont think this forum is where it should take place. we could start up a website rebutting the arguments, could go post in a more relavant forum, a white supremasist site perhaps. I think we should just follow the troll principles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S0V13T Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Moderator Warning: Quoted content deleted for lack of courtesy, civility and/or respect. except elderbear... and those arn't really 'love' notes, exactelly ... and random people for re-seed requests. Great image krisbeawulf. Lets all read it, set it as all out desktop background images, and every time we want to launch the nukes at someone, minimise the window, and read it again, and not launch the nukes :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elderbear Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Cripes! I think more than one of those troll points apply to me!!! :o :o :o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Krisbeawulf... sounds like good advice to me. More people should follow it ^^ (the ignoring part, of course.) Edit: - trying to impress others with their knowledge. - making themselves the savior of the group. - flooding by excessive posting. - attacking regulars in the group. Hmmmmm.... :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralLee Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Cripes! I think more than one of those troll points apply to me!!! :o :o :o Haha... I see myself in several of those as well off and on, now and then. Guess it's mood dependent. Matter of fact, I think we ALL fit into a number of those catagories now and then.. what the heck. But, to "live" in those attitudes, almost 100% of the time like a very few do, especially online in forums, newsgroups, or what-have-you, is truly simply bizarre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BorisP Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Cripes! I think more than one of those troll points apply to me!!! :o :o :o I had this conversation at another forums. I made up some pictures that demonstrated that the points that apply to trolls apply to any person that is helpful. Teacher, Fireman, Policeman, Clergyman. They are all trolls by the definition of that picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Moderator Notice: Post deleted for lack of courtesy, civility and/or respect EDIT: Boyeeeeeee...the above statment (in bold red no less) makes me look like a really, really bad person. Gosh... c4 B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TV Man Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Cripes! I think more than one of those troll points apply to me!!! :o :o :o I always thought trolls were people who consistently posted off topic inflammatory diatribes to draw people into the attack. So I'm not so sure the original picture was the best description of a troll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 She made a physical threat, you posted actively bigoted propaganda... from a purely technical standpoint, you should both be banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 She made a physical threat' date=' you posted actively bigoted propaganda... from a purely technical standpoint, you should both be banned.[/quote'] I did? What was it? I can't recall. Please refresh my memory GorunNova. PM if you wish. c4 :thinking: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now