Moderation question

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Moderation question

Postby smiths » Sun Jun 06, 2010 11:35 pm

ahh, thats a good one 17breezes, you talking about credibilty is actually the laughter i needed to deal with feeling so upset by it all,

now, just remind me, which arab state just killed 9 or more people in international waters and got away with it?
the question is why, who, why, what, why, when, why and why again?
User avatar
smiths
 
Posts: 2205
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 4:18 am
Location: perth, western australia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby Username » Sun Jun 06, 2010 11:37 pm

~
barracuda wrote:The same goes for America, and almost any country you can name, smiths.

I feel pretty much the same way when I read people going on about their favorite football or baseball teams, or talking about tee vee shows they enjoy while their countries of residence are literally burning children world-wide. Should we ban those people too?

What fine country do you live in that is not currently killing innocent children?


Does this make you a defeatist, barracuda?

Yes. We should ban those people who loudly support the burning of children.
~
Last edited by Username on Sun Jun 06, 2010 11:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Username
 
Posts: 794
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:27 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby smiths » Sun Jun 06, 2010 11:38 pm

once again you miss the point barracuda, i know realise it is intentional

this is not a discussion of racists pasts and abuse

this is a discussion about the actions NOW of a CURRENT and ACTIVE racist state that is receiving protection from an international community
the question is why, who, why, what, why, when, why and why again?
User avatar
smiths
 
Posts: 2205
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 4:18 am
Location: perth, western australia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby 17breezes » Sun Jun 06, 2010 11:39 pm

smiths wrote:ahh, thats a good one 17breezes, you talking about credibilty is actually the laughter i needed to deal with feeling so upset by it all,

now, just remind me, which arab state just killed 9 or more people in international waters and got away with it?


LOL you think I expected anything else but this? Not from you pal. Listen to cuda....he has some wisdom for you.
"Go back to Auschwitz" Humanitarian peace activists, 2010.
User avatar
17breezes
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:06 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby barracuda » Sun Jun 06, 2010 11:42 pm

smiths wrote:once again you miss the point barracuda, i know realise it is intentional

this is not a discussion of racists pasts and abuse

this is a discussion about the actions NOW of a CURRENT and ACTIVE racist state that is receiving protection from an international community


And Australia is not actively a racist state? Working with the terrorist US state? Then why the discrepancy in life expectancy?

I am honestly trying to understand where you're coming from, dude.
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby barracuda » Sun Jun 06, 2010 11:44 pm

Username wrote:Yes. We should ban those people who loudly support the burning of children.


I'd say the people who quietly support it are no less offensive. And in one way or another, through action or the lack thereof, we are all complicit in that regard.
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby Username » Sun Jun 06, 2010 11:46 pm

~
I'd say the people who quietly support it are no less offensive.


I disagree.
~
Username
 
Posts: 794
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:27 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby Jeff » Sun Jun 06, 2010 11:55 pm

On the poll thread today:

Sepka wrote:Israel's blockade is praiseworthy. Keeping extremely tight control over the Palestinians until they decide to live in peace is the solution most likely to prevent needless loss of life. It's not a perfect solution, but it's better than any of the proposed alternatives that I've seen. The Israelis are showing a great deal more restraint and humanity than the Palestinians have ever done.


Not even a response. I find that interesting.
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby Simulist » Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:00 am

Well, actually, I did respond. It wasn't a great response (or even a memorable response), but... well, it was there.
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby Username » Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:00 am

~
pffffft . . . it was Sepka.

and there was too a response.

Simulist wrote:Sepka, bless your little heart... You're terribly wrong, but you are unfailingly consistent at it.

Seems like that deserves some credit. (You know, for something.)

~
Last edited by Username on Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
Username
 
Posts: 794
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:27 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby norton ash » Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:01 am

Jeff:

On the poll thread today:



Sepka wrote:
Israel's blockade is praiseworthy. Keeping extremely tight control over the Palestinians until they decide to live in peace is the solution most likely to prevent needless loss of life. It's not a perfect solution, but it's better than any of the proposed alternatives that I've seen. The Israelis are showing a great deal more restraint and humanity than the Palestinians have ever done.




Not even a response. I find that interesting.


That's because even though I may not agree with Sepka, it's a reasonable point. And I can sympathize with Percival's viewpoint as well.

Meanwhile, they're not busy screaming at their opposition calling them stupid anti-semites either.
Zen horse
User avatar
norton ash
 
Posts: 4067
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby Jeff » Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:04 am

Sorry, a response. Just unlike by orders of magnitude the responses if it hadn't been Sepka.
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby slomo » Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:11 am

You know, I'm starting to have a great deal more sympathy for Nordic's hissy fit. I would not characterize the situation in such stark terms as he, but it does appear that statements which dehumanize Palestinians (such as Sepka's, not to mention 17's) get a pass, while even the vaguest whiff of anti-semitism gets at least a stern warning if not an outright ban.

Jeff, it's your forum, you can moderate it any way you deem fit. But it does raise questions about inherent biases, and whether it is really worth my time anymore to participate in this forum.

EDIT: Pfft, I misunderstood what Jeff was getting at. Still, the subtle bias is there.
Last edited by slomo on Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
slomo
 
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby Jeff » Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:12 am

Username wrote:~
pffffft . . . it was Sepka.


Which is my point.

If Sepka gets a pass from the board's anti-zionists then for all the rhetoric this is just a pissing personality clash.
User avatar
Jeff
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11134
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 8:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Moderation question

Postby 17breezes » Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:18 am

slomo wrote:You know, I'm starting to have a great deal more sympathy for Nordic's hissy fit. I would not characterize the situation in such stark terms as he, but it does appear that statements which dehumanize Palestinians (such as Sepka's, not to mention 17's) get a pass, while even the vaguest whiff of anti-semitism gets at least a stern warning if not an outright ban.

Jeff, it's your forum, you can moderate it any way you deem fit. But it does raise questions about inherent biases, and whether I should participate under the circumstances.


Dehumanize Palestinians? Where do you get that shit from? Come on prove it!! With EVIDENCE.
"Go back to Auschwitz" Humanitarian peace activists, 2010.
User avatar
17breezes
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:06 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 169 guests