NationStates Jolt Archive

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=412429

He's at it again, calling gays "sodomites" in what is a clear demonstration of malice.

Now, I don't want to be impatient, but how long will this go on? Had it been black people he called "niggers" or Jews whatever Nazis refer to them as, it would have been dealt with a long time ago. As it is now, he gets his threads locked, only to continuously start new ones with the same sort of inflammatory, malicious comments.

It's getting ridiculous.

Not a divine being, but...

That, combined with that player's history, looks like grounds for a deletion.

Not a divine being, but...

That, combined with that player's history, looks like grounds for a deletion.

He has been deleted twice before, only to come back and pick up the same behaviour.

Although I don't agree with him, I believe he's entitled to his views - but his expression of them is overtly critical and offensive, and his inability to ever discuss anything other than 'sodomy' and abortion is, to me at least, tiresome. It's really got beyond ridiculous.

I think homosexuality is wrong. The use of the word "gay" to describe homosexuals is offensive to me because it masks behavior that I think is perverted. But, I think (I hope) that I can discuss issues with people of differing opinions without being hateful in the use of language. I also think being hateful to people is wrong.

So, is this guy actually hateful in the threads, or is he using a word that you don't like (and, that he probably knows will provoke reactions)?

Look. He is CLEARLY playing a game. And I think you should try to stop him, because there are going to be people who don't get what he is trying to do and will be genuinely offended.

I think homosexuality is wrong. The use of the word "gay" to describe homosexuals is offensive to me because it masks behavior that I think is perverted. But, I think (I hope) that I can discuss issues with people of differing opinions without being hateful in the use of language. I also think being hateful to people is wrong.

As a gay person I don't think you are in position to have such an opinion about my sexuality, as I am in no position to have about yours. Just to have that out of the way, so that you know how much I really don't care about what you think of me.

So, is this guy actually hateful in the threads, or is he using a word that you don't like (and, that he probably knows will provoke reactions)?

His threads are infamous for the hateful language they contain. Use the advanced search and look for posts written by him, and prepare to be appalled.

So, is this guy actually hateful in the threads, or is he using a word that you don't like (and, that he probably knows will provoke reactions)?Yes. Obviously, I've got no idea if he's serious or if he's just trolling for fun, but either way, his posts - in my opinion - are intended to provoke furious reactions, rather than genuine debate. However, I am not a moderator of course, so I leave the binding interpretations and decisions in their very capable hands.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8680676&postcount=106

We applaud you, Frisbeeteria.

Thank you Fris! :fluffle:

Just a question to Fris,

I don't really think about anyones sexuality really but if someone held the religous belief that homosexuality was morally wrong, could they not express that opinion? Is this a case of NS3 going beyond his belief and into trolling or is subjective morality a taboo subject altogether?

Again, just a question, not about the judgement of NS3, but for my own future posts. Personally held convictions (of any stripe) really shouldn't be punished in my opinion, with the caveat that they are presented amicably.

Thanks

Just a question to Fris,

I don't really think about anyones sexuality really but if someone held the religous belief that homosexuality was morally wrong, could they not express that opinion? Is this a case of NS3 going beyond his belief and into trolling or is subjective morality a taboo subject altogether?

Again, just a question, not about the judgement of NS3, but for my own future posts. Personally held convictions (of any stripe) really shouldn't be punished in my opinion, with the caveat that they are presented amicably.

Thanks
In my viw, sure he can argue his beliefs as strongly as he wishes. But, this is not his website. This is Max Barry's and he sets the rules. If he doesn't comply with them, then it is his problem. He must follow the rules of the host.

Not a moderator

Many people do share those sentiments, Greater Wallachia, and they manage to share their opinions without using language in such a way to offend everyone on the other side. NationStates players are free to hold and express their opinions in a civil manner, and there are always phrasing or wording choices available to make your dislike of an idea clear without flaming.

[NS]Commando, in his various incarnations, has always chosen to pick the most inflammatory language he could. It makes no difference if those opinions are truly held, or presented as deliberate trolling, or parody trolling. What matters is the presentation.

I quoted the bit on sodomy because that seemed to be his primary focus in this particular thread. Here are some other quotes that break the site's Terms of Service. Just in this one thread he's flamebaiting, trolling, using terminology that most readers find offensive, and promoting illegal activity.
the sodomites can run around and lie about being oppressed.

Every wonder why so many poor kids have AIDS? Because perverts, prostitutes, and gays spread it, along with heroin users.

But the fags (and perverts) keep spreading it and if they behaved normally it would go away.

I have no problem with bombing an abortion clinic
Max Barry made it clear that all opinions were welcome, as long as they didn't fail these six magic words: obscene, illegal, threatening, malicious, defamatory, spam. [NS]Commando3 has failed on at least five of the six, and I could make a case for all of them.

You want to disagree with civility? Do so. Hundereds of posters manage it every day. Those that can't seem to grasp that simple concept are simply not welcome here.

With that being the case, I would like to know why people aren't held to the same standards about the word "faggot" or in [NS] Commando's case "sodomite" as they are with the word "******" or "kike." As I recall, Decisive Action (or Communist Mississippi or whatever incarnation he was in at the time) typed n****** so that he wouldn't actually type the word "******" out, but he freely used the word "faggot."

I wish to point out two things:

1) "[NS]" is a prefix added to forum accounts for NationStates nations that have the same name as an existing account on the Jolt system. For example, if I try to create a nation called "Kevin", the forum account will be called "[NS]Kevin" because the "Kevin" accout already belongs to a Jolt Admin. The player in question may be properly referred to as "[NS]Commando3" on the forums, but it should be understood that the nation involved is "Commando3".

2) This player has the nations "Commando2" and "Commando3". "Commando" was a different player altogether and in the event of his resurrection (or release of the name "Commando"; the name is quite old) should not be necessarily confused with this troll unless his behavior indicates otherwise.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

It's things like this that make me glad I'm not a mod. I really don't envy you poor souls, though I do applaud your work.

As I recall, Decisive Action (or Communist Mississippi or whatever incarnation he was in at the time) typed n****** so that he wouldn't actually type the word "******" out, but he freely used the word "faggot."
Seen him around lately, have you?

*aside* Doesn't he have a DOS now Fris? */aside*

Lemme just see somethin here... [NS]Comando3 is entitled to his views, just not allowed to present them the way he does. The whole fine line between an avid stand on an issue and a flame for the issue deal... right?

*aside* Doesn't he have a DOS now Fris? */aside*
I believe so.

Lemme just see somethin here... [NS]Comando3 is entitled to his views, just not allowed to present them the way he does. The whole fine line between an avid stand on an issue and a flame for the issue deal... right?

There are different ways in presenting your views. There is an intelligent way, stating what you believe in, while keeping an open-mind that others have different beliefs, and are entitled to them, and then there's the other approach, which is what Commando3 took. He stated his beliefs in a manner that was set to offend others who believed differently.

the sodomites can run around and lie about being oppressed.
Every wonder why so many poor kids have AIDS? Because perverts, prostitutes, and gays spread it, along with heroin users.
But the fags (and perverts) keep spreading it and if they behaved normally it would go away.
I have no problem with bombing an abortion clinic

Stating such things (which are obviously not proven) is a sure way to irritate others, seeing as its obvious he's trying to offend others without remorse. It may be his beliefs, and he's entitled to them, but make the effort in keeping the display of your beliefs as civil as possible. It's quite easy to say that you don't support homosexuality by simply stating that you believe its against your religion, but going out of your way to blame society on them for things that aren't proven is not the best idea.

There are different ways in presenting your views. There is an intelligent way, stating what you believe in, while keeping an open-mind that others have different beliefs, and are entitled to them, and then there's the other approach, which is what Commando3 took. He stated his beliefs in a manner that was set to offend others who believed differently.

Essentially what I was saying, just more intellegently!

I kinda did mean as an underhanded question to ask if there are any discussion topics on NS at all... but I didn't want to hijack the thread... I'll probably ask later.

I'd assume anything is debateable, as long as it is done civilly... though, as we can see, not everyone can do that...

You want to disagree with civility? Do so. Hundereds of posters manage it every day. Those that can't seem to grasp that simple concept are simply not welcome here.


Thanks for the clarification! I was hoping that it was his words that got him done in, not his beliefs.

I'd assume anything is debateable, as long as it is done civilly...
Correct.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

... and Views of both Positive and Negitive in nature can be expressed without even touching offensive words.

Seen him around lately, have you?This was quite a while ago, back before the DOS.