NationStates Jolt Archive

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11286847&postcount=441

Doesn't look like Flaming or Flamebaiting. It might be trolling but it also just might be him expressing his political oppinion.

Looks like a joke to me.

I assumed he was being sarcastic to tell you the truth.

I don't know that it's any more trollish than any other sarcasm around.

Even a casual glance at his post history would indicate that those beliefs are his, and not intended to be sarcastic or mocking. Nor do I think they are trolling - his post history indicates that he equates homosexuals to satan-worshippers, and he's willing to quote the Old Testament all day long to prove his point.

This is one of those cases where you must challenge and rebut. Despite the fact that his posts are incredibly politically incorrect, they appear to be honestly held.

Even a casual glance at his post history would indicate that those beliefs are his, and not intended to be sarcastic or mocking. Nor do I think they are trolling - his post history indicates that he equates homosexuals to satan-worshippers, and he's willing to quote the Old Testament all day long to prove his point.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11277395&postcount=5

Is sexual orientation an aspect that is covered by this new policy, if I may call it that? Because I would think that saying that "in the end it will end up in a mass queer/lesbionic paedophiliac rape; because this is what homosexuals know and enjoy; they are evil people" would fall under the heading of attacking a group by making offensive sweeping generalisation such as "rapists" and the rest of the post to indeed be a theory of "intrinsic degeneracy."

Verbal gay-bashing isn't just politically incorrect. It's hateful. If these kinds of things were said about another group...a group that isn't still 'politically correct' to demonise*...say, aboriginal people...would it fly?

*as evinced by the extreme anti-gay rhetoric being bandied about in both Canada and the US by even those in the highest echelons of power.

Verbal gay-bashing isn't just politically incorrect. It's hateful. If these kinds of things were said about another group...a group that isn't still 'politically correct' to demonise*...say, aboriginal people...would it fly?

*as evinced by the extreme anti-gay rhetoric being bandied about in both Canada and the US by even those in the highest echelons of power.

Its his personal views. We allow people who dont like Americans and [insert group here]...we let them say their opinions about them, to a point...and aslong as they really are their views and opinions, NS free speech generally accepts it.

Its his personal views. We allow people who dont like Americans and ...we let them say their opinions about them, to a point...and aslong as they really are their views and opinions, NS free speech generally accepts it.

I'd be inclined to agree with Baguetten, actually.

Example: if the comment wasn't about homosexuals, but WAS about the example you cited, Americans?

""in the end it will end up in a mass... paedophiliac rape; because this is what Americans[i] know and enjoy; they are evil people"...

I don't believe that THAT comment would be allowed to stand.

You know that's a good point.

But is it about whether or not you believe it to actually be true? Because if people were arguing, for example, that they think that black people are by their very nature, dumber, murderous, and less able to control themselves, a position we know some people hold, that's a believeable position for someone to believe. Now substitute that with the claims this poster made that, it seems, he actually believes. Aren't they somewhat similar? The big difference here is that we don't attach the same stigma to murder and pedophelia. However, there have been many loooooong topics on NS about how black people are more likely to commit crimes or the like.

I don't envy the mod position here. This is a tough one.

Is sexual orientation an aspect that is covered by this new policy, if I may call it that?
The only 'new policy' I've adopted is that I'm no longer going to jump through your "let's use mods as a club to teach gay tolerance" hoops. You've been doing it long enough to have lost a nation over it, and it's time you took some responsibilty for addressing the free speech aspects yourself.

I've re-read the posted definition of trolling, and it seems that the other fellow deserves a "knock it off", which I'll deliver via telegram. That's as far as I'm willing to take it at this point.

The only 'new policy' I've adopted is that I'm no longer going to jump through your "let's use mods as a club to teach gay tolerance" hoops. You've been doing it long enough to have lost a nation over it, and it's time you took some responsibilty for addressing the free speech aspects yourself.

I was not aware it was up to me to address free speech aspects, seeing as I am not a moderator, and any free speech we enjoy here is at the whim of those who own this forum, a subservient aspect to that being the rules as proclaimed by moderation staff, based upon the consistency with which I found myself wanting to question your finding and ask that you reconsider.

I'm sorry that you found that to be "hoops," and I'm sorry that you need to point out my bias towards gay issues, seeing as it is a bias I have never even made the slightest allusion towards denying, let alone finding regrettable in myself, not to mention that I remained ignorant of its causation in the loss of my previous nation (whose demise I assumed had something to do with the last instance of interaction with moderation I had under that nom de plume, namely a thread dealing with spam in the Dutch thread), but thank you for letting me be aware of such a connection.

I've re-read the posted definition of trolling, and it seems that the other fellow deserves a "knock it off", which I'll deliver via telegram. That's as far as I'm willing to take it at this point.

Thank you for re-evaluating your initial finding. Slap on the wrist as the consequence to the poster may seem to some (not to me, though), I find important the principle of it being equally unacceptable to call one group, of which I've never hid being part, a bunch of paedophilic rapists as it is to call another one a similar thing.

I was not aware it was up to me to address free speech aspects, seeing as I am not a moderator
The assumption here is that this is a discussion forum, not a place where mods are expected to close arguments that are distasteful to some members. We'll enforce Max's rules, but Max has made it clear that his perception of "free speech" encompasses ideas that are occasionally distasteful or outright disgusting. Consequently, we expect players to form their own responses against idiotic arguments, preferably while following our rules.

Trolling is always a judgement call, and we really don't like bringing out the Hammer of Mod to deal with it. We should be your last resort, not your first.