NationStates Jolt Archive

A group of us had been suspecting that the material in this original post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11648168&postcount=1) of this thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=498782) wasn't thought up by the thread starter because it hasn't matched his previous writing style nor has he returned to defend the statements. There hasn't really been any discussion of the topic anyway, and now someone found the source (http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com/2006/09/it-is-time-for-jews-to-think-about.html) that the OP didn't link to.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11650907&postcount=80

trollllllltastic

Thread locked for review.

In the thread you mention that you think he was warned for this before. Can you link me to it?

Yup, that thar's onna them Jew-hatin' trolls. They'se gettin' more common 'round these parts, we puts 'em outta their misery when we can though.

Initially, I'm inclined to say that it is trolling, but I'm open to discussion on it.

This bit strikes me as pretty blatant.

The jews are a race of usururs.

Initially, I'm inclined to say that it is trolling, but I'm open to discussion on it.

This bit strikes me as pretty blatant.

Just my two cents, but honestly, I don't see anything in the entire post that is NOT designed to push the bad buttons. The usurers line simply congeals the rest of the slop into one thought.

What I cant figure is if the ST.Henry at the bottom indicates that it is a quote of some sort, and if it is, does that mean that the poster was intending somehow to show how unpleasant ST.Henry is? Maybe (in a big stretch towards 'benefit of the doubt') it was intended to be sarcastic?

But it sure didn't sound like it.

Just my two cents, but honestly, I don't see anything in the entire post that is NOT designed to push the bad buttons. The usurers line simply congeals the rest of the slop into one thought.

What I cant figure is if the ST.Henry at the bottom indicates that it is a quote of some sort, and if it is, does that mean that the poster was intending somehow to show how unpleasant ST.Henry is? Maybe (in a big stretch towards 'benefit of the doubt') it was intended to be sarcastic?

But it sure didn't sound like it.

Noted.

What I cant figure is if the ST.Henry at the bottom indicates that it is a quote of some sort, and if it is, does that mean that the poster was intending somehow to show how unpleasant ST.Henry is? Maybe (in a big stretch towards 'benefit of the doubt') it was intended to be sarcastic?

But it sure didn't sound like it.

I thought it might be some sort of quote too - Henry Ford came to mind - but St Henry? And I searched on google and it doesn't seem to be an actual quote.

So I think it's just trolling.

Just my two cents, but honestly, I don't see anything in the entire post that is NOT designed to push the bad buttons. The usurers line simply congeals the rest of the slop into one thought.

What I cant figure is if the ST.Henry at the bottom indicates that it is a quote of some sort, and if it is, does that mean that the poster was intending somehow to show how unpleasant ST.Henry is? Maybe (in a big stretch towards 'benefit of the doubt') it was intended to be sarcastic?

But it sure didn't sound like it.
It could be his real name. I don't think a nation in the NSM HQ (National Socialist Movement HQ, according to the Factbook Entry) and uses an English translation of the SS motto for their motto meant something like that sarcastically.

Edit: Yeah, he uses the same ST Henry in his RMB posts. It's his signature, not a quote.

Thanks y'all. I'll take that into account.

And Laerod, could you link me to the thread where the OP was warned previously for the copy/paste plagiarism? IIRC, you mentioned something in the thread about him being warned for it not long ago.

And Laerod, could you link me to the thread where the OP was warned previously for the copy/paste plagiarism? IIRC, you mentioned something in the thread about him being warned for it not long ago.This was the thread I was referring to (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=498027), though it was more copy/paste trolling than plagiarism, as he mentions where he got it from and that he fleshed it out a bit. Here's TG telling him he's banned for a weekend.
(http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11622383&postcount=42)
The modus operandi were similar; both were taken from other sources and perhaps altered a bit with little to no original content added to them, though in the latter case, it seemed to fit the definition of plagiarism more than a definition of trolling, as was the case with the former.

Maybe I worded my posts wrong before. I didn't intend to say that he has plagiarized and gotten warned for it before, but that it seems common for him to use other people's points and not add any content to them for threads he starts. Also, judging from his posting style, it didn't sound like something he had written.

This was the thread I was referring to (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=498027), though it was more copy/paste trolling than plagiarism, as he mentions where he got it from and that he fleshed it out a bit. Here's TG telling him he's banned for a weekend.
(http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11622383&postcount=42)
The modus operandi were similar; both were taken from other sources and perhaps altered a bit with little to no original content added to them, though in the latter case, it seemed to fit the definition of plagiarism more than a definition of trolling, as was the case with the former.

Maybe I worded my posts wrong before. I didn't intend to say that he has plagiarized and gotten warned for it before, but that it seems common for him to use other people's points and not add any content to them for threads he starts. Also, judging from his posting style, it didn't sound like something he had written.

Thanks. That really does help. :)

Posted (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11652971&postcount=84).