NationStates Jolt Archive

It's just annoying and I'd like to get the thread off right without anyone foolishly trying to sabotage it and flame me, atleast not until we get past the first page:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14072267&postcount=6

Neesika:

With a few more years, TAI, you too will mature enough to stop being a fascist piece of shit!

I'm neither a fascist nor a piece of shit.

Blatant flaming.

Over the line. Red card.

Is TAI fascist?

He has publicly and expicitly supported far-right dictatorships, racist doctrines, imperialist expansionism, and other fascist doctrines.

Or was it just the merde remark?

Is TAI fascist?

He has publicly and expicitly supported far-right dictatorships, racist doctrines, imperialist expansionism, and other fascist doctrines.

Or was it just the merde remark?

Fascist may or may not be true. Regardless, "piece of shit" is a flame.

Fascist may or may not be true. Regardless, "piece of shit" is a flame.

Definitely.

But I was wondering about the other. Fascist is an adjective, basically, and though it does have negative connotations, it is also a definite political term. One could argue that TAI and his ilk have shown behaviour that can be defined as such. It might even make a good thread in terms of political discussion.

If it's allowed.

Any time someone addresses the poster rather than the argument, they are taking a risk with regard to site flaming policy. Comments intended to be pejorative will be judged based on their apparent intent, not some sort of political acid test.

We don't really care whether someone is being called "fascist piece of shit", "liberal piece of shit", "Shinto piece of shit", or "Hungarian piece of shit". It's still clearly intended to be a flame, and will earn warnings, infractions, and/or bans.

If someone self-identifies as a fascist, a Nazi, a Democrat, a Republican, a Tory, or an other political group, then it's reasonable to quote them and agree or disagree with their interpretation. If someone posts opinions you don't like and you throw labels in their face in an attempt to discredit the argument by subverting the poster, that's flaming.

It's pretty much common sense. Or at least to me it is ...

The term "Fascist" (regardless of how it's intended) is no more offensive, intrinsically, than "Communist" or "atheist" and should not be regulated. Any negative connotations are subjective and can either be disputed ("I am not a atheist because I believe in God but not a religious doctrine") or debated ("Why do you think Fascism is bad?")

... and should not be regulated.

I believe I just got through explaining exactly how it would or would not be regulated by NationStates moderators. You comment doesn't add anything to that ruling.

This is not General. Once a ruling has been delivered, there's no longer any need for theoretical discussion. Thread closed.