NationStates Jolt Archive

I've made it clear I consider the 'natural rights' argument to be something of a hijack to the thread, and so I have stated that I will not respond to posts on that topic, in thread.

"Any 'natural rights' content in this thread, I'll be automatically ignoring - although I'm willing to join debate on it in another thread."

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14611470&postcount=203

In the immediate aftermath of that:

"Translates to:

"I fucked up."

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14611482&postcount=205

and:

"Maybe so. But the point remains that it claims natural rights exist, and the world has largely agreed to that concept, except Grave over here. He prefers to go lone-ranger on this one."


http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14611489&postcount=207


I'm not sure if it meets all the requirements of flamebait, since I'm not sure I'm expected to flame in response - but it is certainly taking advantage of my decision not to indulge the hijack, to take repeated personal shots at me.

It seems rather mild to be a flame/flamebait. Considering the tension and friction in debates like these, I'd say it's just TAI blowing off steam. A warning might be in order, but, as I always say:

/notamod

I'm not a mod, so I'm sure there's precedent I'm not aware of.

Having said that ... that's flamebait? Really?

If I were a mod, I might suggest you get a thicker skin.

This is ridiculous (my eyes are rolling so hard they're about to fall out) but I may as well clarify.

(Not a mod) I honestly cannot see that being flamebait. You were avoiding further debating a ridiculous position you were making when pressed on it by me and two other posters. (VirginiaCooper and Conserative Morality)

Also, it was certainly not off topic. The debate on whether or not freedom of speech is a natural right in a debate about censorship (real or imagined) developing into a debate about whether natural rights exist or not is not us derailing the thread, it is the very essense of NSG.

Shame on you for knowing that yet using the mods as weapons to stop us from pressing you on denying that natural rights exist.

*goes and grabs a glass of water*

It seems rather mild to be a flame/flamebait. Considering the tension and friction in debates like these, I'd say it's just TAI blowing off steam. A warning might be in order, but, as I always say:

/notamod

Not wanting to derail this too far, either - it's not so much TAI's content, per se, that's the problem (I'm okay with a slightly more 'robust' mode of exchange than some might find palatable) - it's the fact that my open statement that I'll not answer anything else on that little diversion... has been taken as a ticket to take free shots.

If he really wanted to discuss the issue, he'd have asked to have the topic split, or started another. No one else (that I saw) jumped on the opportunity for sniping.

Not wanting to derail this too far, either - it's not so much TAI's content, per se, that's the problem (I'm okay with a slightly more 'robust' mode of exchange than some might find palatable) - it's the fact that my open statement that I'll not answer anything else on that little diversion... has been taken as a ticket to take free shots.

If he really wanted to discuss the issue, he'd have asked to have the topic split, or started another. No one else (that I saw) jumped on the opportunity for sniping.
But most of the friction there was between you two. Honestly, posting it here probably wasn't the best idea, and could be interpreted as flamebait, if you really stretched it, but he needed to blow off steam, and you blew off some yourself here by overreacting (At least in my opinion, the mods might have another opinion about this)

/notamod

This is ridiculous (my eyes are rolling so hard they're about to fall out) but I may as well clarify.

(Not a mod) I honestly cannot see that being flamebait. You were avoiding further debating a ridiculous position you were making when pressed on it by me and two other posters. (VirginiaCooper and Conserative Morality)

Also, it was certainly not off topic. The debate on whether or not freedom of speech is a natural right in a debate about censorship (real or imagined) developing into a debate about whether natural rights exist or not is not us derailing the thread, it is the very essense of NSG.

Shame on you for knowing that yet using the mods as weapons to stop us from pressing you on denying that natural rights exist.

*goes and grabs a glass of water*

The 'topic' is an EU rule about appropriate titles. 'Free speech' was stretching the topic more than a little. The ultimate or alsolute nature of 'rights' seems sufficiently far off-topic to refer to as, indeed, off-topic.

But, for all your trying to move the goalposts, that's not what I cited as the problem.

As for suggesting I'm using the mods as a weapon to avoid being pressed - "although I'm willing to join debate on it in another thread"... clearly, not the case.

While I can see that the first could rub Grave the wrong way, the second is a statement made on observations and comments made in the thread. Grave, TAI, step away from each other and play nice. Also, don't hijack a thread in moderation. It's just not nice.

The 'topic' is an EU rule about appropriate titles. 'Free speech' was stretching the topic more than a little
It was about removing the freedom of MP's to use various words, directly relating to freedom of speech.

But that's it, I'm not going to continue this argument here because it's not the right place for it. I just didn't want people or Mods to be misled by your very lax and misleading summary of the topic.

It was about removing the freedom of MP's to use various words, directly relating to freedom of speech.

But that's it, I'm not going to continue this argument here because it's not the right place for it. I just didn't want people or Mods to be misled by your very lax and misleading summary of the topic.

Come now, TAI.