User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:02:22 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Dave A was let back. What's the statute or limitations? Can we sponsor Monroe into a similar program? He has had twice the chances Dave_A was given. I assure you he will not be returning. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:03:17 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I personally lobbied for his return which is something I don't do. He racked up three more warnings after he returned. He had enough previously to know what is allowed and what is not allowed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ok, this kind of shit pisses me off. While I am not a RangerMonroe cheer leader, I am not his enemy either. This said, he was a great contributing member. snip As to RM, someone unlock that guy already! Sweet Jesus.......... I personally lobbied for his return which is something I don't do. He racked up three more warnings after he returned. He had enough previously to know what is allowed and what is not allowed. I know you did, Ya Site Staff guys know that I love ya for what ya do, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:05:14 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well I have more than 1, but I suddenly feel much better about the number I have gotten. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:05:19 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup... a kick in the teeth to people who vouched for him. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok, this kind of shit pisses me off. While I am not a RangerMonroe cheer leader, I am not his enemy either. This said, he was a great contributing member. snip As to RM, someone unlock that guy already! Sweet Jesus.......... I personally lobbied for his return which is something I don't do. He racked up three more warnings after he returned. He had enough previously to know what is allowed and what is not allowed. Yup... a kick in the teeth to people who vouched for him.  Yes, that sucks too, I don't think kicking you guys in the teeth was his intention, I think he was just spewing piss and wind about the ROP, to be frank about it, I feel the same way as that guy does about the ROP. Believe me, I wish I could post my diatribes detailing what I think of ROPers, RM only said what I have oft been thinking.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:05:56 AM EDT
[#5]
I feel like a total teacher's pet now. :( 11 years, and not even a warning.
I am going to get some of those blow up muscle arms that Spongebob had, and blow them up to "jerk" level. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:06:48 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He has had twice the chances Dave_A was given. I assure you he will not be returning. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Dave A was let back. What's the statute or limitations? Can we sponsor Monroe into a similar program? He has had twice the chances Dave_A was given. I assure you he will not be returning. Unless he's... familiar. No copyright violation as I italicized nothing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:08:14 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Same. It was quite lengthy...  Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The ONLY timeout I've ever gotten was from Aimless in a ROP thread. Sooooo, avoiding them is a good idea of you cannot be tactful. Same. It was quite lengthy... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:08:35 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He has had twice the chances Dave_A was given. I assure you he will not be returning. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Dave A was let back. What's the statute or limitations? Can we sponsor Monroe into a similar program? He has had twice the chances Dave_A was given. I assure you he will not be returning. I took a peek in there, and was amazed by what I saw. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:09:17 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup, Just like elementary school! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wanna guess who had 20, yes twenty, warnings or locks?  I cannot believe how many times we broke down and let him back on the site. I think he beats out pubboy and 5subslr5 for most locks and warnings.Do those warnings and locks go on your permanent record? Fuck! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:11:01 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I took a peek in there, and was amazed by what I saw. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Dave A was let back. What's the statute or limitations? Can we sponsor Monroe into a similar program? He has had twice the chances Dave_A was given. I assure you he will not be returning. I took a peek in there, and was amazed by what I saw. How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:11:10 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Can we sponsor Monroe into a similar program? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:13:53 AM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Holy shit, I just looked at his record.
He should have been banned long, long ago. I have no fucking idea why he's been allowed to remain on the sit as long as he was. 
Jesus fucking Christ, some of the things he has posted are just completely fucked up. I am 100% certain that those of you who are staunchly defending him as a "good guy" would agree that he should be banned if you saw some of the reprehensible shit he has pulled. Well to be honest, the "final straw" that I quoted was nothing, I disagree that it was "nothing." You might agree with his statements, and that's fine. But the question (from our perspective) is whether or not he violated the rules, like he had so many, many times before. He said that he hates Muslims, and wishes death upon them. And called them goat rapers. I don't think that's "nothing" on a site that has a specific prohibition about "posting derogatory comments of a religious nature." Come on. That prohibition is the VERY FIRST rule in the entire Code of Conduct, and he had such a long list of account violations (for all kinds of different stuff), that he clearly was VERY familiar with the Code of Conduct.
Furthermore, this was his third violation after being reluctantly allowed back, and after him PROMISING (yet again) to agree to follow the Code of Conduct. ... so some will find it hard to believe that they really were "reprehensible". I promise you, I am not over-dramatizing or lying. There were several things in his past record that would undoubtedly have been instant bans for someone that wasn't as well liked as him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:14:29 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Dave A was let back. What's the statute or limitations? Can we sponsor Monroe into a similar program? He has had twice the chances Dave_A was given. I assure you he will not be returning. I took a peek in there, and was amazed by what I saw. How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? some animals are more equal that others.. Get used to it.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:14:47 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the long one (# 3) wasn't for anything involving islam, Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The ONLY timeout I've ever gotten was from Aimless in a ROP thread. Sooooo, avoiding them is a good idea of you cannot be tactful. Same. It was quite lengthy... Now that I remember, no, it wasn't. 
But my lock for it wasn't nearly as bad as the rangermonroe post, though. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:17:22 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Almost 3,000 dead in my hometown in less than an hour will do that to people... ETA: We don't have the stick-poking icon? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
but some seem simply UNABLE to control themselves when it comes to Muslims. Almost 3,000 dead in my hometown in less than an hour will do that to people... ETA: We don't have the stick-poking icon? And NOTHING AT ALL in the Code of Conduct prohibits you from wishing death and damnation and all sorts of horrible things upon the people that carried out those acts, or on any other extremist muslims that want to engage in violence or terrorism. But the second that extends to wishing death on ALL muslims, then it is not any different from people who condemn all Catholics (and shit all over them) for the actions of a few bad priests. Either will earn an account warning, because it's the same principle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:22:39 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I suspected the hardheaded SOB went and got himself in trouble again. I'll have to dig up his number and give him a call. Tell him I asked about him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:23:38 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So are you saying we should have no rules? Or ar you saying that we should have rules, but some people (if they are nice and/or popular) shouldn't have to follow them? If you are not saying either of those things, then perhaps you can tell us what the hell are we supposed to do with someone who REFUSES to follow the rules? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ok, this kind of shit pisses me off. While I am not a RangerMonroe cheer leader, I am not his enemy either. This said, he was a great contributing member. A message to Admins, Site Staff, The Avilas, people, I love ya for this place, but WTF? This is not the Arfcom of old. I get it, you are policing as "best as you can" to keep pandemonium down to a minimum, but some shit has become way too PC here. Example, ROPers, protect them, don't protect them, it doesn't matter, they ARE our enemy, no ifs, no butts, simple fact, they really don't care if you protect them. You can't make everyone happy. I have seen time and time again where you TRY to make everyone happy, ya know what? It's appreciated, it really is. Ed Sr. I've enjoyed our talks, you really want good things, I see that. BUT....... Actions like this are OVERKILL. Rm spoke is mind, while it is YOUR board, don't you want members to speak their minds? (I know, baring threats) Comments against a religion, sexual preference, races, etc, while some or many find it offensive, so what? I've learned more about the world in which I live in through heated discussions in direct opposition of someone else. Protected classes of people only make things uglier. Banning RM for what he said, in truth, I don't get it. Yes, things piss me off here too, I don;t have a "BAN" button to make myself feel better when someone chooses a "narrower mindset" and verbalizes it. In fact, I am one of those most would consider a narrow man. (No secret here) You've got a wide range of personalities here, these personalities go in many directions from "mainstream". HOw is it that some of you think you can "moderate" this with a modicum of success? I can't tell you what to do, however, this said, I would be very favorable with less politically correct sentiment that leads to great members here getting the boot over opinions. baring an actual threat (or personal attack), can a little more "freedom of speech" be granted in GD? (Again, yes, I know, this is your board, your rules, FOS does not apply here) As to RM, someone unlock that guy already! Sweet Jesus.......... So are you saying we should have no rules? Or ar you saying that we should have rules, but some people (if they are nice and/or popular) shouldn't have to follow them? If you are not saying either of those things, then perhaps you can tell us what the hell are we supposed to do with someone who REFUSES to follow the rules? I think he's talking about the...lets at least say perceived... imbalance of attention given to Islam threads over Christian threads. A few months back I was a part of a thread in GD talking about Islamic origins (an area I've studied) that made it about three quarters of a page before it was locked citing COC1. Looking back over the thread I have no idea why it was locked. No "death to all Mooslims" talk or anything of the sort. Granted everyone doubted the traditional Islamic storyline, but the conversation was very tame by any standard. After it was locked I started reading one of your typical GD freakouts about Christianity. One poster made a comment to the effect that "all pastors are con men and all Christians are simpletons being conned." Sweeping generalizations are a no no, as I've been told, so I hit the report button. Now, I don't know what goes on behind the scenes and what may or may not have come of it, but I know that said poster kept reiterating that statement for the next dozen or so pages of the thread. Now I get that there are a lot of mods with different interpretations of what constitutes "derogatory", and that no mod can be in one place at all times. But, the uneven handling of COC 1 leads to at least the perception of "protected classes." I think what dogfacepappy was saying (and I'd agree with him) is that in this area you need to open the door wide or shut it completely. Either make all religions fair game or make all religions off limits. The, at least perceived, half measures in place now just magnifies the problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:26:37 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, that sucks too, I don't think kicking you guys in the teeth was his intention, I think he was just spewing piss and wind about the ROP, to be frank about it, I feel the same way as that guy does about the ROP. Believe me, I wish I could post my diatribes detailing what I think of ROPers, RM only said what I have oft been thinking.Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok, this kind of shit pisses me off. While I am not a RangerMonroe cheer leader, I am not his enemy either. This said, he was a great contributing member. snip As to RM, someone unlock that guy already! Sweet Jesus.......... I personally lobbied for his return which is something I don't do. He racked up three more warnings after he returned. He had enough previously to know what is allowed and what is not allowed. Yup... a kick in the teeth to people who vouched for him. Yes, that sucks too, I don't think kicking you guys in the teeth was his intention, I think he was just spewing piss and wind about the ROP, to be frank about it, I feel the same way as that guy does about the ROP. Believe me, I wish I could post my diatribes detailing what I think of ROPers, RM only said what I have oft been thinking.If there is a subject a person for some reason cannot discuss without losing it then they should stay away from the topic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:28:04 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? The member who posted that is a moderator. The mod tag only shows in the area they are responsible for but ALL mods can view warnings (they are considered confidential and that information is not allowed to be posted.) We have close to 150 moderators on this site. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:28:26 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So are you saying we should have no rules? Or ar you saying that we should have rules, but some people (if they are nice and/or popular) shouldn't have to follow them? If you are not saying either of those things, then perhaps you can tell us what the hell are we supposed to do with someone who REFUSES to follow the rules? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ok, this kind of shit pisses me off. While I am not a RangerMonroe cheer leader, I am not his enemy either. This said, he was a great contributing member. A message to Admins, Site Staff, The Avilas, people, I love ya for this place, but WTF? This is not the Arfcom of old. I get it, you are policing as "best as you can" to keep pandemonium down to a minimum, but some shit has become way too PC here. Example, ROPers, protect them, don't protect them, it doesn't matter, they ARE our enemy, no ifs, no butts, simple fact, they really don't care if you protect them. You can't make everyone happy. I have seen time and time again where you TRY to make everyone happy, ya know what? It's appreciated, it really is. Ed Sr. I've enjoyed our talks, you really want good things, I see that. BUT....... Actions like this are OVERKILL. Rm spoke is mind, while it is YOUR board, don't you want members to speak their minds? (I know, baring threats) Comments against a religion, sexual preference, races, etc, while some or many find it offensive, so what? I've learned more about the world in which I live in through heated discussions in direct opposition of someone else. Protected classes of people only make things uglier. Banning RM for what he said, in truth, I don't get it. Yes, things piss me off here too, I don;t have a "BAN" button to make myself feel better when someone chooses a "narrower mindset" and verbalizes it. In fact, I am one of those most would consider a narrow man. (No secret here) You've got a wide range of personalities here, these personalities go in many directions from "mainstream". HOw is it that some of you think you can "moderate" this with a modicum of success? I can't tell you what to do, however, this said, I would be very favorable with less politically correct sentiment that leads to great members here getting the boot over opinions. baring an actual threat (or personal attack), can a little more "freedom of speech" be granted in GD? (Again, yes, I know, this is your board, your rules, FOS does not apply here) As to RM, someone unlock that guy already! Sweet Jesus.......... So are you saying we should have no rules? Or ar you saying that we should have rules, but some people (if they are nice and/or popular) shouldn't have to follow them? If you are not saying either of those things, then perhaps you can tell us what the hell are we supposed to do with someone who REFUSES to follow the rules? We all know that their needs to be rules. I think it would be reasonable to cut people some slack when they are truly apologetic, that have been to combat against people that claim to represent a certain religion. Yes there are even people of that religion on our side, but some of them turn against us. It would be difficult to lose friends and comrades in such circumstances and that might make it difficult to be able to always draw the line between Jihadists and Peaceful good ROPers, because we all know based on things that have happened since 9/11 that line can become very blurry. Given the personal trauma, that line can be obscured for some people from time to time. He was given some slack 20 times, I get that, but given his background, he should be given 21 or more. I am not making excuses, just taking into account the real world circumstances. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:29:09 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Dave A was let back. What's the statute or limitations? Can we sponsor Monroe into a similar program? He has had twice the chances Dave_A was given. I assure you he will not be returning. I took a peek in there, and was amazed by what I saw. How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? Mods in other areas do not show up as mods when they post in forums they are not in charge of. So a HTF Mod only has his mod status in that forum but they all have access to the warning list. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:30:16 AM EDT
[#22]
Ah, how interesting. I had no idea that Mod was a title only in certain areas. Thanks, that makes a lot of sense.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:30:23 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The member who posted that is a moderator. The mod tag only shows in the area they are responsible for but ALL mods can view warnings (they are considered confidential and that information is not allowed to be posted.) We have close to 150 moderators on this site. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? The member who posted that is a moderator. The mod tag only shows in the area they are responsible for but ALL mods can view warnings (they are considered confidential and that information is not allowed to be posted.) We have close to 150 moderators on this site. well it was until Subnet did the data dump a few weeks ago..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:30:50 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think he's talking about the...lets at least say perceived... imbalance of attention given to Islam threads over Christian threads. A few months back I was a part of a thread in GD talking about Islamic origins (an area I've studied) that made it about three quarters of a page before it was locked citing COC1. Looking back over the thread I have no idea why it was locked. No "death to all Mooslims" talk or anything of the sort. Granted everyone doubted the traditional Islamic storyline, but the conversation was very tame by any standard. After it was locked I started reading one of your typical GD freakouts about Christianity. One poster made a comment to the effect that "all pastors are con men and all Christians are simpletons being conned." Sweeping generalizations are a no no, as I've been told, so I hit the report button. Now, I don't know what goes on behind the scenes and what may or may not have come of it, but I know that said poster kept reiterating that statement for the next dozen or so pages of the thread. Now I get that there are a lot of mods with different interpretations of what constitutes "derogatory", and that no mod can be in one place at all times. But, the uneven handling of COC 1 leads to at least the perception of "protected classes." I think what dogfacepappy was saying (and I'd agree with him) is that in this area you need to open the door wide or shut it completely. Either make all religions fair game or make all religions off limits. The, at least perceived, half measures in place now just magnifies the problem. Quote HistoryQuoted: I think he's talking about the...lets at least say perceived... imbalance of attention given to Islam threads over Christian threads. A few months back I was a part of a thread in GD talking about Islamic origins (an area I've studied) that made it about three quarters of a page before it was locked citing COC1. Looking back over the thread I have no idea why it was locked. No "death to all Mooslims" talk or anything of the sort. Granted everyone doubted the traditional Islamic storyline, but the conversation was very tame by any standard. After it was locked I started reading one of your typical GD freakouts about Christianity. One poster made a comment to the effect that "all pastors are con men and all Christians are simpletons being conned." Sweeping generalizations are a no no, as I've been told, so I hit the report button. Now, I don't know what goes on behind the scenes and what may or may not have come of it, but I know that said poster kept reiterating that statement for the next dozen or so pages of the thread. Now I get that there are a lot of mods with different interpretations of what constitutes "derogatory", and that no mod can be in one place at all times. But, the uneven handling of COC 1 leads to at least the perception of "protected classes." I think what dogfacepappy was saying (and I'd agree with him) is that in this area you need to open the door wide or shut it completely. Either make all religions fair game or make all religions off limits. The, at least perceived, half measures in place now just magnifies the problem. also 1-did you report the thread? 2-I don't know if anything was done, but when I warn someone I don't make a public announcement about it
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:31:55 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
well it was until Subnet did the data dump a few weeks ago..
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? The member who posted that is a moderator. The mod tag only shows in the area they are responsible for but ALL mods can view warnings (they are considered confidential and that information is not allowed to be posted.) We have close to 150 moderators on this site. well it was until Subnet did the data dump a few weeks ago..
Subpocalypse |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:33:31 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We all know that their needs to be rules. I think it would be reasonable to cut people some slack when they are truly apologetic, that have been to combat against people that claim to represent a certain religion. Yes there are even people of that religion on our side, but some of them turn against us. It would be difficult to lose friends and comrades in such circumstances and that might make it difficult to be able to always draw the line between Jihadists and Peaceful good ROPers, because we all know based on things that have happened since 9/11 that line can become very blurry. Given the personal trauma, that line can be obscured for some people from time to time. He was given some slack 20 times, I get that, but given his background, he should be given 21 or more. I am not making excuses, just taking into account the real world circumstances. Quote HistoryQuoted: We all know that their needs to be rules. I think it would be reasonable to cut people some slack when they are truly apologetic, that have been to combat against people that claim to represent a certain religion. Yes there are even people of that religion on our side, but some of them turn against us. It would be difficult to lose friends and comrades in such circumstances and that might make it difficult to be able to always draw the line between Jihadists and Peaceful good ROPers, because we all know based on things that have happened since 9/11 that line can become very blurry. Given the personal trauma, that line can be obscured for some people from time to time. He was given some slack 20 times, I get that, but given his background, he should be given 21 or more. I am not making excuses, just taking into account the real world circumstances. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:35:02 AM EDT
[#27]
Damn, I just looked. I've been locked 4 or so times
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:37:19 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Generally speaking people say far far worse things about Islam and Mohammed and get away with it than they do about Christ and Christianity (or Judaism). also 1-did you report the thread? I hit the report button on the comment & submitted a reason. 2-I don't know if anything was done, but when I warn someone I don't make a public announcement about it I wouldn't expect you to, but similar comments from the same poster persisted. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I think he's talking about the...lets at least say perceived... imbalance of attention given to Islam threads over Christian threads. A few months back I was a part of a thread in GD talking about Islamic origins (an area I've studied) that made it about three quarters of a page before it was locked citing COC1. Looking back over the thread I have no idea why it was locked. No "death to all Mooslims" talk or anything of the sort. Granted everyone doubted the traditional Islamic storyline, but the conversation was very tame by any standard. After it was locked I started reading one of your typical GD freakouts about Christianity. One poster made a comment to the effect that "all pastors are con men and all Christians are simpletons being conned." Sweeping generalizations are a no no, as I've been told, so I hit the report button. Now, I don't know what goes on behind the scenes and what may or may not have come of it, but I know that said poster kept reiterating that statement for the next dozen or so pages of the thread. Now I get that there are a lot of mods with different interpretations of what constitutes "derogatory", and that no mod can be in one place at all times. But, the uneven handling of COC 1 leads to at least the perception of "protected classes." I think what dogfacepappy was saying (and I'd agree with him) is that in this area you need to open the door wide or shut it completely. Either make all religions fair game or make all religions off limits. The, at least perceived, half measures in place now just magnifies the problem. also 1-did you report the thread? I hit the report button on the comment & submitted a reason. 2-I don't know if anything was done, but when I warn someone I don't make a public announcement about it I wouldn't expect you to, but similar comments from the same poster persisted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:38:02 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
he did a shit ton of stupid stuff that had nothing to do with Islam, troll accounts, telling people to fuck off, saying that cops deserved to be shot and on and on and on. This is just silliness Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
We all know that their needs to be rules. I think it would be reasonable to cut people some slack when they are truly apologetic, that have been to combat against people that claim to represent a certain religion. Yes there are even people of that religion on our side, but some of them turn against us. It would be difficult to lose friends and comrades in such circumstances and that might make it difficult to be able to always draw the line between Jihadists and Peaceful good ROPers, because we all know based on things that have happened since 9/11 that line can become very blurry. Given the personal trauma, that line can be obscured for some people from time to time. He was given some slack 20 times, I get that, but given his background, he should be given 21 or more. I am not making excuses, just taking into account the real world circumstances. Did not realize there was other stuff. Thought it was a single issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:39:24 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think he's talking about the...lets at least say perceived... imbalance of attention given to Islam threads over Christian threads. A few months back I was a part of a thread in GD talking about Islamic origins (an area I've studied) that made it about three quarters of a page before it was locked citing COC1. Looking back over the thread I have no idea why it was locked. No "death to all Mooslims" talk or anything of the sort. Granted everyone doubted the traditional Islamic storyline, but the conversation was very tame by any standard. After it was locked I started reading one of your typical GD freakouts about Christianity. One poster made a comment to the effect that "all pastors are con men and all Christians are simpletons being conned." Sweeping generalizations are a no no, as I've been told, so I hit the report button. Now, I don't know what goes on behind the scenes and what may or may not have come of it, but I know that said poster kept reiterating that statement for the next dozen or so pages of the thread. Now I get that there are a lot of mods with different interpretations of what constitutes "derogatory", and that no mod can be in one place at all times. But, the uneven handling of COC 1 leads to at least the perception of "protected classes." I think what dogfacepappy was saying (and I'd agree with him) is that in this area you need to open the door wide or shut it completely. Either make all religions fair game or make all religions off limits. The, at least perceived, half measures in place now just magnifies the problem. also 1-did you report the thread? I hit the report button on the comment & submitted a reason. 2-I don't know if anything was done, but when I warn someone I don't make a public announcement about it I wouldn't expect you to, but similar comments from the same poster persisted. Link? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:39:42 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The member who posted that is a moderator. The mod tag only shows in the area they are responsible for but ALL mods can view warnings (they are considered confidential and that information is not allowed to be posted.) We have close to 150 moderators on this site. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? The member who posted that is a moderator. The mod tag only shows in the area they are responsible for but ALL mods can view warnings (they are considered confidential and that information is not allowed to be posted.) We have close to 150 moderators on this site. Shot down my conspiracy theory before it even taxied to the runway.
Quoted:
Damn, I just looked. I've been locked 4 or so times You need to stop trolling in the gaming forum.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:40:11 AM EDT
[#32]
It makes me question a site who ostensibly supports the second amendment so vehemently; yet they ignore the first in favor of censor at any given time. "Their site, their rules etc." is just another name for progressive censorship. Kudos to RM for stating shit the way he felt. His valuable contribution to this site is obviously less important than political correctness. Sad.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:42:02 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Link? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think he's talking about the...lets at least say perceived... imbalance of attention given to Islam threads over Christian threads. A few months back I was a part of a thread in GD talking about Islamic origins (an area I've studied) that made it about three quarters of a page before it was locked citing COC1. Looking back over the thread I have no idea why it was locked. No "death to all Mooslims" talk or anything of the sort. Granted everyone doubted the traditional Islamic storyline, but the conversation was very tame by any standard. After it was locked I started reading one of your typical GD freakouts about Christianity. One poster made a comment to the effect that "all pastors are con men and all Christians are simpletons being conned." Sweeping generalizations are a no no, as I've been told, so I hit the report button. Now, I don't know what goes on behind the scenes and what may or may not have come of it, but I know that said poster kept reiterating that statement for the next dozen or so pages of the thread. Now I get that there are a lot of mods with different interpretations of what constitutes "derogatory", and that no mod can be in one place at all times. But, the uneven handling of COC 1 leads to at least the perception of "protected classes." I think what dogfacepappy was saying (and I'd agree with him) is that in this area you need to open the door wide or shut it completely. Either make all religions fair game or make all religions off limits. The, at least perceived, half measures in place now just magnifies the problem. also 1-did you report the thread? I hit the report button on the comment & submitted a reason. 2-I don't know if anything was done, but when I warn someone I don't make a public announcement about it I wouldn't expect you to, but similar comments from the same poster persisted. Link? Sorry, its been a while & I don't remember the thread titles. I wouldn't know what to search for. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:42:44 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The member who posted that is a moderator. The mod tag only shows in the area they are responsible for but ALL mods can view warnings (they are considered confidential and that information is not allowed to be posted.) We have close to 150 moderators on this site. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? The member who posted that is a moderator. The mod tag only shows in the area they are responsible for but ALL mods can view warnings (they are considered confidential and that information is not allowed to be posted.) We have close to 150 moderators on this site. That's a lot of swedish fish. And regular fish. And goose hush-hush money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:43:01 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Shot down my conspiracy theory before it even taxied to the runway.
You need to stop trolling in the gaming forum. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? The member who posted that is a moderator. The mod tag only shows in the area they are responsible for but ALL mods can view warnings (they are considered confidential and that information is not allowed to be posted.) We have close to 150 moderators on this site. Shot down my conspiracy theory before it even taxied to the runway.
Quoted:
Damn, I just looked. I've been locked 4 or so times You need to stop trolling in the gaming forum. Two of them were from the EE. One was calling out a guy selling fake Chinese shit as the real deal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:45:39 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Two of them were from the EE. One was calling out a guy selling fake Chinese shit as the real deal. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? The member who posted that is a moderator. The mod tag only shows in the area they are responsible for but ALL mods can view warnings (they are considered confidential and that information is not allowed to be posted.) We have close to 150 moderators on this site. Shot down my conspiracy theory before it even taxied to the runway.
Quoted:
Damn, I just looked. I've been locked 4 or so times You need to stop trolling in the gaming forum. Two of them were from the EE. One was calling out a guy selling fake Chinese shit as the real deal. How do you get a lock for exposing that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:46:24 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How do you get a lock for exposing that? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Two of them were from the EE. One was calling out a guy selling fake Chinese shit as the real deal. How do you get a lock for exposing that? Ad stomping I posted a thread a few months before where you can get decent Eotech clones for $30. This guy buys a couple and tries to sell the for $100 LINK My last timeout was for This one I think I got a timeout or maybe just a warning for putting "SOLD" in bold in my thread title in the EE so noone wasted their time clicking on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:47:22 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I disagree that it was "nothing." You might agree with his statements, and that's fine. But the question (from our perspective) is whether or not he violated the rules, like he had so many, many times before. He said that he hates Muslims, and wishes death upon them. And called them goat rapers. I don't think that's "nothing" on a site that has a specific prohibition about "posting derogatory comments of a religious nature." Come on. That prohibition is the VERY FIRST rule in the entire Code of Conduct, and he had such a long list of account violations (for all kinds of different stuff), that he clearly was VERY familiar with the Code of Conduct.
Furthermore, this was his third violation after being reluctantly allowed back, and after him PROMISING (yet again) to agree to follow the Code of Conduct. I promise you, I am not over-dramatizing or lying. There were several things in his past record that would undoubtedly have been instant bans for someone that wasn't as well liked as him. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Holy shit, I just looked at his record.
He should have been banned long, long ago. I have no fucking idea why he's been allowed to remain on the sit as long as he was.
Jesus fucking Christ, some of the things he has posted are just completely fucked up. I am 100% certain that those of you who are staunchly defending him as a "good guy" would agree that he should be banned if you saw some of the reprehensible shit he has pulled. Well to be honest, the "final straw" that I quoted was nothing, I disagree that it was "nothing." You might agree with his statements, and that's fine. But the question (from our perspective) is whether or not he violated the rules, like he had so many, many times before. He said that he hates Muslims, and wishes death upon them. And called them goat rapers. I don't think that's "nothing" on a site that has a specific prohibition about "posting derogatory comments of a religious nature." Come on. That prohibition is the VERY FIRST rule in the entire Code of Conduct, and he had such a long list of account violations (for all kinds of different stuff), that he clearly was VERY familiar with the Code of Conduct.
Furthermore, this was his third violation after being reluctantly allowed back, and after him PROMISING (yet again) to agree to follow the Code of Conduct. ... so some will find it hard to believe that they really were "reprehensible". I promise you, I am not over-dramatizing or lying. There were several things in his past record that would undoubtedly have been instant bans for someone that wasn't as well liked as him. I understood IG as saying "compared to his previous actions, this was mundane for him" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 10:57:06 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It makes me question a site who ostensibly supports the second amendment so vehemently; yet they ignore the first in favor of censor at any given time. "Their site, their rules etc." is just another name for progressive censorship. Kudos to RM for stating shit the way he felt. His valuable contribution to this site is obviously less important than political correctness. Sad. 
Your understanding of rights seems to be severely lacking. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 11:39:21 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Your understanding of rights seems to be severely lacking. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It makes me question a site who ostensibly supports the second amendment so vehemently; yet they ignore the first in favor of censor at any given time. "Their site, their rules etc." is just another name for progressive censorship. Kudos to RM for stating shit the way he felt. His valuable contribution to this site is obviously less important than political correctness. Sad.
Your understanding of rights seems to be severely lacking. I didn't state anything about anyone having "rights". The only ones with "rights" in this situation was the site with their "right" to ban him. I was questioning ideology. You obviously need a lesson in reading comprehension. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 11:43:59 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I didn't state anything about anyone having "rights". The only ones with "rights" in this situation was the site with their "right" to ban him. I was questioning ideology. You obviously need a lesson in reading comprehension. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It makes me question a site who ostensibly supports the second amendment so vehemently; yet they ignore the first in favor of censor at any given time. "Their site, their rules etc." is just another name for progressive censorship. Kudos to RM for stating shit the way he felt. His valuable contribution to this site is obviously less important than political correctness. Sad.
Your understanding of rights seems to be severely lacking. I didn't state anything about anyone having "rights". The only ones with "rights" in this situation was the site with their "right" to ban him. I was questioning ideology. You obviously need a lesson in reading comprehension. Referencing the 1st and 2nd amendment is a clear indication that you are referring in some way to rights. Try again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 11:51:39 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I understood IG as saying "compared to his previous actions, this was mundane for him" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Holy shit, I just looked at his record.
He should have been banned long, long ago. I have no fucking idea why he's been allowed to remain on the sit as long as he was.
Jesus fucking Christ, some of the things he has posted are just completely fucked up. I am 100% certain that those of you who are staunchly defending him as a "good guy" would agree that he should be banned if you saw some of the reprehensible shit he has pulled. Well to be honest, the "final straw" that I quoted was nothing, I disagree that it was "nothing." You might agree with his statements, and that's fine. But the question (from our perspective) is whether or not he violated the rules, like he had so many, many times before. He said that he hates Muslims, and wishes death upon them. And called them goat rapers. I don't think that's "nothing" on a site that has a specific prohibition about "posting derogatory comments of a religious nature." Come on. That prohibition is the VERY FIRST rule in the entire Code of Conduct, and he had such a long list of account violations (for all kinds of different stuff), that he clearly was VERY familiar with the Code of Conduct.
Furthermore, this was his third violation after being reluctantly allowed back, and after him PROMISING (yet again) to agree to follow the Code of Conduct. ... so some will find it hard to believe that they really were "reprehensible". I promise you, I am not over-dramatizing or lying. There were several things in his past record that would undoubtedly have been instant bans for someone that wasn't as well liked as him. I understood IG as saying "compared to his previous actions, this was mundane for him" If that's the case that supports BOTH our points.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 11:54:08 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Probably wishing death, but I hear some people are sensitive about their goats around here. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just received info he was permabanned for the following statement: HERE Quoted:
While I hate them, and wish death upon them personally.... I do believe I would find myself aligned with the goat rapers if such a thing were to happen here. Freedom of religion and such. Government persecuting a religion never ends well. Just so I don't make the same mistakes, did he get banned for calling them goat rapers or wishing they all die, or believing in freedom of religion?  Probably wishing death, but I hear some people are sensitive about their goats around here. Goats are protected here, Geese, not so much
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 11:56:15 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We all know that their needs to be rules. I think it would be reasonable to cut people some slack when they are truly apologetic, that have been to combat against people that claim to represent a certain religion. Yes there are even people of that religion on our side, but some of them turn against us. It would be difficult to lose friends and comrades in such circumstances and that might make it difficult to be able to always draw the line between Jihadists and Peaceful good ROPers, because we all know based on things that have happened since 9/11 that line can become very blurry. Given the personal trauma, that line can be obscured for some people from time to time. He was given some slack 20 times, I get that, but given his background, he should be given 21 or more. I am not making excuses, just taking into account the real world circumstances. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok, this kind of shit pisses me off. While I am not a RangerMonroe cheer leader, I am not his enemy either. This said, he was a great contributing member. A message to Admins, Site Staff, The Avilas, people, I love ya for this place, but WTF? This is not the Arfcom of old. I get it, you are policing as "best as you can" to keep pandemonium down to a minimum, but some shit has become way too PC here. Example, ROPers, protect them, don't protect them, it doesn't matter, they ARE our enemy, no ifs, no butts, simple fact, they really don't care if you protect them. You can't make everyone happy. I have seen time and time again where you TRY to make everyone happy, ya know what? It's appreciated, it really is. Ed Sr. I've enjoyed our talks, you really want good things, I see that. BUT....... Actions like this are OVERKILL. Rm spoke is mind, while it is YOUR board, don't you want members to speak their minds? (I know, baring threats) Comments against a religion, sexual preference, races, etc, while some or many find it offensive, so what? I've learned more about the world in which I live in through heated discussions in direct opposition of someone else. Protected classes of people only make things uglier. Banning RM for what he said, in truth, I don't get it. Yes, things piss me off here too, I don;t have a "BAN" button to make myself feel better when someone chooses a "narrower mindset" and verbalizes it. In fact, I am one of those most would consider a narrow man. (No secret here) You've got a wide range of personalities here, these personalities go in many directions from "mainstream". HOw is it that some of you think you can "moderate" this with a modicum of success? I can't tell you what to do, however, this said, I would be very favorable with less politically correct sentiment that leads to great members here getting the boot over opinions. baring an actual threat (or personal attack), can a little more "freedom of speech" be granted in GD? (Again, yes, I know, this is your board, your rules, FOS does not apply here) As to RM, someone unlock that guy already! Sweet Jesus.......... So are you saying we should have no rules? Or ar you saying that we should have rules, but some people (if they are nice and/or popular) shouldn't have to follow them? If you are not saying either of those things, then perhaps you can tell us what the hell are we supposed to do with someone who REFUSES to follow the rules? We all know that their needs to be rules. I think it would be reasonable to cut people some slack when they are truly apologetic, that have been to combat against people that claim to represent a certain religion. Yes there are even people of that religion on our side, but some of them turn against us. It would be difficult to lose friends and comrades in such circumstances and that might make it difficult to be able to always draw the line between Jihadists and Peaceful good ROPers, because we all know based on things that have happened since 9/11 that line can become very blurry. Given the personal trauma, that line can be obscured for some people from time to time. He was given some slack 20 times, I get that, but given his background, he should be given 21 or more. I am not making excuses, just taking into account the real world circumstances. That was the argument EVERY TIME he was banned. So after we give him slack for this 21st offense, and he does it again, then what? Then we can have the exact same argument, and then say he should be given slack for his 22nd offense. Then he does it again (and history has shown that he will) and what do we do? (and keep in mind, few of his prior account warnings or locks/bans were related to Islam. Most were just him being an asshole and ignoring the CoC). You see the problem, right? That's essentially saying that he doens't have to obey the CoC. . So what do we tell everyone else? How do we lock people for similar stuff that he doesn't get locked for? Who gets to decide who the "special" people are the get send on third and fourth and fifth etc. chances, when others just get locked? We cannot enforce the rules that way.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 11:57:02 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Dave A was let back. What's the statute or limitations? Can we sponsor Monroe into a similar program? He has had twice the chances Dave_A was given. I assure you he will not be returning. I took a peek in there, and was amazed by what I saw. How are all the non-mods looking up people's ban histories? We are mods, just not in GD. Go over to Legal, A2 Builds, or AR Basics and you'll see the mod badge on my posts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 12:00:42 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just so I don't make the same mistakes, did he get banned for calling them goat rapers or wishing they all die, or believing in freedom of religion? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I just received info he was permabanned for the following statement: HERE Quoted:
While I hate them, and wish death upon them personally.... I do believe I would find myself aligned with the goat rapers if such a thing were to happen here. Freedom of religion and such. Government persecuting a religion never ends well. Just so I don't make the same mistakes, did he get banned for calling them goat rapers or wishing they all die, or believing in freedom of religion? probably the part in blue |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 12:06:04 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That was the argument EVERY TIME he was banned. So after we give him slack for this 21st offense, and he does it again, then what? Then we can have the exact same argument, and then say he should be given slack for his 22nd offense. Then he does it again (and history has shown that he will) and what do we do? (and keep in mind, few of his prior account warnings or locks/bans were related to Islam. Most were just him being an asshole and ignoring the CoC). You see the problem, right? That's essentially saying that he doens't have to obey the CoC. . So what do we tell everyone else? How do we lock people for similar stuff that he doesn't get locked for? Who gets to decide who the "special" people are the get send on third and fourth and fifth etc. chances, when others just get locked? We cannot enforce the rules that way.And that's the argument that's made for a lot of guys that have numerous warnings and locks. And it happens a lot. One poster, after saying I was full of shit in a divorce thread (big surprise) basically said that he wanted to meet me in person and fight me since I was local. He was permabanned and then let back in. A perusal of his history shows more than one permaban and subsequent "last chance." As it happens he's been permabanned again, let's see if he's back in a few months. I think that a lot of people don't realize the lengths to which Staff goes to avoid real permanent locks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 12:06:19 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It makes me question a site who ostensibly supports the second amendment so vehemently; yet they ignore the first in favor of censor at any given time. "Their site, their rules etc." is just another name for progressive censorship. Kudos to RM for stating shit the way he felt. His valuable contribution to this site is obviously less important than political correctness. Sad. Other sites would have shut down this thread a long time ago. Posting here, getting your position known and staying within the CoC here is fairly easy. Getting banned actually takes work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 12:07:24 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think he's talking about the...lets at least say perceived... imbalance of attention given to Islam threads over Christian threads. A few months back I was a part of a thread in GD talking about Islamic origins (an area I've studied) that made it about three quarters of a page before it was locked citing COC1. Looking back over the thread I have no idea why it was locked. No "death to all Mooslims" talk or anything of the sort. Granted everyone doubted the traditional Islamic storyline, but the conversation was very tame by any standard. After it was locked I started reading one of your typical GD freakouts about Christianity. One poster made a comment to the effect that "all pastors are con men and all Christians are simpletons being conned." Sweeping generalizations are a no no, as I've been told, so I hit the report button. Now, I don't know what goes on behind the scenes and what may or may not have come of it, but I know that said poster kept reiterating that statement for the next dozen or so pages of the thread. Now I get that there are a lot of mods with different interpretations of what constitutes "derogatory", and that no mod can be in one place at all times. But, the uneven handling of COC 1 leads to at least the perception of "protected classes." I think what dogfacepappy was saying (and I'd agree with him) is that in this area you need to open the door wide or shut it completely. Either make all religions fair game or make all religions off limits. The, at least perceived, half measures in place now just magnifies the problem. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok, this kind of shit pisses me off. While I am not a RangerMonroe cheer leader, I am not his enemy either. This said, he was a great contributing member. A message to Admins, Site Staff, The Avilas, people, I love ya for this place, but WTF? This is not the Arfcom of old. I get it, you are policing as "best as you can" to keep pandemonium down to a minimum, but some shit has become way too PC here. Example, ROPers, protect them, don't protect them, it doesn't matter, they ARE our enemy, no ifs, no butts, simple fact, they really don't care if you protect them. You can't make everyone happy. I have seen time and time again where you TRY to make everyone happy, ya know what? It's appreciated, it really is. Ed Sr. I've enjoyed our talks, you really want good things, I see that. BUT....... Actions like this are OVERKILL. Rm spoke is mind, while it is YOUR board, don't you want members to speak their minds? (I know, baring threats) Comments against a religion, sexual preference, races, etc, while some or many find it offensive, so what? I've learned more about the world in which I live in through heated discussions in direct opposition of someone else. Protected classes of people only make things uglier. Banning RM for what he said, in truth, I don't get it. Yes, things piss me off here too, I don;t have a "BAN" button to make myself feel better when someone chooses a "narrower mindset" and verbalizes it. In fact, I am one of those most would consider a narrow man. (No secret here) You've got a wide range of personalities here, these personalities go in many directions from "mainstream". HOw is it that some of you think you can "moderate" this with a modicum of success? I can't tell you what to do, however, this said, I would be very favorable with less politically correct sentiment that leads to great members here getting the boot over opinions. baring an actual threat (or personal attack), can a little more "freedom of speech" be granted in GD? (Again, yes, I know, this is your board, your rules, FOS does not apply here) As to RM, someone unlock that guy already! Sweet Jesus.......... So are you saying we should have no rules? Or ar you saying that we should have rules, but some people (if they are nice and/or popular) shouldn't have to follow them? If you are not saying either of those things, then perhaps you can tell us what the hell are we supposed to do with someone who REFUSES to follow the rules? I think he's talking about the...lets at least say perceived... imbalance of attention given to Islam threads over Christian threads. A few months back I was a part of a thread in GD talking about Islamic origins (an area I've studied) that made it about three quarters of a page before it was locked citing COC1. Looking back over the thread I have no idea why it was locked. No "death to all Mooslims" talk or anything of the sort. Granted everyone doubted the traditional Islamic storyline, but the conversation was very tame by any standard. After it was locked I started reading one of your typical GD freakouts about Christianity. One poster made a comment to the effect that "all pastors are con men and all Christians are simpletons being conned." Sweeping generalizations are a no no, as I've been told, so I hit the report button. Now, I don't know what goes on behind the scenes and what may or may not have come of it, but I know that said poster kept reiterating that statement for the next dozen or so pages of the thread. Now I get that there are a lot of mods with different interpretations of what constitutes "derogatory", and that no mod can be in one place at all times. But, the uneven handling of COC 1 leads to at least the perception of "protected classes." I think what dogfacepappy was saying (and I'd agree with him) is that in this area you need to open the door wide or shut it completely. Either make all religions fair game or make all religions off limits. The, at least perceived, half measures in place now just magnifies the problem. lol We allow FAR MORE bashing of Islam, and derogatory comments about muslims than we do about any other religion, by a huge margin. So yes, there is absolutely an uneven handling of the CoC when it comes to Islam and other religions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 12:16:45 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And NOTHING AT ALL in the Code of Conduct prohibits you from wishing death and damnation and all sorts of horrible things upon the people that carried out those acts, or on any other extremist muslims that want to engage in violence or terrorism. But the second that extends to wishing death on ALL muslims, then it is not any different from people who condemn all Catholics (and shit all over them) for the actions of a few bad priests. Either will earn an account warning, because it's the same principle. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
but some seem simply UNABLE to control themselves when it comes to Muslims. Almost 3,000 dead in my hometown in less than an hour will do that to people... ETA: We don't have the stick-poking icon? And NOTHING AT ALL in the Code of Conduct prohibits you from wishing death and damnation and all sorts of horrible things upon the people that carried out those acts, or on any other extremist muslims that want to engage in violence or terrorism. But the second that extends to wishing death on ALL muslims, then it is not any different from people who condemn all Catholics (and shit all over them) for the actions of a few bad priests. Either will earn an account warning, because it's the same principle. Easy, brother.... Like I said, we need that stick-pointy icon thing. 
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
