Originally posted by pcaspian
Nemesio and you don't seem to graps the difference between that which may cause offense (for which he claims to speak for all alcoholics and homosexuals), and that which is actually derogatory. As every 3rd or 4th post of mine [b] certainly is not derogatory, they fall in the 2nd category, that which Nemesio deems offensive. [/b]
How do you make such a distinction about what IS and what
MAY BE offensive? This is where what you are saying makes
no sense. There might, actually, be people who don't find the
fetus in the manger comment offensive, whereas there are people
who find your comments about homosexuality most certainly are.
People's classifications of offensive are not based on some objective
standard, but on their own subjective opinions shaped by their
experience. This is why #1 says your position is 'dictatorial,' because
you are holding up your particular standard and concept of what is and
is not offensive as being objective.
As such I challenge his authority to speak on behalf of these deeply hurt individuals by attacking my character in making these accusations. See, those actually require substantiating. As I've yet to receive a single response from a self confessed alcoholic/homosexual at RHP (afterall 10% of men across the board are homosexual) regarding my 'offensive' posts, I want him to substantiate his claims.
Obviously, either these individuals have my mindset that
even your offensive speech ought not to be censored, or
they don't feel comfortable confronting such a self-
professed bigot.
Nemesio is the policeman who publically berates you when you take a pee in the bush, eventhough no-one else could care less about it, he speaks on behalf of the community appalled by my actions. Its a load of crud, and simply claiming that he's doing me some kind of favour by not throwing me into jail is even further removed from the truth.
??? I publically berate you because you are a bigot, one
who uses the Bible to substantiate hateful action, on behalf
of 'God.' If I am in a minority, that's fine with me. And
if your hateful posts don't get alerted (because I am not
doing it), that's fine with me. Several other people have
spoken on my side and several others on your. I've never
claimed to speak on behalf of the community, and as for
your 'throwing you in jail comment,' recall that it was YOU
who were anticipating more bans in the future, not I.
Nemesio
P.S., Calling in my sentence is not an adjective; it is an
adjectival participle. In your 'sentence' it is a gerund.
However, your sentence would require the preposition 'for'
to be 'of' and the verb 'leaving' to be something else like
'ending' or 'disappearing,' since 'leaving' tends to refer to
animate things, not concepts. So, I can finally understand
why you misunderstood my totally correct sentence: because
you speak like a 2nd grader, you assume that I do. False
assumption, but I forgive you.
P.P.S., You need to refresh your memory about the proper
use of the apostrophe.
Originally posted by nemesio
How do you make such a distinction about what [b]IS and what
MAY BE offensive? [/b]
Perhaps get some real life perspective. Could you go up to the nearest group of 3 or 4 african american men you find. Say to them "Hey, my [insert negro reference of choice here] , hows it hanging". Then when, I mean if, you make it back to RHP, tell us how it went. Please explore on your attempts to convey the "subjective opinions shaped by their experience" argument.
--ps. Make sure a police officer is standing near by, just incase the discussion gets heated.
Obviously, either these individuals have my mindset that even your offensive speech ought not to be censored, or they don't feel comfortable confronting such a self-professed bigot.
For me to be a 'self-professed' bigot, I would actually have to admit that my own beliefs are unreasonable. Ofcourse I claim no such thing, you do. As such, perhaps refrain from stating obvious lies.
As no such RHP individuals have confronted me (nor have any of my posts been moderated by either Robomod or any of the previous RHP mods) your statement is nothing but opinionated, and at that, unreasonable or bigoted. That would make you the hypocrite. May I suggest that if you're going to attempt to attribute qualities to my persona, you atleast get them right.
I publically berate you because you are a bigot, one
who uses the Bible to substantiate hateful action, on behalf
of 'God.'
Pray tell Nemesio, what actions have I suggested that were hatefull ? Doing any harm to homosexuals or alcoholics ? Ignoring homosexuals or alcoholics ? I have stated opinions that are literal interpretations of Biblical scriptures, as stated by Jesus. If you choose not to accept those scriptures, so be it. Your reaction however is to brand me a hateful, malicious bigot. Difference is I am not willing to deceive another person into changing their entire lives to support a God that rejects their behaviour in the very scriptures His essence is based on. That is living a lie. Your words say more about you, than about me.
If I am in a minority, that's fine with me. And
if your hateful posts don't get alerted (because I am not
doing it), that's fine with me. Several other people have
spoken on my side and several others on your.
Why do you not alert my posts ? If my posts are offensive, alert every single one of them. That is the entire point of the RHP alert system. I can guantantee you that you are doing me no injustice to attempt to moderate my posts. Please do, atleast then I can hear the last of your claims of bigotery, for that truely is getting lame.
So, I can finally understand
why you misunderstood my totally correct sentence: because
you speak like a 2nd grader, you assume that I do. False
assumption, but I forgive you.
Grammar lessons from the guy who doesn't know the difference between 'or' and 'nor'. Sheesh, don't you feel just somewhat embarrassed to make that statement ?
in friendship
pc
Originally posted by pcaspianYou really are naive. Do you think that I've never used the
Perhaps get some real life perspective. Could you go up to the nearest group of 3 or 4 african american men you find. Say to them "Hey, my [insert negro reference of choice here] , hows it hanging". Then when, I mean if, you make it back ...[text shortened]... ey the "subjective opinions shaped by their experience."
n-word in front of African American friends of mine? Indeed I have,
and I'm still here to tell about it. It's all about context.
No word is intrinsically offensive, just the context of its delivery.
Now, some words are offensive in more contexts than others, such
as the n-word, but not all. For example, the word 'balls' can have
an offensive context but many perfectly acceptable ones. And, for
those contexts in which you would likely find 'balls' offensive, I can
bet there are many people who wouldn't find it offensive (and those
who would find it horrifying).
As I've said before, one of my closest friends calls me 'Spic Terrorist'
on a regular basis (I'm Latino by birth) and I find the term endearing,
not offensive. In the mouth of someone like yourself, it would not
be endearing at all.
I know you really, really, really want there to be an objective standard,
but I'm sorry, there isn't one.
Nemesio
Originally posted by nemesio
You really are naive. Do you think that I've never used the
n-word in front of African American friends of mine? Indeed I have,
and I'm still here to tell about it. It's all about [b]context.
No word is intrinsically offensive, just the context of its delivery. [/b]
Why do you call it the 'n-word' here, instead of just saying it as you would with your friends ?
surely : No word is intrinsically offensive ? Afterall we are not using it in a derogatory context no ?
Lets try :
1. RHP is an international forum based on chess.
2. 'ni**er' is a historically derogatory term.
Any person that realises these facts will not use this word at RHP. Should they fail to realise this (ie: assuming RHP to contain only racist white folk or fail to understand the actual meaning of this word) ofcourse then they may be excused for making this mistake.
Now these facts (1 and 2) constitute a standard of behaviour with regard to this word. Ofcourse you are correct in stating that this word does not offend in all cases (nor would the word 'd*ck' offend someone that doesn't speak english, however as we are making some reasonably educated assumptions about the people that visit RHP, we can assume that under no reasonable circumstances in the near future should the use of this word be allowed. This should be the case irrespective of whether 'n' RHP users find it offensive. It should be the case irrespective of whether 'n' RHP users alerts a post, containing this word, indeed should only a single user alert such a post, it should be deleted based on content
I can go on the list and I can be explicitly crude if I had to be. Without doubdt I know I would cross the boundaries of accepted behaviour. This is common sense. It is the same common sense that enables you not to offend each and every co-worker every day at work.
We require a standard set by designated respected mods. Indeed that is why we supply reasons for alerting a post when we find it offensive. Whether you believe it or not, Russ will actually have to use discression when moderating a post. Why, because 5 people that alert a post simply because they do not like the person posting is not sufficient to remove it. Similarly, a single person posting a crude message about hitting slaves in the face with a hammer (perhaps you recall this message) again should be removed, even if it does not receive the required 'n' alerts.
The problems with requiring 'n' people to alert a post before it is deemed offensive are numerous.
1. I can post an offensive message in an obscure thread where no-one is to read it. Perhaps one or two people will read it, but this may not be sufficient to get that post removed.
2. We are not protecting the interests of the minority. Is it truely fair that we have one or two Muslim members, but as they are not sufficient to justify 'n', I am allowed to make an derogatory comment about Mohammed, which only they find offensive ? This is similar to junior school where you can pick on the kid in the corner because you have bigger friends that he does, so anything goes.
3. 'n' people actually have to read the post before it is removed, by which time damage has been done.
Ofcourse from a business perspective satisfying the needs of the majority makes perfect sense, however is that right ? Is picking on the minority correct because only that person is offended ?
in friendship
pc
Originally posted by pcaspianOf course there if there is going to be moderation there has to be some standards set; that's common sense. Where the difficulty is in setting up the standard. You and a few others found the Norma McGrevey haikus "shockingly offensive" but I dare say there was nothing intrinsically offensive about them and most people who lack your strong religious views on the site did not find them offensive. On the other hand, your views that homosexuals and alcoholics are not open to salvation and are thus damned if they continue in their sinful ways is a perfectly acceptable reading of what you regard as sacred scripture, but others can and do find such a view offensive.
Originally posted by nemesio
[b]You really are naive. Do you think that I've never used the
n-word in front of African American friends of mine? Indeed I have,
and I'm still here to tell about it. It's all about [b]context.
No word is intrinsically offensive, just the context of its delivery. [/b]
Why do you call it the 'n- ...[text shortened]... Is picking on the minority correct because only that person is offended ?
in friendship
pc[/b]
What Russ is in effect doing with Robomod is "punting" the problem directly to the community; YOU decide what is too offensive to be put in YOUR forums. He has instituted some safeguards against the "ganging up" to moderate certain members (i.e. alerters must give a reason), but by and large its up to us. Again, I haven't heard you give a convincing reason why the majority of people on the site can't decide what is acceptable for them to read; we're all over 13 now anyway. My mine concern with Robomod at the outset was that n would be set so low that vast amounts of material would get moderated; as this has not happened I am generally satisfied with the system so far.
The problem doesn't get solved by having "respected" moderators; we know that quite often the moderators can't agree between themselves if a post should be moderated or not. All we are doing is replacing the will of the community with the will of a few as to what the majority should be able to read. This meant be well-meaning "enlightened" censorship, but it's still censorship nonetheless. By and large, people who post here post well within accepted internet standards and when they don't it gets moderated. Therefore, I don't see that there's a major problem.
In Sweetlogicandreasonship,
2BitLawyer
Originally posted by pcaspianBecause in this context, I would believe that it is offensive,
Why do you call it the 'n-word' here, instead of just saying it as you would with your friends ?
not because it is intrinsically offensive.
#1 addressed your post beautifully. I have nothing to add to it,
if you'd like to respond.
Nemesio
Edit: I will add one thing. If there were no black people on this
site, I would still expect the n-word used in a hateful manner to
be alerted by the community. I, myself, have alerted a few
nasty anti-Moslem comments.
Originally posted by pcaspianSome people will always find some statements offensive that others dont. Nothing can be done about that.
Originally posted by nemesio
[b]You really are naive. Do you think that I've never used the
n-word in front of African American friends of mine? Indeed I have,
and I'm still here to tell about it. It's all about [b]con ...[text shortened]... ause only that person is offended ?
in friendship
pc[/b]
"Jesus sucked Marys nipples for hours on end and enjoyed it"
A totally true statement. I see nothing wrong with it at all. I suspect some might not agree it is an acceptable statement however. Id say they just dont live in the real world.
On the other hand I might find
"I don't believe you.
You are a deceitfull person Nemesio, I pity you.
Ofcourse you believe different, but then the best lies are the ones you believe yourself.
pc"
To be of offence. Yet I wouldnt alert it, nor expect it to be removed.
Moderation, should be minimal. If you dont like something dont read it, others shouldnt have to suffer because of a few who could simply not read what offends them.
Originally posted by GrayeyesofsorrowI can say that I did not alert this, either. It was
On the other hand I might find
"I don't believe you.
You are a deceitfull person Nemesio, I pity you.
Ofcourse you believe different, but then the best lies are the ones you believe yourself.
pc"
To be of offence. Yet I wouldnt alert it, nor expect it to be removed.
subjectively offensive to me. I'm sure pcaspian
derived great pleasure writing it, though.
Nemesio
Originally posted by nemesioIm not sure if it was in responce to one of your posts but pcaspian had the answer. He said something along the lines of I dont bother to read X's posts anymore. By his own admission he can choose to not read peoples post whos ideas are opposed to his own. I dont see how that is different to self moderation.
I can say that I did not alert this, either. It was
subjectively offensive to me. I'm sure pcaspian
derived great pleasure writing it, though.
Nemesio
For anyone to say they alert posts on behalf of other people isnt a convincing arguement.
Originally posted by nemesio
Because in this context, I would believe that it is offensive,
not because it is intrinsically offensive.
#1 addressed your post beautifully. I have nothing to add to it,
if you'd like to respond.
Nemesio
1. No1 didn't address all my point. Infact he flat-out ignored all 3 reasons I gave for Robomod being flawed. Ofcourse by now we all know this is his style.
2. I am not in debate with no1, but with you. No1 takes no ownership of his posts in the long run, so you're on your own. Furthermore, If I am to respond to his post assuming it is your post, you will easily be able to avoid any future conflicts, by stating it was not your words.
As such I suggest you reply in your own post. If you want to, copy and paste his entire post, so be it, but actually include references to my post.I am not in debate with no1, I've stated this previously, I am also ignoring posts from Graye, so you're on your own.
Please respond,
in friendship
pc
Originally posted by pcaspian😀
Originally posted by nemesio
[b]Because in this context, I would believe that it is offensive,
not because it is intrinsically offensive.
#1 addressed your post beautifully. I have nothing to add to it,
if you'd like to respond.
Nemesio
1. No1 didn't address all my point. Infact he flat-out ignored all 3 reasons I gave f ...[text shortened]... noring posts from Graye, so you're on your own.
Please respond,
in friendship
pc
[/b]
Did you consider my statement to be alert worthy? Or just decided you wouldnt debate because you consider me lower than you?
Either way its given me a laugh.
Originally posted by nemesio
I can say that I did not alert this, either. It was
subjectively offensive to me. I'm sure pcaspian
derived great pleasure writing it, though.
Nemesio
I suggest we could have examine the entire thread before posting my response. That's calling posting in 'context'. Ofcourse that would show you in a bad light. This is the part I don't grasp and I find sloppy. You accept Graye's attempt at deflamation, but you know it can simply result in a mud-slinging fight and lol, I still have alot of mud from what you've thrown my way. Yet instead of rejecting it, you play the martyr. 🙂
Originally posted by pcaspianThis thread is about moderation and you were aruging what is acceptable and what isnt. I pasted one of your posts from another thread. I pasted your whole post, in which you addressed Nemesio, the post you made before that one was much the same. It is certainly not out of context, being pasted here.
Originally posted by nemesio
[b]I can say that I did not alert this, either. It was
subjectively offensive to me. I'm sure pcaspian
derived great pleasure writing it, though.
Nemesio
I suggest we could have examine ...[text shortened]... rown my way. Yet instead of rejecting it, you play the martyr. 🙂 [/b]
I merely showed you that your own posts are sometimes offensive yet others give you leeway.
If mods were to have set standards your post would probably fall under those standards.
I think people should be able to post what they like, without fear of being censored. Certainly there are some posts that should be moderated, however for the most part we should let anything go and you can choose not to read posts.
Originally posted by pcaspianWAH, I don't like no1 so I won't answer his posts!! What a very mature debating style you have, Pcaspian. Since there's little substance to your post, there's little to add to my last one. Your 3 reasons why Robomod was flawed were "ignored" because 1 and 3 are obviously stupid; if offensive material is tucked anyway in an obscure thread that no one reads who cares? Will its mere unsuspected existence somehow send waves of discontent over people at RHP who will never read it? And please explain some method by which it can be determined that posts are offensive without SOMEONE ACTUALLY READING THEM so that your flaw no3 can be solved; it goes without saying that somebody is going to see the offensive material before it gets moderated so some "damage" will be done but short of divining somebody's intent at their keyboard to write an "offensive" post and delivering an electrical shock to dissuade them BEFORE they write it, that is unavoidable.
[b/]Originally posted by nemesio
Because in this context, I would believe that it is offensive,
not because it is intrinsically offensive.
#1 addressed your post beautifully. I have nothing to add to it,
if you'd like ...[text shortened]... u're on your own.
Please respond,
in friendship
pc
Your concern that minorities might be freely insulted is touching if a tad hypocritical for someone who regularly posts that certain of them should be denied basic human rights and are doomed to eternal damnation. However, as we pointed out before (see how these posts are related) someone doesn't have to be a member of a minority to realize that certain things are offensive to a minority. Therefore, I believe that things which were truly offensive to a Muslim (your example) will be alerted by n number of non-Muslims even if there was less than n number of Muslim on site. My occasional perusals of the Debate forums seem to indicate that most offensive materials being modded are crude insults directed to certain minorities and I doubt if most of the alerters are members of those minorities. Thus your second flaw, while a theoretical possibility, does not seem to exist in the cold, hard reality of RHP.
If you don't want to answer my posts, be a petulant child and don't but I reserve the right to comment on your extreme views in this public forum. If you don't like it, TFB.
In Boohoopcaspianwon'tplaywithmeship,
2BitLawyer