may I ask why spidergoat was never banned for the claim that the palestinians deserved to die? I mean If I were to make the claim that the jew deserved to die simply because they thought they had a right to palestinian land I would have banned in a heart beat but some how a jewish poster who supports Israel is allowed to say palestinians deserve to die for esstenially trying to defend their property and rights with out so much as a slap on the wrist.
Yes, people who "defend their property rights" by encouraging their kids to blow themselves up on crowded buses with pockets full of nails and rat poison do not deserve life, they deserve death. (Everyone ideally deserves a fair trial, but we are speaking theoretically here, as if one could be assured of guilt).
the palestinains don't encourage them(their kids) to blow them selves up the condition set in by miserable self absorb bigots like you self do. and that's not what you said you said in response to the palestinian having a right to defend themselves that they deserved to die.
yes, I have tried to tone down on my reporting but saying whole peoples deserve to die is something that I'll report every damn time.
Probably not, but probably should be. Note: Forum Rules, Regulations and Recommendations - - Version 2.3 3. Stereotyping, Insulting and name-calling Use of vulgar or demeaning words to describe a member or a group of people will be subjected to editing or post deletion at a moderator’s discretion. The reparative use of such language could get you banned. The following are included: · Profanity used in the description of person or member is no acceptable! · The use of childish immature names such as but not limit to “idiot”, “twit” and “Moron” in the description of a member is not acceptable. · Misspellings of members names that look demeaning are unacceptable · Misspelling of words that look demeaning, examples include but not limited to: “Amerikans”, “Sheeple” and “Mooslums” are unacceptable. Be careful of assigning character features to another poster because of his or her membership of a group (such as a particular religious belief system – or place of residence). It is acceptable to point out similarities between members of groups, but only as long as this is backed up by some kind of argument or evidence. 5. Religious, ethnic or racial hatred / Threats Avoid posts that promote hatred among different religions, ethnic groups or nations. All racial slurs will be deleted. Any post threatening another poster in any way will be deleted, and an effort will be made to ban the poster from sciforums. Seems pretty clear to me...
That's a pretty facile line of thought. Speech hurts people on a daily basis. Moreover, intolerance is predominantly mediated by what? Oh yeah, that's right: speech. ...pen.... sword...
So, I should report every post that includes an intended pun on my country's name in English, 'Turkey' -which is given by 'brilliant' Americans, because they thought the birds came from Anatolia and probably because they can't pronounce two extra consonants? Or should I report this post as it could be an example of the sort?
Yes you should. However, proving that the slur was intentional, would be difficult to say the least..
I didn't say that all Palestinians deserved to die. I certainly don't feel that way. Only the ones that target innocent people. English comprehension skills are not exactly pjdude1219's strong point. I would like a link to the post in question as well.
Given Israel’s use of cluster bombs that continue to maim children today, their deliberate targeting of hospitals in Lebanon, their use of white phosphorus against civilians in a densely populated area (a war crime), their targeting of UN posts in both Lebanon and Gaza, their act of piracy against aid ships in international waters, and for herding millions of people into third-world ghettos then applying blockades against basic necessities, i'd suggest it’s perfectly reasonable to say the same thing of Israelis. Is it not?
What is it with everyone tonight?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The blockade isn't illegal and the flotilla incident wasn't piracy!!! CAN ISRAEL IMPOSE A NAVAL BLOCKADE ON GAZA? Yes it can, according to the law of blockade which was derived from customary international law and codified in the 1909 Declaration of London. It was updated in 1994 in a legally recognised document called the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea". Under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control. "On the basis that Hamas is the ruling entity of Gaza and Israel is in the midst of an armed struggle against that ruling entity, the blockade is legal," said Philip Roche, partner in the shipping disputes and risk management team with law firm Norton Rose. OPPONENTS HAVE CALLED ISRAEL'S RAID "PIRACY". WAS IT? No, as under international law it was considered a state action. "Whether what Israel did is right or wrong, it is not an act of piracy. Piracy deals with private conduct particularly with a pecuniary or financial interest," Kraska said. http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LDE6511I7.htm I mean you can argue that it isn't right but you cannot argue that it isn't legal. Just take a look at the entire link. If there is anything Israel isn't short of its lawyers.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Since the thread title begs an answer or answers, I'll offer here some suggestions to pj and anyone else interested as a fellow member. I haven't reviewed this case, but at the level of more engaged participation SciForums, that is in solidarity with all concerned members who wish for the forum to be less frequented by people who make mostly substandard posts, I would suggest the following: If a person with whom I may have a personality conflict is motivating me to make a post or a complaint here, I will take extra time and distance to separate my feelings from forum rules, and then make any retorts or reports with specificity about what post(s) are obvious violations of those rules. At the very least I will endeavor to not break any forum rules in any response (yes, including this one). Subtle bending is OK, even extra credit for inoffensive bending (good faith, no personal attack, etc) IMO. Deep breath, a click on the Forum Rules bookmark (of course you do have one?)... and then let it all out in an expressive but inoffensive post. Then click on the FR bookmark again, edit the post as necessary- even liberally and progressively- and most importantly- Save Changes. I strongly believe in saving my changes- I've seen it change my savings. A self-disciplining moderating influence is useful in life. Mindful of this, and if in my heightened awareness I am still feeling pissed off, I will avail myself of the Search Members link (bookmarked) and reach the appropriate member profile. I read through a few of the member's Recent (and maybe some not-so-recent) Posts, and have a calm sip of hot tea/cold beer/room-temp whiskey as appropriate. If still perturbed I will then repeat the same process on myself, with a deliberately contrived perspective of what others may perceive. If I become overcaffeinated or inebriated by this process, I suspend the experiment for later (burp). So I'll come edit this post some more later... If it isn't easy to find violations of the Forum Rules in my investigation of another member who has annoyed me, then it is very likely a valuable opportunity to discover errors (maybe even a pattern of error) in my own perception. Frequently discovering errors in one's own perception is to practice an extremely valuable (increasingly rare?) skill that is applicable to many areas of life. More specifically with regard to this thread, I believe generally in "no harm no foul" in online discussions, and as a flawed moderator, I dream of the converse- no foul, no harm. If I wish to occasionally lodge my disagreement with someone that I am prone to disagreeing with here, I know it's fitting and permissible- but if I catch myself hammering away with intentions to change a specific member's political orientation, then it's time to give some attention to my own post history in contemplation of my post-future. An intelligently self-examined online life is not merely more worth posting- it invites no external moderation. In the expanding information age, we are evolving new reiterations of ancient social mechanisms that serve the same functions as "moving on" when presented with a potential confrontation in the physical street, and in polite company. When we all can enter Sciforums or any respectful interactions with practiced and evolving self-control, our abilities to contribute positively are enhanced, and especially in situations where aggression may be aroused, responses can be pivotal and contagious for better or worse. When was the last time you reviewed your own posts, to assess the quality of your own contributions here? I'm determined to do so before criticizing another member by any means (as a member or mod) and I think it helps me to have a better footing here. It's not always comfortable to look back at my own posts with a critical eye towards my own behavior, but it's been useful and instructive for me and more-objective self-assessment is a habit worth cultivating, that is very useful in many other social and professional contexts. It's the deeper aspect of the old parable attributed to a radical Islamic Prophet- "let him who is without sin cast the first stone". As for the possibilities of comparable level-headedness of moderation here, we are imperfect volunteers who police this community with the sole compensation of seeing an improvement in the quality of posts and membership here. We have disagreements in our sanctum sanctorum over banishing anyone of note from our little garden. When there are doubts about the consistency with which forum rules are enforced, then it is an opportunity for all concerned to review the basic rules of posting etiquette here, and in that I want to emphasize that the "ruling class" actually wields a smaller influence here than the membership at large. What is much more important and effective than any policing and garbage-disposal policy adjustments here is that a culture of mutual respect and good faith is cultivated, and we all have an influence on whether these flourish or deteriorate, whether we're moderators or not. I am completely unfamiliar with this case, and haven't yet found or read the posts at the root of this particular discussion. That is a challenge before the Original Postor that is still awaiting an answer in this thread. In a more general way, this is an opportunity to offer the links and thinks that help me to approach more heated conversations here with a little better balance, both as a member and a moderator. Self-evaluation with regard to the forum rules is a powerful choice of influence that transcends all hierarchy here. When we take sides on that in at least the spirit of the scientific method, then we find we're all (all of us that matter) here together in agreement that causes something important in human discourse to be happening right here. Well, maybe not right this instant, but now and then. That's just a quote here because I LOLed. Then I reviewed the Forum Rules and The Merchant of Venice (lol). I'm so glad we banned/would ban Willy SpamSpear- too many words, forced down and vomited out of too many throats IMO. My point is that there is a trial of opinions before bannings that includes ample representations of the viewpoints of the the most valued membership. The most valued membership is self-aware and even self-conscious. And while the quality of ScoFora mercy is occasionally strained by confused intention, it has an abiding intention to cultivate here an environment for worthwhile conversation. If it were not so, I would have split already. My only point is that when the most regularly engaged membership (& if you don't know who you are here, you're not reviewing your own posts enough) leads by conscious example, this place has and will evolve and excel, which is something lucid lucys and the many other smart people who set the tone around here are consistently and most influencially agreeable about. Eat, sleep, speak and post smart, and always increase the peace. Now I've satisfied my preaching-to the-choir quota for at least a few days. [quote="portia" @ all authority, "Shakespeare" Merchant of Venice] The quality of mercy is not strain'd, It droppeth, as the gentle rain from heaven Upon the place beneath: it is twice bless'd; It blesseth him that gives, and him that takes: 'Tis mightiest in the mightiest; it becomes The throned monarch better than his crown; His sceptre shows the force of temporal power, The attribute to awe and majesty, Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings; But mercy is above this sceptred sway, It is enthroned in the hearts of kings, It is an attribute to God himself; And earthly power doth then show likest God's When mercy seasons justice. Therefore, Jew, Though justice be thy plea, consider this— That in the course of justice, none of us Should see salvation: we do pray for mercy; And that same prayer, doth teach us all to render The deeds of mercy.[/quote]
