Q's Ban (Or, Syne Strikes Again)

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by Balerion, Feb 25, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,685
    No..by condemning people you are in fact expressing intolerance for their behavior. You may not actively suppress their behavior, but you definitely believe they should not act that way. That's what it means to condemn.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    Don't be obtuse. Obviously you have the physical ability to make the excuse. I was saying you can't do so to the benefit of your argument. Obviously.

    You refuse to disclose what the problem with the behavior is.

    Again: obviously.

    That you consider it a mistake means you subscribe to some notion of universal morality. It appears you merely lack the conviction to explain yourself.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Kittamaru Suppose it makes sense. Wearing a bit thin. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,937
    Much like I condemn child molesters, muggers, sexual predators, and other such criminal deviants? That's fine... I have no problem condemning them and having them removed from society.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    I believe that people should not be overprotected from themselves, so while I condemn some behavior, based on my own personal assessment, so long as they do not harm others, I really do not care what they do to themselves.

    Maybe this is difficult for you to understand. My opinions are informed by what I think is right or wrong for me. I am not the judge of anyone else's life, but at the same time, I do assess others through the same standard I hold for myself (which everyone does).

    Just like I do not deride myself unduly for simply failing to live up to my own standard (just a lesson to be learned), I do not deride others for doing so. Now I suppose if you were one of these people who really beat themselves up over the least little error then I would expect you to have some trouble differentiating condemning specific behavior from demonizing the person wholesale.

    Yet again, I did, regardless of whether you disagree that it benefits the argument.

    Because that thread is not primarily about homosexuality and I do not intend to derail it. You seem to want me to argue against homosexuality even though that thread is about demonizing people in general.

    Perhaps that would simply make it easier for you to demonize people.

    My conviction is just fine, and if you wish to engage me on the topic in a new thread dedicated to the subject, I would be happy to oblige. And everyone applies their own sense of morality to others. I have yet to see anyone claim that torture and murder is okay by them if you happen to live in the right culture or something.

    Do you condemn anything that is not criminal? What about lying (just as an example)?
     
  8. scifes In withdrawal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,573
    me me me me me!!
    Because there's only one right opinion of course! homosexuality is normal and god doesn't exist, all of other opinions should be educated and introduced to science.
    This is a science forum after all.

    Even issues like whether children have the right to live their lives as they want or not is according to some moderators, beyond discussion.
     
  9. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    No, see, this isn't a matter of disagreeing over a point of contention. This is a matter of logic. You simply cannot benefit your argument by doing so. And you most certainly did not.

    I want you to fully explain your position, and stop being a pedant.

    I sincerely doubt you're up to it, but I'll give it a shot.

    Then why do you pretend that you do not think homosexuals should refrain from homosexual activity? If you have a problem with it, then you must think they should do something else, otherwise you wouldn't have a problem with it. It appears you're trying to have it both ways.
     
  10. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,685
    Then why do you condemn gay people for loving who they do and expressing that love with them sexually? Is there something harmful about love and sex among gay people that you know about that we don't?
     
  11. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    I am not pretending anything. I guess it is simply beyond you that a person can both have an opinion and be unconcerned whether others act or believe contrary to it.

    My opinion on homosexuality in general is a meta-ethical stance (what is right) not a normative-ethical position (what ought be done).

    I will not make this thread a debate on homosexuality. Start a new thread for that.
     
  12. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,379
    While I'm glad to hear that you are taking member complaints seriously, I'd like to raise another issue here.

    Currently that post that got (Q) banned has been left 100% as originally posted.
    There is nothing there to suggest that it IS an example of inappropriate posting.
    No comment from you in the post itself or even in the thread.

    How are people to realise, let alone understand, that it is an example of inappropriate posting, as you intend them to?
    How can your actions here possibly be to the benefit of others as you had intended - if you leave the offending post unmarked, uncommented on - even if just to comment to the effect "Mod Note: this post is inappropriate, and has led to (Q) being given a temporary ban. Please take this as evidence of what is deemed unacceptable." etc.

    Would that not make more sense?
     
  13. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    I have remedied that, Baldeee, but generally I err on the side of saying the least when handing out infractions. I really do not what to "rub it in" any more than necessary. I will have to juggle whether I should simply delete offending posts/links/images or come up with a standard mod note to let others know what is inappropriate. I really thought that the red card on the post and all of the attention it has received would have sufficed.
     
  14. phoenix2634 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    329
    The general membership doesn't see a yellow or red card on a post.

    A card is only visible to moderators or to a member whose post received an warning or infraction.

    That's why there are repeated requests for moderator notes.
     
  15. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    Ooooooohhhhh. Thank you very much. I had either forgotten that or simply was not aware. Still on the learning curve. Again, thank you for pointing that out to me.
     
  16. Kittamaru Suppose it makes sense. Wearing a bit thin. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,937
    I confess, I was not aware of that either - I had thought the yellow or red card showed on the post to general membership.
     
  17. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,823
    No, it only shows up for moderators and for the person who received the infraction. Which is why we often get PM's or accusations that we haven't done anything about a certain issue or other, even though we have already issued a warning.
     
  18. Kittamaru Suppose it makes sense. Wearing a bit thin. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,937
    Righto - I think I'll continue using my mod-hat edit then.
     
  19. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    Yeah, I will definitely document warnings/infractions in the thread when they are given.
     
  20. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,379
    Syne, your candour in this regard is refreshing.
    Thank you.
     
  21. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    Yeah, every once in a while honest mistakes do happen.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. rpenner Fully Wired Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,833
    I thought the Red card does show up as an icon on posts but unprivileged members can't see more than that.

    //Edit
    Whew -- it took forever for me to find this from my memory. For some reason I was looking at Nightshift's posts instead of those of Trapped.

    Here is the red card I see on Trapped's [post=3164974]post #301[/POST] on his "My last thread on UFO's".
    I also see the red card on (Q)'s [POST=3164726]post marked for inflammatory content.[/POST]
     
  23. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page