The most absurd moderation in Sci history

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by Norsefire, Aug 5, 2010.

  1. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,471
    Sure, SAM. Toddle off now.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,386
    I believe I did. Unfortunately Norse was unable to provide anything aside from 'history doesn't have to be correct'.

    Have I said any differently?

    So it would be correct for me to say that the British did not colonise India, for example?

    Okay. Umm..

    Where did I claim they were?

    Nope. I believe it exists in all cultures in some form or other. In India, for example, you have the caste system.

    And this is important because? Ah yes, we get to that..

    Hitler has admirers around the world. We refer to them as Neo Nazis. They commonly attack any non-white groups, and their current pet hate is Muslims in Europe.
    Maybe. Or maybe some people just admire mass murderers. I believe even mass murderers in jails around the world and serial killers have their fan clubs. Why should Hitler be any different?

    Which has what to do with this thread?

    I mean we could say that there are no deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan, because it isn't reported. 30 years down the track, we can take that and run with it and be like Norse. We can disregard the evidence that exists, the meticulous records kept by the Nazis and the video footage, photographs, the dentures, hair, glasses and the like of those they killed.. we can disregard testimonials from survivors and claim that 'it doesn't matter if my history isn't correct'.. I just have to believe that is so. I mean I can even claim that the Rwandan genocide never occured. And in 10 years time, I can believe that the war in Iraq and Afghanistan resulted in zero civilian deaths and that the Jews living in Israel now were always there...

    La la la..

    Denial is lovely, isn't it?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Thats not the point. The point is if you said it, should you be banned? ANd if you came back after the ban and said it was just your opinion and you saw no need to provide evidence for it, should you be banned again? In science, if your opinion is not backed up by evidence, do people lose the right to express it? Or does it simply remain irrelevant until it can be supported? How is banning opinions science? Is it forbidden to have unsupported opinions??

    The British "holocaust" is not taught anywhere in England. Are they all racists? Are they in denial?

    Do Americans learn about natives villages being burned by George Washington? Are they all racists?

    People like James somehow abandon rational thought and become patronising SOBs who think they have "struck a note" because their rants and accusations are not given due consideration. All because we're talking about Jews! Amazing, really

    Land without a people for people without a land. Familiar, isn't it?
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2010
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,471
    Saying "The British did not colonise India" is not hate speech, SAM.

    You seem to be having a lot of trouble with a simple concept.

    What holocaust? Are you claiming the British carried out an Indian genocide?

    How many native villages did old George burn, SAM?

    Hehe. I certainly did strike a nerve there. Feel free to insult me, SAM. I promise I won't ban you for the personal insults you're dying to throw at me in this thread. Go on - tell me what you really think.
     
  8. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Is that your opinion or is it a fact? Because if its a fact, you'll have to back it up with evidence. It may be offensive enough to many Indians to be considered as hate speech by them. Its like saying they and not the British were responsible for what happened to them. Like the Gazans today, in fact.
     
  9. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    lol

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Good catch, I meant "struck a nerve"

    /you lurker you.
     
  11. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Thanks, it was funny

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Probably a residual sublimation

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,102
    S.A.M.
    If you want to go on about British Colonial Oppression, just remember that India invented War rockets which were used against the British Troops and you could imply that without this technological change made by Indians the Nazi's would have never had V2 rockets to launch at England.

    (I think this is the usual play on logic people usually complain about in regards to you, but I could be wrong)
     
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,471
    What? I have to back up with evidence that "The British did not colonise India" is not hate speech?

    Who would the target of this supposed "hate speech" be, SAM? Indian people? ...

    Indian people aren't even mentioned in the statement.

    Is it? Is it, just? Mmmm....

    I think you're grasping at straws now, SAM. You should have toddled off when I suggested it earlier and cut your losses.

    Ah yes, everything comes back to the Palestinians for you, doesn't it SAM? What has it been? Two or three posts without a mention of Israel/Palestine? Need a fix?
     
  15. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    War Rockets seem to have been good for England. Think of it as a learning experience. After all, your wars with France left us with the income tax and property tax.

    Now which one of us will be banned for hate speech [is that a clock I hear ticking?]

    Yeah unsupported opinions are no longer permitted on sciforums. Haven't you heard?

    By the by, does this mean that posters can now be reported for lack of evidence or failure to cite evidence and this will be a reason for moderation?
     
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,471
    Now you're confusing hate speech with unsupported opinion.

    It is hate speech that isn't permitted, SAM. Get it?

    That's been happening forever. It's called "trolling", SAM.
     
  17. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,102
    Personally I don't hate you or India. I know you could perhaps hate me for being apart of a country you see as an oppressor, but you have to take into consideration that I have no position in the countries running so I'm not personally at fault. (In fact there are a lot of things I disagree with about this country but there is little I could do, it's what you could call the downfall of civilization, "Apathy".)

    It's very similar to how I believe you are, I mean I can't fault you for what goes on in the part of the world where you originated, it's all power games done by people other than us and we are of course made to suffer for it.

    It's just occasionally there will be something that you detest passionately and sometimes people feed off that, which is why they'll just be happy feeding you lines to cook you in your own stooper.

    Incidentally my point with my last post was to identify a blantent Logical Fallacy, not actually fault a country.
     
  18. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Stryder, I don't know you well enough to hate you or love you

    But tbh, if there was something I wanted to hate you for, it would be for transferring that certain thread out of Biology when I was having the argument with Voldemort. I don't know why you did it and I don't care. I found it singularly disrespectful an action by one moderator towards another. You could be a purple alien monotheist hermaphrodite and I would still hold it against you only for that one reason.
    The topic is absurd moderation.
    Is it now the role of admin and moderators to determine the evidence given to support opinions on sciforums?

    Because if it is, I want to know what qualifications you are forwarding as an authority on the subject.

    Are mods and admins going to jump into discussions and demand evidence from posters and ban them if they do not support their opinions in history, religion, politics and world events with evidence?

    For example:

     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2010
  19. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,471
    Moderator note: Discussion of the history of disease in North America following the arrival of European colonists has been split to a separate thread, here:

    [thread]103451[/thread]
     
  20. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,471
    Yeah. The MOST absurd moderation in HISTORY!

    Nah. We can't read everything and wouldn't want to if we could. Most of your stuff, for example, is repetitive and boring.

    What subject?

    That's been happening for a long time. Wake up and smell the coffee, SAM. We act on complaints.

    Also, don't forget this is a science site.
     
  21. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    To repeat:

    Now imagine in this discussion, a mod jumps in takes a side, demands evidence, sets a timer and threatens a ban. Is this science?
     
  22. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,471
    That's for other other thread, SAM.

    No. Science is the part where you have a hypothesis and you go out and find the evidence for and against it.
     
  23. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,220
    Why should I bother, if you can simply remove it, relevant in my opinion or not?

    Moderator note: off-topic discussion moved to other thread about disease in North America
     

Share This Page