Offensive Avatars

[S.A.M.]

If you read the discussion in the original thread, there is discussion of a Swastika which is NOT visible on the avatar SAM claims to be the one in question, but CLEARLY is present on the image I think she cropped

This discussion?

All I want to know is if I can use a swastika as my avatar now. Can I have your blessing ?

The swastika is a sacred Hindu symbol that is present in Hindu homes and temples. You have my blessing

source: http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1795719&postcount=198

How does this imply that the swastika is on my avatar?

 

[Tiassa]

Nothing less than your best

And you are being short sighted as usual, because SAM is involved. I know what I saw three years ago! She's dishonestly trying to use three years of history to create ambiguity.

No, actually, I think the avatar you remember was attached to someone else. That's all.

Apart from linking to an image which I think the avatar was cropped from? How would I provide proof, given this bulletin board only stores one, current avatar? If you read the discussion in the original thread, there is discussion of a Swastika which is NOT visible on the avatar SAM claims to be the one in question, but CLEARLY is present on the image I think she cropped.

And reduced to a 60x60 avatar image?

I even cropped the image again to make the swatstikas more visible.

But seriously, man, I'm pretty sure I remember the avatar you're recalling, and no, it was not attached to S.A.M. I can actually promise you that.

You did over moderate, and lo and behold it's in a thread where SAM's bullshit is being called. So I think it's YOU who needs to prove your motivations are pure matey, 'cos you have a pattern in your behaviour.

Taking up a new career as a conspiracy theorist?

And instead of posting a polite message asking for folk to bring the discussion back on track you tried to bury the thread.

Are you writing my protocols, now?

I look forward to the full manual, when it's published.

In the meantime, next time I'll be polite than direct, wait for more than one response, and certainly give people more than twelve hours notice. (Oh, right, since all three of those links are consecutive posts, just jump to #133-135.)

(And I'll definitely check in with the administration about what constructive purpose there is in information deliberately leaked in order to create an uproar about a false pretense of threatened administrative action. Which is what this thread is. Of course, what's really weird is that even though Giambattista can be annoying, I actually feel badly for how he's been used in this case. To the other, it also means someone on staff finally put him to some good use. I just wish they would tell the other moderators when they're going to be pulling a stunt like this. Or maybe that's the point ... hmm ... I wonder if we'll actually be debriefed. Never mind; it's not like you'll ever know what's going on. Then again, it's not like you ever cared if you did.)

I'm calling bullshit on your motive.

Of course you are. We wouldn't expect anything more less of you.

 

[phlogistician]

No, actually, I think the avatar you remember was attached to someone else. That's all.

Nope, 'cos I re-read the thread where I told SAM I thought her avatar was offensive. Maybe you should do some research instead of supplying your opinion.

And reduced to a 60x60 avatar image?

I know what I saw matey, three years on doesn't alter what I saw back then.

But seriously, man, I'm pretty sure I remember the avatar you're recalling, and no, it was not attached to S.A.M. I can actually promise you that.

You might be sure that's what you think but it's not what I know. Sorry.

 

[Giambattista]

I know what I saw matey, three years on doesn't alter what I saw back then.

Seeing is believing, but believing doesn't make it so.

You may honestly think you remember what you saw, but understand that over time, the human memory, being fallible like all human senses and functions, becomes flawed. Two separate incidents that were perhaps similar, and within approximately the same time frame for practical purposes, like say, within a few months of each other, may over time become confused.
Since now the exact time, place, and other details have become fuzzy, the mind seeks closure and coherence in reconstructing the timeline, so it reaches for plausible memories or embellishments to fill in the gaps, and thus sometimes the brain eventually begins to equate two incidents which in reality were separate events.

You seem sincere. You are convinced that you remember what you saw, although others here are contesting the accuracy of your recall.

I'm not calling you a liar, but given the quirky, imperfect nature of human memory, me and my rational thinking friends over at the JREF forum cannot be entirely convinced by your singular anecdotal account, especially considering that you have at least one person (Tiassa) who disputes that account.
I trust that you, of all people, would understand my reticence at putting my full faith and confidence behind your testimony.

This doesn't make you a bad person, or purposely deceptive. Far from it!
It just means you're human, and subject to the vagarity of the sensory faculties and the mind.

Hope this helps.

 

[Giambattista]

• It's true I was over-moderating; I figured a thread that had been off-topic for several days, that derived from a bullshit back-room setup by the administration probably wasn't serving any useful purpose, but Plazma certainly corrected that mistaken notion.

Back-room setup? I feel pleasantly victimized.

Taking up a new career as a conspiracy theorist?

Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe a conspiracy theory exists when official explanations and timelines are seen as problematic and full of holes? Or maybe that the official story is itself the definition of a conspiracy theory, but one that is lacking in substance and fact?
Too off topic for this thread, I'll leave it at that.

(And I'll definitely check in with the administration about what constructive purpose there is in information deliberately leaked in order to create an uproar about a false pretense of threatened administrative action.

I was told by James R in PM that I could keep the avatar if I wished to look like a "racist birther" but that it may at some point be removed. Is that necessarily "false pretense"?

Of course, what's really weird is that even though Giambattista can be annoying,

:thankyou:

I actually feel badly for how he's been used in this case.

To the other, it also means someone on staff finally put him to some good use.

Tiassa, the elitist!

I just wish they would tell the other moderators when they're going to be pulling a stunt like this.

Explain stunt, if you would, please.
And who is to blame in this instance? The one(s) who did the initial, probably racially tinged, complaining? The one who proffered the forced removal of the offensive avatar? The one who said something to me? The one who confirmed the possibility of forced removal?

 

[phlogistician]

Seeing is believing, but believing doesn't make it so.

And three years on doesn't change what happened at the time.

You are clutching at straws old boy, let it go. There is documented discussion on this very site to back up my claim. Go read it.

 

[Tiassa]

I'm just sayin' ....

Back-room setup? I feel pleasantly victimized.

And some whores enjoy the work. It's not a bad thing. But I would also remind that as much as being used in such a manner might be taken to suggest you are important, it can equally suggest you're simply a dispensable, otherwise useless patsy.

Unfortunately, the investigation would stall because the only witness isn't cooperating. Maybe you should be pleased, but I can't draw a conclusion on that point one way or the other.

Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe a conspiracy theory exists when official explanations and timelines are seen as problematic and full of holes?

And in such cases, that's fine as far as it goes. But this one existed before anything resembling an official explanation was on the record.

I was told by James R in PM that I could keep the avatar if I wished to look like a "racist birther" but that it may at some point be removed. Is that necessarily "false pretense"?

Was that before, while, or after the little bird told you there was an issue?

Tiassa, the elitist!

Nah, just someone who, on the one hand, finds little use in your posts and, to the other, wonders why you were suspended for a Boehner joke.

Explain stunt, if you would, please.
And who is to blame in this instance? The one(s) who did the initial, probably racially tinged, complaining? The one who proffered the forced removal of the offensive avatar? The one who said something to me? The one who confirmed the possibility of forced removal?

I cannot at this time. Unfortunately, when I inquired, our only witness was not cooperative.

What I'm stuck with are a number of appearances that, in sum, seem suspiciously coincidental in their grouping and effect, but of themselves look like just another day at Sciforums.

That is, coincidental stupid outcomes happen around here on a fairly regular basis. I cannot at this time eliminate that possibility.

If only I had a reliable, cooperative witness.

 

[Gustav]

.....wonders why you were suspended for a Boehner joke.

best not wonder out aloud......

(04-02-11, 01:48 AM)
You can PM Giambattista and ask him/her the reason for his/her ban if you really need to know. I've deleted your thread on that topic.

thread on that topic

In the meantime, next time I'll be polite than direct, wait for more than one response, and certainly give people more than twelve hours notice. (Oh, right, since all three of those links are consecutive posts, just jump to #133-135.)

i like it
what with your action notes and whatnot
you are a model of restraint and fairness
thank you

 

[Gustav]

I know what I saw matey, three years on doesn't alter what I saw back then.

pardon
i am looking for a few good woo woos
am i in the right place?
or did i make a wrong turn?

 

[Gustav]

so ahh
batissta
answer me please
you a selfhating homo?
i mean, you got banned for homophobia, ja?

talk to me, my friend
i can help

 

[Gustav]

calling all eyewitnesses

stringy string string's previous moniker depicted a sexual act
what was it?

/for the lulz

 

[Enmos]

http://translation.babylon.com/dutch/to-english/lul/

 

[Giambattista]

And three years on doesn't change what happened at the time.

That may well be, but recollection can change over time, for reasons I stated above. I'm sure you believe what you think you saw.

You are clutching at straws old boy, let it go. There is documented discussion on this very site to back up my claim. Go read it.

Could you repost that link or links here? I'll have a look.

 

[Giambattista]

And some whores enjoy the work. It's not a bad thing. But I would also remind that as much as being used in such a manner might be taken to suggest you are important, it can equally suggest you're simply a dispensable, otherwise useless patsy.

Is this how you elevate yourself in the morning, Tiassa, by suggesting people such as myself are unimportant, useless patsies? Are you so cold, that you construct a sort of straw man out of my supposed inflated sense of self-importance, only to set fire to it to keep warm?

I was told by James R in PM that I could keep the avatar if I wished to look like a "racist birther" but that it may at some point be removed. Is that necessarily "false pretense"?

Was that before, while, or after the little bird told you there was an issue?

Just after. I was seeking confirmation, and received every bit I could possibly desire.

Nah, just someone who, on the one hand, finds little use in your posts and, to the other, wonders why you were suspended for a Boehner joke.

Was it Boner? Or did I call Lindsey Graham something naughty? Maybe YOU could clear up which it was.

What I'm stuck with are a number of appearances that, in sum, seem suspiciously coincidental in their grouping and effect, but of themselves look like just another day at Sciforums.

What dost thou hint at? You feel a controversy was targeted at you?

 

[Giambattista]

best not wonder out aloud......

Originally Posted by James R
(04-02-11, 01:48 AM)
You can PM Giambattista and ask him/her the reason for his/her ban if you really need to know. I've deleted your thread on that topic.

thread on that topic

Not so fast, Tiassa. I AM important enough to be on Spookz.com.

so ahh
batissta
answer me please
you a selfhating homo?
i mean, you got banned for homophobia, ja?

Nay. Not in the least.
But I think people may be confused at which post it was exactly that got me branded a homophobe.
I don't think it had to do with Boehner and gayface.
This is the post that James R flagged http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2720480#post2720480

talk to me, my friend
i can help

What kind of services do you offer? Are these competitive rates? I'm not made of money.

http://translation.babylon.com/dutch/to-english/lul/

Thank you, Enmos, for the most on topic link this thread has to offer. I will use this to my advantage next time I dare converse with you in your native gibberish.

 

[Tiassa]

I guess it was the f@ggot remark, and other notes

Is this how you elevate yourself in the morning, Tiassa, by suggesting people such as myself are unimportant, useless patsies? Are you so cold, that you construct a sort of straw man out of my supposed inflated sense of self-importance, only to set fire to it to keep warm?

Actually, I'm just proving to myself the futility of adopting other people's colloquial attitudes. Don't worry about it.

Was it Boner? Or did I call Lindsey Graham something naughty? Maybe YOU could clear up which it was.

Ah, it might have been the Graham thing. Or was that all in the same string of posts? Whichever one you called a faggot, though. Graham, I think.

Just after. I was seeking confirmation, and received every bit I could possibly desire ....

.... What dost thou hint at? You feel a controversy was targeted at you?

Nah, not at me. A blatant maneuver didn't work back in November. A pathetic maneuver didn't work recently. It would be too soon to set up something this subtle having to do with me.

Well, maybe not subtle. But that's the thing. There are only a couple of potential sources for the facts. One I cannot expect honesty of. The other, you, can't give a useful answer unless it is specifically petitioned of you according to whatever arcane protocols move you to grace us with your benevolence.

Or, since you take such paragraphs so gravely, I'll simply say that I can understand the need to protect your little bird. But the lack of that detail pretty much closes the book; there's nothing else I can do except chalk up yet another slightly twisted but largely inconsequential episode in the annals of Sciforums.

 

[Giambattista]

The other, you, can't give a useful answer unless it is specifically petitioned of you according to whatever arcane protocols move you to grace us with your benevolence.

Arcane protocols... I'll wear that one with dignity and pride.

Or, since you take such paragraphs so gravely, I'll simply say that I can understand the need to protect your little bird. But the lack of that detail pretty much closes the book; there's nothing else I can do except chalk up yet another slightly twisted but largely inconsequential episode in the annals of Sciforums.

You suspect a conservative leaning rival who has it in for you?

What if I told you it was actually a magical, talking bird?

Since the behind-closed-doors scheming of the mod forum is potentially bad for any informants, I feel it wouldn't be right to blabber.
I was told that there was grumbling, and possible retribution for my Obama Hitler avatar, nothing more nothing less. I then confirmed with James R.
Unless there is something I'm missing, the person doesn't harbor any ill will towards you. No names were mentioned, just the controversy at hand.

But it's nice that we can have this adult conversation.

Thank you for playing.

 

[Gustav]

This is the post that James R flagged http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2720480#post2720480

ah
still works
battista, a homo, calls a public figure a faggot and gets banned for homophobia

does that sound about right?

/snort

 

[Tiassa]

(Insert title here)

Arcane protocols... I'll wear that one with dignity and pride.

Indeed. I actually recognize and sympathize with the sentiment.

You suspect a conservative leaning rival who has it in for you?

Hardly. In point of fact, that scenario never had anything going for it.

What if I told you it was actually a magical, talking bird?

Well, then I'd have to chuckle at the lie, and you might complain about the accusation of dishonesty, and if history has any suggestions, it might be that the situation would deteriorate steadily after that.

Since the behind-closed-doors scheming of the mod forum is potentially bad for any informants, I feel it wouldn't be right to blabber.

Aye.

I was told that there was grumbling, and possible retribution for my Obama Hitler avatar, nothing more nothing less. I then confirmed with James R.

Unless there is something I'm missing, the person doesn't harbor any ill will towards you. No names were mentioned, just the controversy at hand.

I don't know about grumbling and retribution, but it was oddly timed that the question came up, and then the public thread.

Generally speaking, you might or might not have noticed me haranguing some of my colleagues over the inconsistency of our standards. This thread followed, and is connected to, at least three back-room issues involving your name. I'm trying to figure out what it is you've done to become so important in that context, or if you're just someone's tool in something else entirely.

But it's nice that we can have this adult conversation.

Thank you for playing.

I don't know whether to call it sad, or unsettling, or whatever, and it doesn't involve only you and me; but I have noticed a trend by which this community seems to get along better the less pretentiously we waste kilobytes.

I mean, this part of the thread, the questions about little birds and such, is so inconsequential that even if I had every piece of data I've considered and desired, it wouldn't make any practical difference.

If we throw in a pretense of importance, what are the odds that we'd be at each other's throats? And sure, we can leave that as a rhetorical question, if you wish.

 

[420Joey]

Im a random nobody piece of shit speck in the virtural world of sciforums but if I was prince I would say that Tiassa and SAM (Had to edit her in cant believe I forgot) is the fairest of them all !!!!