-->
@whiteflame
Can I make a semi dumb suggestion.
The permanent ban on chap470: Justified or unjustified?
Posts
Total:
202
-->
@Mharman
I don’t think this site will be flooded with Neo-Nazis either. Most of the users that joined recently are not Neo Nazis, and it’s reasonable to think Neo Nazis will have their ideas opposed and debunked in front of their eyes on this website.
Even if it were you just get good at arguing against them unless it got to the point where you lost control of site culture, but that's easy enough to see coming and preempt
I am grateful this didnt happen while I was modded. The drama from this is at least hitting the mods who let the place rot for so long and finally had to stop it. I am also happy David is back. I can tell the his influence is good.
I am maybe seeing God's plan here now. 🤍🙏
-->
@Mharman
With that being said, from a logical standpoint, you have left yourself open to calling anything you don’t like a Neo-Nazi belief.
Yes, there's always someone who will say anything, this isn't new.
What about...
I literally addressed these concerns in the ban: "This is not a ban on discussing WWII, nor events in and surrounding it. Holocaust denial is a well recognized form of extreme hate speech, used to justify calls for repeated genocide. ... Whereas something like denying Australia exists, is just a bit of harmless silliness; and is most certainly not connected to loser terrorists."
You may have gotten lost on this, but my point here is… where do you draw the line? Because with your logic, and power tipping mod can argue any of these are hate speech.
As frustrating as some of your words have been today (such as accusations that the public moderation log is somehow a diabolical scheme keep things secret...), I actually do get your point at the end. A power tripping moderator could twist things, and even edit peoples posts if they wanted to sell it. One of the safeguards we have in place is we bounce reports and inner frustrations off of each other; as often as not a proposed ban ban become just a warning... As a hypothetical, lets say there was a pro-lifer in the moderation team (I knew for a fact an inactive one is, but that's besides the point), and he saw someone proposing a genocide against the unborn (AKA, someone takes the pro-choice side in an abortion debate), before a ban could move forward it would get talked down. Now someone proposing sterilizing all members of an ethnic group, that would take more review (or perhaps less if they they're only here to promote that).
-->
@Mharman
Enough with the grift, and yes, it is a grift, because not even you believe spambots and holocaust denialists are the same.
So you're now okay with banning accounts and deleting their posts if they're just here to deposit their garbage and not have meaningful discussions?
-->
@Barney
Please tell me why a holocaust denialist should be treated the same as a spambot when it comes to deletion of posts. You keep dodging this point.
Again, this is a false equivocation fallacy.
I can’t wait to hear such arguments like “their beliefs are garbage, like a spambots spam are garbage.”
-->
@Mharman
Challenge period debates of banned accounts have almost always been deleted. This prevents them being farmed for free wins.
Why are you pretending this is new?
-->
@AdaptableRatman
For a guy who talks so highly of European regimes and political thinkers elsewhere on the site, insulting West Europe so severely is not becoming of you.America is far more degenerated away from family values and most things you claim to stand for, than Europe is.
Europe was once great, and her greatness lingered on for a while. I love authors who wrote in her twilight years and diagnosed her many maladies. But her heart has rotted away. Bereft of faith, purpose, or any higher calling, she sinks deeper and deeper into the pit of rank despotism and utopian lunacy. I view the leadership of most European countries nowadays as abjectly evil.
I don't care about good intentions. To quote Eliot quoting Jeremiah:' O Lord, deliver me from the man of excellent intention and impure heart: for the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked.' My country has its own problems, but Europe is even further along the path to ruin.
-->
@Barney
So these weren't forum posts they were debates on Holocaust denial?
I will be making a presidential address at 10 pm
-->
@Barney
Oh for crying out loud. Why didn’t you make this point sooner instead of yapping about how people with opinions you don’t like are akin to spambots?
I had no way of knowing what was deleted; all I saw was an account with 0 debates, 0 votes, 0 comments, and 0 forum posts.
How about this: The mods have an alternate account that they all have access to. It doesn’t have any mod perms, but it is used for accepting the debates of banned users so if something like this happens again, what EXACTLY got said user banned is public record.
Would you oppose such a solution?
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
No, America is further. American Ghettos are 4-5x as deadly, ruthless etc as west europe or scandinavian ones.
The path is not to ruin btw. Europe will make a return soon. It already is. This time without the sociopathic activities that violated the sanctity of other nations.
-->
@Barney
Holocaust denial is all about the need murder any surviving Jews. Trying to separate it, would be like trying to separate out the orange from the citrus fruit.
Either the user endorsed genocide or they didn’t. The fact that you didn’t answer Savant’s question directly is because you’re strawmanning the user’s position, but don’t want to admit it.
Playing this moral high ground by virtue-signaling this SJW angle makes no sense when you’re completely comfortable with Wylted’s anti-semitism.
So either you don’t really care at all, or you only care when it’s convenient for you.
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Do you notice WF as chief mod is letting Barney take all the heat?
Do you notice WF as chief mod is letting Barney take all the heat?
Barney needs to be able to take responsibility for his own words and actions, and answered very differently than whiteflame.
Whiteflame acknowledged the complaint and was willing to negotiate. Barney doubled down on the mod original decision, was being inconsistent, and being vague.
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Most holocaust denial is probably bad faith dog whistling intended to undermine Jewish victimhood status. Little if any good faith holocaust denial, though I figure it probably does exist like it does with the people who think the moon landing was faked, the 9/11 conspiracy theories or the flat earthers.
-->
@ultramaximus2
How is it the same as flat earth?
-->
@AdaptableRatman
It is denying in the face of overwhelming evidence.
-->
@ultramaximus2
It is denying in the face of overwhelming evidence.
AdaptableRatman is a Flat Earther.
-->
@ultramaximus2
And how does flat earth theory lead to anywhere the same outcomes as Holocaust denial?
They are not comparable to be banned. At most NASA and space stuff has to worry.
So the Jews in NASA lie but not the ones who claim their was human lamp shades?
-->
@Barney
Will you accept the con position in this debate as a good faith gesture that you believe in free speech
https://www.debateart.com/debates/6374-the-holocaust-definitely-happened-
I cannot be on a website with holocaust denial allowed on it.
So if that continues even for my mental health I need to quit instantly.
It is a legal threat to my wellbeing.
-->
@WyIted
Thank man, I really needed a good laugh (but no, I don't do formal debates anymore, the energy for that goes into the wiki).
I wish you had started this thread. You're able to make good implicit points like that (also credit to Ultra for reminding us that we don't ban utter stupidity such as flat earthers), and engage in a policy discussion, rather than hurling some very strange accusations.
-->
@Barney
I hope the wiki gets more attention . It is useful
-->
@Barney
Holocaust denial is all about the need murder any surviving Jews.
I buy that Holocaust denial is anti-semitic, but I'm not sure how saying "genocide never happened" implies a desire to keep doing genocide. If you take the words at face value, then if anything it implies an aversion to genocide. Because if one wanted to express that genocide was a good thing, why would they feel a need to deny it, rather than bragging about it? Of course, we can't necessarily take the words of Holocaust deniers at face value, but then the user is banned for what we assume they are thinking. I think banning users for something we assume they are thinking, rather than what they said, sets a pretty dangerous precedent and can't really be hate speech since it's not speech. In addition, we can't be certain that the user in question isn't just wrong or misinformed, in which case denying history doesn't necessarily have malice behind it.
If you want, I would debate you on the resolution "Holocaust denial is calling for violence."
-->
@Savant
It's effectively a strawman and a lame excuse to ban someone you disagree with. And if it's the position that Barney's taking, then he has no excuse for not taking a similar mindset to people here who believe and endorsed worse things.
-->
@Savant
I buy that Holocaust denial is anti-semitic, but I'm not sure how saying "genocide never happened" implies a desire to keep doing genocide.
It's Neo-Nazi logic. To quote one of the former heads of the Canadian anti-abortion movement: "Anyone who fakes something like that deserves to have it happen to them." There are of course plenty of variants to this reasoning, but the conclusion of of using it to justify further atrocities is universal.
If you take the words at face value, then if anything it implies an aversion to genocide
Wylted send you a PM did he? (he just posted a video showing how these monsters recruit)
Because if one wanted to express that genocide was a good thing, why would they feel a need to deny it, rather than bragging about it?
They believe it's a good thing, but acknowledge that they need to ease people into it... It's like Scientology, they don't start off saying they worship dead alien ghosts, it's only once one is brainwashed to a high enough level that they get to know the truth.
I think banning users for something we assume they are thinking, rather than what they said, sets a pretty dangerous precedent
That would be a dangerous precedent, but that's not what happened. We didn't see some random nice user, and ban them for magical insight into their hidden depths... This ban is specifically for the Neo-Nazi propaganda he posted.
and can't really be hate speech since it's not speech.
That bit of semantics is grasping at straws. Writing is a form of speech. Spoken speech is also speech, but that doesn't make it the only possible form of it.
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Thank you for demonstrating your skills at writing strawman and ad hominem arguments.
-->
@Barney
Please describe the total range of what you believe counts as "Nazi propaganda."