Total posts: 5,754
Posted in:
-->
@Tyrone
nigga tf it's me. to hell with calling. me and dequarius gonna pay you a visit in person and beat your ass for doubting me
This site wants to force white culture on us, so you may be reprimanded for threatening violence.
Created:
Posted in:
All these racist shut up real quick when a black man entered the conversation. How convenient you guys are scared to say racist stuff now
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yo Tyrone, don't let none of these whitebreads tell you how to be. You aint on their plantation
I thought the racism on DDO was bad, but I feel really sorry for the shit Tyrone has to put up with here
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tyrone
Fist bump right back homie. You should know I have been getting Jiggy with it since I was like 12, and can really identify with your culture.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tyrone
Sorry you have to see the racist comments from people like mopec. The moderation on the site is working on removing those toxic members, if that makes you feel better.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Low IQ and being prone to violence kind of go hand in hand. so that is a false choice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
But nigger is an ugly word, and if you are a black who identifies with that word, you are belittling your self, and you should be ashamed. REAL TALK.
Stop using racial slurs. Next time you use that word in a post I will be forced to ask the mod team to take action.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Whites deserve to get screwed over by subsidizing blacks. They attempted to screw Jews by creating a welfare system to rob them of their hard earned cash, to stupid to realize Canadians would use that same law to subsidize themselves.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
White culture like mass murder?
True that, mass murder is a cultural thing with whites. Most of them do it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nd24007
It should come as a thief in the night. Simmer down.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
My church band plays that shit from hillsong, which is way better than that typical black chorus thing that has sounded exactly the same for the last 100 years at your church, and why did you change your username? I remember your conspiracy afrocentric posts clogging up DDO
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
You did, by saying most blacks are raised wrong, and that is why they use the "N" word. You atleast strongly implied it. The worst kind of Canadian is a self hating Canadian.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Black mothers are doing the best they can in this society and for you to say most of them suck at their job is racist as fuck. Go join the KKK, jerk
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Just to be safe I am referring to them as canadians to avoid being banned
Created:
I argue that we should keep a low percentage of Canadians on the site. According to this article the average IQ of Canadians is 85 and the average IQ of normal people is 100. If we limit Canadian presence to below 2 % we can be inclusive while also mantaining the integrity of the site as a place for intellectuals. https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t533102/
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ArgentTongue
If you are going to be racist please do it somewhere else. We can't force Canadians to subscribe to white culture.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
You let a member of the Motisa tribe around your girlfriend? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vto9nY-xh5s
Hopefully you care enough about her well being to not leave her alone with that Canadian.
Created:
Posted in:
This is actually a good question. Will BSH1's policy discourage black people from joining the site seeing as how canadians disproportionately use the N word. Is BSH1's intention to limit the number of Canadians joining the site, by creating rules that seem to target them.
Created:
Posted in:
I think we should replace the N word with the word Canadian. Instead of saying why do N words rape so often, we can say why do Canadians disproportionately rape people. Why do Canadians on average have such low IQs. Why do Canadians run so fast?
Do you get what I'm saying, my Canadian?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Fair enough. I was unaware he could.Changing the rules is always something the mods can do here. The CoC is literally whatever bsh1 wants it to be. He can change it, unilaterally, at any time, for any reason.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
You are in the minority on Dart in that case
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
the rules themselves are unfair, then they should be changed. I'll note that this is a common conflation. What the rules are is a separate issue from how they should be enforced. Saying that the rules should be enforced is not saying that I agree with whatever the rules happen to be at that time. What it does mean is that, if there is some issue with the rules then we should change what those rules are and have the mods enforce those new rules, rather than depending upon the mods to take it upon themselves to selectively ignore the CoC.
I think that is where the crux of our disagreement is. I don't know why you would enforce unjust rules. If a rule is unfair I think the authority in charge of enforcing that rule is morally obligated to ignore it. Changing rules is not always something that authority figure can do, but they are morally obligated to ignore it. You know, kinda like how people ignored the harboring slave laws, who participated in the underground railroad.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I'm not advocating he mod's based on his mood. I was advocating for him to mod based on a broader sense of justice in respect to what the Coc in shorthand is attempting to encapsulate. That's the only thing I'll comment on. I think we both are aware of where we stand on the issue and that we are just going to go in circles without making much progress in this conversation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
It is a violation of the CoC to say he sucks. So watch yourself
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
Please do not ignore my thread kissing your ass and comparing you to Trump
Created:
Posted in:
There is a certain aspect of leadership that many leaders have to deal with that is damaging to the good of the community. When you are not seen as fit for the job because the people you lead used to be your peers, or you are viewed as outside of what people are used to in that particular leadership position. BSH1 and Donald Trump are a lot alike in that respect.
Modding is a bit of a leadership position. A leadership position not much unlike president of the site that comes with leadership responsibilities and not very much power. Anybody who has been promoted at work and has to lead former peers can probably identify with what BSH1 is going through right now.
A constant questioning of their leadership philosophy, and questions on their competence in their new role. Having every mistake magnified, and having success seen as failure because the negative results of an action get more attention than the positive results. I've seen many people who otherwise would have made great leaders fold under this pressure. They were scared to make mistakes, every decision they would start to consider what their nay sayers could say in response to it.
It's a vicious cycle because when they start to behave that way, then they start performing even worse than they were before. There is a learning process to modding. BSH1 will have to learn from his actual mistakes and learn to ignore criticism without explaining himself for his percieved mistakes. BSH1 will have to learn that his idealism and modding philosophy created from it will fail in the real world and make the neccessary adjustments to his philosophy based on that. I'm sure he has and will continue to evolve his philosophy based on the results of seeing it put to practice.
We can help him flourish instead of folding under to the pressure of being put under a microscope by just trusting his judgement and not trying to impose our untested modding philosophies on him, merely because we smell weakness and think our criticisms will be acted on by him.
The last part of this message is for BSH1:
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.
Teddy Roosevelt
Created:
-->
@drafterman
Your assertions aren't even worth looking into. You ask that BSH1 mod in perfect accordance with the letter of the rules. It's absurd and you haven't even backed up that bare assertion. He should just do it that way based on what? Your fealings I suppose?
It can't be to eliminate bias in modding decisions, because quite frankly the English language like all languages, is limited and meant to act as short hand for ideals that can't quite be encapsulated with words. You can't remove bias from the modding decision making process.
You also can't eliminate mistakes or in this case a percieved mistake. BSH1 is human and like all humans with the exception of one, falls short of perfection. Maybe he made a mistake here in this instance, maybe he is inconsistent because he is constantly evolving and is in essence a slightly new person each day.
I think the worst possible sin here is putting a microscope on what BSH1 does. Do you really want to put his every action under a microscope like it currently is? Do you want him to act like he is under a microscope which is trying to expose his every flaw?
Eliminating the mod's personal bias should not be the number one goal of choosing a modding philosophy (which is unique to each mod), it should be to maximally enhance fairness, whatever modding philosophy on how to do that he is working with.
I'm going to rehash this in a new thread I am starting on this subject which deserves it's own thread. If you have the patience, please save your responses for that thread. If not, I'm impatient myself and understand.
Created:
-->
@drafterman
This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Thought so, you have no argument against it. It just sounds wrong to you.
Created:
-->
@drafterman
Would this one violate the COC https://www.debateart.com/debates/244
Created:
-->
@drafterman
Good luck showing me in the COC where a debate about mortality is a violation. Especially when you said the Logan's run debate which was the same debate titled differently, doesn't.'m assuming nothing about what you meant by the debate title because what you meant by the debate title is irrelevant to the CoC:"[The nature of the comment] is not based upon the intentions of speaker
Flip that, reverse it. The mods should only ever enforce the letter of the law. If the letter of the law is insufficient, it should be modified.
That so wrong as to be laughable. The reason that most countries leave laws up for interpretation by courts and modified by courts is because the spirit of the law is important and takes precedence over the letter of the law. Take the speed limit for example. It is technically illegal to speed, but when you do so to take your child who got bit by a poisonous snake and is turning blue to the hospital, even if giving a ticket for it, a judge would normally interpret that you violated no such law.
Enforcing the letter of the law is the worst way to go, and it would lead to even more injustice in the court system than already takes place. Enforcing to the letter, the COC would have a similarly negative result.
Not to mention, if I am okay with people making personal attacks against me than it causes no harm. It is beside the point but absolutely true and would not be challenged as true by an intelligent person.
Your rules also don't take into account special people. Let's say you can label driving ability 1 to 10, and most people drive like 7s, but when drunk drive like 5s. If I normally drive like a ten while sobor but can provably drive like an 8 when drunk, it is ignorant to lock me up for reckless endangerment when my driving skills are still above normal. So looking at the letter of the rule unjustly punishes people who the rule should not apply to.
Created:
-->
@drafterman
Hypothetical interpretations are irrelevant
LOL, that is the interpretation. Even the first comment on the debate before she got a chance to accept I explained that I was going to run some sort of schoppenhour argument that explained non existence was preferable to exist or take the environmentalist angle. The title was "The User known as Yeshuabought should die" . You are correct that hypothetical interpretations don't matter. You ignorantly assumed that the debate was meant as advocating suicide, when I made it clear I was advocating for mortality. I can't control your interpretation of the title. I do make titles for debates that sound more interesting than the debate itself. It is something I do almost every single debate I create. You are essentially saying that because somebody could interpret the title of the debate as violating the COC (something they could only do by ignoring the comment section and not reading the first round of the debate), that it should be removed.
No title would have sufficed in that situation. If I titled it something like "Society should implement a Logan's Run law and kill everybody at 30" , it would be the same debate and yet could be interpreted in a way that makes it a violation of the COC. It is not the mod's job to use twisted logic to see if something can be interpreted as violating the COC, it is their job to make sure the spirit of the rules are obeyed even if that means some actions would technically not violate the rules, but should be punished, or if somebody technically violated the letter of them but should go unpunished. Honestly, I can't control what you ignorant interpretation of the title is despite me framing the debate to be impersonal in the comment section and just a few hours after it was removed it would have been framed in round 1. Maybe we should debate whether BSH1's original decision not to remove the debate was correct, though you would clearly lose. Your whole argument is that if something can be interpreted as hateful that it should be interpreted as hateful. You sound like one of those SJW who interpreted the Geico Caveman commercials as racist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
The first round I would have framed the debate to make it more inpersonal.
Created:
-->
@drafterman
They don't and the debate should have been deleted anyway regardless of either user's consent.But the mod team here has opted to voluntarily neuter itself as their style of moderation.
So you are saying people shouldn't have the right to argue anti-natalism, or are you saying that the title of such a debate shouldn't be a piece of good marketing that will ensure it is not one of those debates that go unvoted and ignored around here?
If the debate was titled something like "Yeshua should kill herself" that would clearly advocate for suicide, but the other title could have been interpreted as saying I am pro mortality. It could also be interpreted as a debate about whether physical immortality is desirable for humans. Until you see the arguments, you really can't know if that type of debate is a violation of the code of conduct.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
That is a great street and time period. Before forensics. I could just murder people for money and easily get my life together. Back then shelters treated homeless people as slaves so I would definitely avoid them, that particular year.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
I think it is like quantum physics and not even understandable to people who study it. binary is the lowest way to break down computer code in this system. In a quarternary system it would not be. I don't think quarternary is even resembles binary. Here is an article advocating for trinary, read it if you feel compelled and give me your opinion. The author claims that trinary would contain more info in less bits and make quantum computers more powerful than current computers. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17575-ditching-binary-will-make-quantum-computers-more-powerful/
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
You can do this with 9 players. Letting this take much longer to fill up will cause a ton of inactivity
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
I'll have to take your word for that, though the quantum computing engineer I talked with about quarternary seemed to think it was it's own beast. I don't know enough about this subject to comment further.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
DNA doesn't seem binary though. I'm sure there are other exceptions, but DNA seems a bit more advanced than binary code. It does resemble computer code, though.
Created:
Posted in:
Inequality in teacher rape convictions? You mean the 16 year old boys who fuck their hot history teacher vs the men who prey on little girls by giving them drugs or alcohol and typically target pre teens. Wow the courts are so biased against men in this situation.
Created:
Posted in:
If anyone wants to debate whether I deserve to live or not, feel free to send me the challenge. I wouldn't have made it personal with prolifeliberal, but I understand if your arguments in the debate get personal. It's no big deal
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
This was explained. She asked me to send her that specific debate challange and then accepted the debate, I assume because at some point she had an intention to debate it.
Created:
I would ask you to debate that, but you would probably accept it accuse me of racism against dogs and have the debate removed.
Created:
It's more likely to be quarternary, like hopefully quantum computers will adopt. The DNA code is some evidence towards the quarternary theory.
Created:
-->
@bsh1
If blessing is off the table, maybe "permission" was the only way to go.
Created:
-->
@bsh1
I think you berate yourself a bit by calling it permission. "Thank you for giving me your blessing to delete the debate" Would be more appropriate and better signify your authority a bit. I know it's a bit pedantic but I think both phrases come across entirely different.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Buddamoose
The one in front of the police van, is clearly a statist. He seems to be in cahoots with the state.
Created:
-->
@disgusted
Yes it's a conspiracy promulgated by the dragon people who live on the dark side of the flat moon, be afraid be very afraid.
Yeah, dude you're right. There is no such thing as politically motivated people who wish to influence elections.
Created:
-->
@disgusted
I wonder why this is happening so close to election day, when it will help drive more Democrats to the polls? Cui Bono
Created: