Roll Call of Fallen Commrades

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

IMO - it's really quite simple.

Example -

Danno used "research" to explain / argue his pov regarding the pro / con of specific population - racial or sexual orientation or marital status - demographic.

BUT

Danno NEVER referred to any of the above with a slur.

(that's how I recall his posting history)

They are the same. Justifying the relative lack of worth of an entire swath of people, repeatedly, is no different from using a racial slur.

[Crashed~N2~Me 970]

If that's what you got from what I posted, I don't know what else to say.

So that was ok then? He posted hundreds of such threads to paint blacks and in a negative light, but that was ok, no racial slurs? Just opinion?

IMO - as it relates to the nature of this forum = discussion / debate = yes.

That's what I like about this Forum = diverse perspectives discussed (IMO) by many intelligent people with good communication / writing skills.

a VJ for example - He constantly rails on the GOP & Conservatives...sometimes the Libertarians become a target. The only time I take offense to it = when he uses slurs and insult.

another VJ - is on point to criticize people of faith & organized religion. No offense until he starts name calling and insulting (which off the top of my head - I can't remember him using slurs. He just mocks.)

Etc...

I don't recall Danno ever making a racist comment about Blacks. (but) He is very committed to his opinion regarding the community shortcomings being the responsibility of the community itself. He might be a Bigot...I'm not convinced he's a racist. Coz he often recognized individual success....

I personally tire of the "race debate"...but before I grew bored with it - I learned some new perspective from the Danno versus - debates. Some threads were very informative.

[Crashed~N2~Me 970]

_______________________________________________________________

Racial Slur = a derogatory or disrespectful nickname for a racial group, used without restraint.

ETA: Sometimes there is a fine line separating criticism and disparaging comment. Maybe I need to consider the difference a bit more.

Edited May 25, 2014 by Crashed~N2~Me

[Novembro 1,763]

Everyone just needs to adopt the equal opportunity hatred that I have.

[Peikko 1,575]

When I edited the post, I took out the slang terms and left the rest. I sincerely thought that was what moderation wanted removed. I had no intention to cause even more controversy, and for that I apologize.

We need to have some very detailed rules and a list of unusable words as a guide to go by. There were dozens upon dozens of threads painting blacks, gays, etc in a negative light, yet that was considered someone's opinion. If we're expected to do a 180 on what is allowed, we really do need some very explicit instructions. If we don't know what the rules are, we can't follow them. And using common sense and trying to be "politically correct" isn't going to work, IMO. Someone is going to be offended no matter what. Whether here or in real life, we see and hear things we don't like. Comedians make jokes on TV, people are offended. Oprah had content that offended some people. The news has stories that offend people. If I don't like what I'm seeing, I change the channel or turn off the TV. I don't laugh at racist jokes. I don't hang around with racist people.

If there is a VJ thread about basket weaving, I don't read it. We had people in this thread making post after post judging someone they didn't know, calling him a fat, lazy slob. Questioning his financial status. All because they don't approve of his lifestyle or choices in life. They posted to cause controversy and trouble. Lot's of judging goes on in these forums. I find some of it quite offensive, but it's my choice to continue to participate.

I see, so you want it only your way, right? A guy is allowed to come on this website and post in a highly derogatory manner about his ex, no one knows the validity of his statements it just has to be the truth because, well he's the guy and he said it is, and no one is allowed to question the validity of anything he says because it 'might' cause offense? I think this has to be the whiniest thing said yet.

They are the same. Justifying the relative lack of worth of an entire swath of people, repeatedly, is no different from using a racial slur.

That is the basic problem here. Some of the mods are incapable of seeing this, hence the curious policy that is used to determine what is and isn't offensive when it comes to bigotry.

[Karee 4,190]

Not surprising this thread has deteriorated into an argument about what is PC and what isn't. Just like a lot of others here. Don't agree with someone's position or opinion, cherry pick a few words of the post, and argue about whether they're racist bigoted, or whatever while ignoring the other 95% of the post. Kinda reflects the political divide in this country.

Everyone's a victim and everyone's offended. This country is turning into a bunch of whiners, and this thread has become a pretty good representation of that sad fact.

[Peikko 1,575]

Not surprising this thread has deteriorated into an argument about what is PC and what isn't. Just like a lot of others here. Don't agree with someone's position or opinion, cherry pick a few words of the post, and argue about whether they're racist bigoted, or whatever while ignoring the other 95% of the post. Kinda reflects the political divide in this country.

Everyone's a victim and everyone's offended. This country is turning into a bunch of whiners, and this thread has become a pretty good representation of that sad fact.

On this you are wrong. Castigating people for belonging to a certain group is wrong no matter what way you slice it. The offense isn't calling someone a name, that's nothing really, the offense is grouping people by sexual orientation, or religion, or skin colour or nationality and seeing that group as 'lesser' than the dominant group.

I am not sure how you come to the conclusion that everyone is a victim and everyone is offended. I am neither but I do appreciate it when bigotry is called out, not because I am offended but because we shouldn't be complacent when it rears its ugly head. That is what leads to holocaust type situations, not the lack of guns.

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

I really do believe it should be easy to avoid debasing an entire group of people, and also to not personally attack people on this board. No need to rewrite the TOS or make a long list of crazy rules.

But, I do tire of what has been called the "PC debate." It should be called the polite debate.

Back to the jokes!

[Karee 4,190]

On this you are wrong. Castigating people for belonging to a certain group is wrong no matter what way you slice it. The offense isn't calling someone a name, that's nothing really, the offense is grouping people by sexual orientation, or religion, or skin colour or nationality and seeing that group as 'lesser' than the dominant group.

Well if that's the case, the following groups should be labelled as racist and bigoted.

GLAAD

NAACP

LULA

Congressional Black Caucus

And any other group that defines it self and it's membership based on the criteria you laid out above.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

It was never about "family-friendly". It was about an entire demographic being degraded, based upon their nationality.

This. And even though I've mellowed into the kinder, gentler maven these days, when I think back about the nasty, vitriolic comments that were made about certain nationalities, it still makes my hackles raise a little.

[Crashed~N2~Me 970]

Well if that's the case, the following groups should be labelled as racist and bigoted.

GLAAD

NAACP

LULA

Congressional Black Caucus

And any other group that defines it self and it's membership based on the criteria you laid out above.

You're only a bigot when you criticize the "oppressed".

& slurring those which criticize the oppressed by labeling them bigots doesn't make me a bigot...no...not at all.

Edited May 25, 2014 by Crashed~N2~Me

[Peikko 1,575]

Well if that's the case, the following groups should be labelled as racist and bigoted.

GLAAD

NAACP

LULA

Congressional Black Caucus

And any other group that defines it self and it's membership based on the criteria you laid out above.

Wrong, 1 they are not the dominant group, 2 they don't see others as lesser. Simply belonging to a group isn't a problem, looking at a group and seeing them as inferior on mass is.

Edited May 25, 2014 by The Truth™

[Crashed~N2~Me 970]

I, for 1 , got tired of the various race threads populating this forum. (But) This isn't my forum. It's Ewok's. & It's not mine to dictate what interests other VJs desire to discuss. Posting is open for all active members.

Different strokes for different folks.

Don't like what one particular poster ...posts...don't follow that poster's posts.

Heck - I don't even read Danno's threads anymore...coz I've seen enough of them to repeat it verbatim. (that's an exaggeration but I'm sure you get the point)

Edited May 25, 2014 by Crashed~N2~Me

[Peikko 1,575]

The underlying evil is when you do not even realise that is what you are doing, as seems to be the case often around here.

[Karee 4,190]

Wrong, 1 they are not the dominant group, 2 they don't see others as lesser. Simply belonging to a group isn't a problem, looking at a group and seeing them as inferior on mass is.

So who is the dominant group, and what defines "dominant?"