Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Banning Sean1916

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Originally posted by RicardoSmith
    What about illegal activities. Can they be discussed under the banner of free speech?

    Being a racist isn't a crime though. And illegal activities can be discussed under the banner of free speech, since when where they not?


  • Options
    #33
    ecksor
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 10,501 Mod ✭✭✭✭ecksor


    What about illegal activities. Can they be discussed under the banner of free speech?

    No.

    You don't have free speech on these boards, nor do you have unlimited free speech of the sort you're implying in Ireland. I don't see anyone else mentioning free speech here, so I'm not sure where you got that from.


  • Options
    #34
    ecksor
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 10,501 Mod ✭✭✭✭ecksor


    Oh, apparently we did drift into "freedom of speech" along the way. Anyway, bottom line is that the constitution in this country imposes restrictions on what you can say freely and that applies here. We also frequently restrict the freedom to hassle and disrupt reasonable discussion according to our varying definition of the term.


  • Options
    #35
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Originally posted by RicardoSmith
    You didn't answer the question. Are illegal activities allowed to be discussed?

    Yes, you're being as ecksor decribed a " barely coherent morons who can't hold an argument". Besides what connection is there between that and racism.


  • Options
    #36
    ecksor
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 10,501 Mod ✭✭✭✭ecksor


    Actually, I did. Perhaps "No" was too vague for you. I've been working on correcting my overly blunt responses lately and this is the unfortunate side effect.

    In reality "No" is too specific, but if you want a more indepth answer then assume "No" and ask on a case by case basis, or else phrase your question in a more specific way. Most people seem to get by with a bit of common sense thankfully.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    RicardoSmith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    Originally posted by ecksor
    Actually, I did. Perhaps "No" was too vague for you. I've been working on correcting my overly blunt responses lately and this is the unfortunate side effect.

    In reality "No" is too specific, but if you want a more indepth answer then assume "No" and ask on a case by case basis, or else phrase your question in a more specific way. Most people seem to get by with a bit of common sense thankfully.

    I missed the "no" obviously just like you missed the free speech bit. Too err is human no? Nothing like a good monologue to brighten your day, and that was nothing like one....:D

    So back on topic...

    Basically the boards.ie allow pro racist posts, links etc. Not because of free speech, as there isn't any, as you've pointed out. But because the boards have decided to do so.
    Originally posted by Boston
    Yes, you're being as ecksor decribed a " barely coherent morons who can't hold an argument". Besides what connection is there between that and racism.

    I'm plural now are we.....

    But the the insult has cheered me up no end. Thanks. :)


  • Options
    #38
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Originally posted by RicardoSmith
    Basically the boards.ie allow pro racist posts, links etc. Not because of free speech, as there isn't any, as you've pointed out. But because the boards have decided to do so.

    Is there any reason why boards wouldn't. Racism is allowed to be discussed in the same way illegal activities (have to disagree with ecksor there) are, once they don't promote or glorify it. Illegal activities is very very vauge anyway, you could be talking about x y and z crimes where commithed as a topic of discussion. where as talking about how to make a bomb wouldn't be allowed.


  • Options
    #39
    RicardoSmith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    Originally posted by Boston
    Is there any reason why boards wouldn't. Racism is allowed to be discussed in the same way illegal activities (have to disagree with ecksor there) are, once they don't promote or glorify it. Illegal activities is very very vauge anyway, you could be talking about x y and z crimes where commithed as a topic of discussion. where as talking about how to make a bomb wouldn't be allowed.

    A discussion and posting offensive comments and links are not the same thing, IMO.


  • Options
    #40
    ecksor
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 10,501 Mod ✭✭✭✭ecksor


    Originally posted by RicardoSmith
    Basically the boards.ie allow pro racist posts, links etc. Not because of free speech, as there isn't any, as you've pointed out. But because the boards have decided to do so.

    What's your point exactly?


  • Options
    #41
    RicardoSmith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    Originally posted by ecksor
    What's your point exactly?

    Q). Should Sean1916 be banned?

    A). Not if posting offensive comments and links is not against the rules.

    Or is he being banned for being off topic? Or not polite enough? :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Originally posted by RicardoSmith
    Discussing a discussion and posting offensive comments and links are not the same thing, IMO.

    That made zero sense. "Discussing a discussion "

    Anyway, it strikes me of the old comment, " I don't mind homosexuals, once they stay at home and I'm not confronted by them" you don't mind racists once they stay in the wood work and stfu. Has it ever crossed your mind that sometimes people have very good reasons for thinking the way they do, you may not agree with it, and that's your right, but they are entailed to their opinion, and they are entailed to expresses it here if they wish (that is what boards is for after all) once they do it in a non-adversarial manner. sometimes just having an opinion is offensive to others.


  • Options
    #43
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Originally posted by RicardoSmith
    Q). Should Sean1916 be banned?

    A). Not if posting offensive comments and links is not against the rules.

    Or is he being banned for being off topic? Or not polite enough? :D

    But he was banned for posting offensive comments, wasn't he?


  • Options
    #44
    RicardoSmith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    Ah....being racist is having an opinion.

    I thought it gets you arrested and charged for incitement to something or other.


  • Options
    #45
    RicardoSmith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    Originally posted by Boston
    But he was banned for posting offensive comments, wasn't he?

    But is that against the rules if offensive is subject opinion like your claiming.


  • Options
    #46
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Originally posted by RicardoSmith
    Ah....being racist is having an opinion.

    I thought it gets you arrested and charged for incitement to something or other.

    thats being subjective. You're implying that having an opinion makes you a racist, having a racist opinion makes you a racist.

    If you get arrested, you're arrested for inciting others to carry out a crime, not for being a racists. I'd rather if you just came out and said something instead of all this crap. you keep hintign at this and that, whats your opinion.
    But is that against the rules if offensive is subject opinion like your claiming.

    If I say on politics that I support the work of sucicde bombers, thats going to be an offencive comment to alot of people, but its a fair opinion and I should be able to express it without being banned.


  • Options
    #47
    ecksor
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 10,501 Mod ✭✭✭✭ecksor


    RicardoSmith,

    I can see that you're continuing on with an argument from http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?postid=1703804#post1703804

    I didn't ban him so I'll let DeVore answer that particular question.

    You seem to have taken my "No" answer without the qualification, which is fine and what was intended as the default if you weren't going to take the qualification. Doesn't bode well for you actually arguing your point successfully though.


  • Options
    #48
    RicardoSmith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    Not really. I was interested in the semantics of it all. But a line has been draw in the sand so I guess thats the end of it. It was doomed from when Godwin's Law was invoked.


  • Options
    #49
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Originally posted by RicardoSmith
    Not really. I was interested in the semantics of it all. But a line has been draw in the sand so I guess thats the end of it. It was doomed from when Godwin's Law was invoked.
    Off-topic, but Godwin's Law merely states that someone's bound to bring up Hitler and/or Nazis sometime if a discussion goes on long enough. Anything about discussions being over, debates being lost and so on are just addons.



    Yeah, I know the "law" actually says something along the lines of "as a usenet thread gets longer the probability of a Nazi comparison approaches one" but that's close enough


  • Options
    #50
    flogen
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,247 Mod ✭✭✭✭flogen


    really, sceptre? I thought it was that once someone is called a nazi or hitler, a thread is null and void, and is better off locked... may have just been an add on, though

    Flogen


  • Options
    #51
    TwoShedsJackson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    I think the first person to invoke the Nazis or Hitler, or draw a comparison thereto, loses the debate instantly :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Originally posted by flogen
    really, sceptre? I thought it was that once someone is called a nazi or hitler, a thread is null and void, and is better off locked... may have just been an add on, though
    Wouldn't really be much point in that as an automatic thing. All someone would have to do in a discussion that wasn't going their way would be to bring up Hitler and bang, thread ended. And that's just what they'd want. And muppets should never get what they want. Sometimes it's a valid course of action, sometimes it's not.

    All the law says is
    As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

    Godwin's Law FAQ
    Might be a tradition in some quarters but it's not part of the original. Wikipedia page.

    I still reckon that on a boards.ie politics discussion, as a thread grows longer the probability of Sinn Fein being brought up (regardless of the thread topic) approaches one.

    Originally posted by TwoShedsJackson
    I think the first person to invoke the Nazis or Hitler, or draw a comparison thereto, loses the debate instantly :)
    The Oxford Union have that as a pretty informal rule in their debates:) At least it goes at the end of every rule sheet they hand out to adjudicators.


  • Options
    #53
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,411 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Originally posted by Boston
    Being a racist isn't a crime though.
    But, just to be clear, incitement to hatred is a crime and being an action is not covered by free speech.


  • Options
    #54
    flogen
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,247 Mod ✭✭✭✭flogen


    Originally posted by sceptre
    Wouldn't really be much point in that as an automatic thing. All someone would have to do in a discussion that wasn't going their way would be to bring up Hitler and bang, thread ended. And that's just what they'd want. And muppets should never get what they want. Sometimes it's a valid course of action, sometimes it's not.

    Well I did mean to say that the person who brings up Hitler/Nazism instantly loses... but anyway... cheers for explaining the law... must have picked it up wrong somewhere...:D

    that FAQ is quite interesting..

    flogen


  • Options
    #55
    CuLT
    Subscribers Posts: 9,716 ✭✭✭CuLT


    Damn, I lose. :) .

    Messageboards are starting to look more like poker the more I used them.


  • Options
    #56
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Originally posted by Victor
    But, just to be clear, incitement to hatred is a crime and being an action is not covered by free speech.

    The two don't actually have to go hand in hand. theres evidence that hitler didn't give a damn about the Jews or others he incited hatred about.


  • Options
    #57
    RicardoSmith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    Originally posted by Boston
    The two don't actually have to go hand in hand. theres evidence that hitler didn't give a damn about the Jews or others he incited hatred about.

    I think the point is relative to comments made in these forums, not those made 60 years ago.


  • Options
    #58
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Well I think anything can incite anything if you take it to an abstract enough level. Beside I was using it as an example that racism, and racist actions arn't mutually inclusive.


  • Options
    #59
    RicardoSmith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    Originally posted by Boston
    Well I think anything can incite anything if you take it to an abstract enough level. Beside I was using it as an example that racism, and racist actions arn't mutually inclusive.

    Well you're not racist unless you do something, or say something that makes you racist. So I don't see the distinction.

    What level of Racisim, wouldn't be incitement? and would therefore be acceptable?


  • Options
    #60
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Originally posted by RicardoSmith
    Well you're not racist unless you do something, or say something that makes you racist. So I don't see the distinction.

    I disagree, You don't know someone is racist unless they express that racism in one form or another. The fact that you don't know, doesn't make it not true. Besides people can still express it without incitement, as evident


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    RicardoSmith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    Originally posted by Boston
    .... Besides people can still express it without incitement, as evident

    How?


Advertisement