Good, then there isn’t any problem, and you were worried about nothing.
Regards,
Shodan
Funny that the supposed “anti-censorship” advocate is so strongly against these threads being moved to the least-censored part of the board.
We have already established that they don’t need to be moved. As it now stands, we have GD for debate, and the Pit for mindless abuse. Limiting such threads to only mindless abuse would, indeed, be a form of censorship.
Regards,
Shodan
The Pit is not limited to mindless abuse – much debate occurs there as well. It’s just a bit more… spirited, I suppose.
There’s never been any worthwhile debate in the Pit.
Our definitions of “worthwhile” might differ, but several come to my mind.
But mostly mindless abuse. GD is the forum for debate. I don’t see any reason to exclude a topic from debate.
YMMV, especially if you don’t like “free speech” as it is understood in the US.
Regards,
Shodan
I’m a big fan of US-style free speech, though I don’t think it has anything to do with private message boards. My understanding of free speech is about state action, not any actions of privately owned forums.
Name three.
Great, so if you’re so in favor of free speech, you must be in favor of allowing racists to be called racists in GD.
That’s what the Pit is for. GD is for debate.
Regards,
Shodan
:dubious:
[QUOTE=Me]
One that starts with a foundational text that fraudulently claims “Africa is a continent of retards” is not that place
[/QUOTE]
It’s not “personal bias” to note you don’t have the experience of growing up in the colonized world.
I believe no such thing. Did you not read what I wrote about African-Americans? And conversely, there are lots of green-eyed, blonde Agfhanis who I would say partake in the experience I speak of. Some Middle-Eastern Jews, even.
You had it tough - but this is not a “who had it tougher” competition, though, so that’s all irrelevant. The experienced of the colonized isn’t solely or even necessarily the experience of tough times.
No - it’s because of shared experience. Based on our subaltern position. Not surface details. Which is why I said you *don’t *understand, and can’t. You’ve had tough times, but you’re still privileged.
No. I want the views of a particular set of minorities to be considered as valid for determining what constitutes hate speech as, say, any other minority.
You are saying that because we third-worlders are such a minority, our opinions on the hateful speech directed at us has no validity. I mean, you can say that - like I said, all the power is on your side, we apparently have no agency but that you allow us . And you hobble even that limited agency we might aspire to, the ability to speak to our haters as they do to us (even if you can’t hear the insult in their “polite” speech, it remains there).
To go along with the topic of this thread – various conversations about what actually constitutes racism or being racist; also conversations about whether some particular violent law enforcement action was legitimate… plus debates about how stupid in particular some Republican’s action or statement was (i.e. was it incredibly stupid or just run-of-the-mill stupid :D).
No, he’s not saying that nor have you shown there is such obvious hate speech.
I didn’t say anything of the sort -I’ve specifically pointed out non-Black posters I regard as sharing the experience.
I don’t want the kind of quota the conservatives propose, for non-Americans. What I want is for the existing mods to check their privilege in this regard.
:dubious:
[QUOTE=Colibri]
You want to moderate the board on the basis of the opinions of a tiny minority of our membership. I don’t see why we should do that.
[/QUOTE]
“Africans are genetically inferior” is hate speech, whatever politeness you wrap it in.
You want to moderate the board on the basis of the opinions of a tiny minority of our membership. I don’t see why we should do that. does not = You are saying that because we third-worlders are such a minority, our opinions on the hateful speech directed at us has no validity.
Are there no Africans living in America? Surely, you can’t think that only those living in the Continent can determine what is hate speech?
Nor have I seen that exact phrase. The phraseology seems discussing all Black people, not those residing on the African continent, and is not aimed at White people who live there at all.
The last has had some interesting examples, but those could have been posted in Elections or GD or IMHO. No valuable debate.
The “violent law enforcement action” thread has become the biggest waste of electrons on this board. Again, No valuable debate.
Does
Where have I said only Africans get to have an opinion? What I’ve said is that Africans and other “third worlders” are the ones whose opinions aren’t considered.
Pedantic nitpickery.
If you’re unfamiliar with the contents of the work of Rushton and Lynn, maybe you shouldn’t actually get involved in a conversation about the use to which they’re put?
There have been decent debates in that thread, in my opinion. Lots of nonsense too.