# Should the thread on hot to bypass the China firewall have been closed??? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 10, 2006, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911 "2006-02-10T20:35:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/41 "2006-02-11T04:53:07Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > Blowing sunshine up my ass isn’t going to make me forget you were deliberately abusive for no good reason. Who was it in post #16 then? The post that stated in reference to **samclem** , “You’re full of shit.” Who was that? ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/42 "2006-02-11T05:00:53Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Who was it in post #16 then? The post that stated in reference to **samclem** , “You’re full of shit.” Who was that? That’s hardly what I’d call abusive; certainly not in the same league as “fuck you”. Nor was it “for no good reason”–I gave my reason above, which you would have seen if you hadn’t been in such a rush to kiss ass. OTOH, **samclem** ’s only reason for _his_ post was retaliation; he as much as admitted as such. ---
**Author:** ![VegemiteMoose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/df788c/32.png) [@VegemiteMoose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VegemiteMoose)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/43 "2006-02-11T05:05:05Z")
Allow me to be the first to say "What the fuck are you talking about?’. > [@samclem](#): > > Well, my opinion is that the Reader can damn well decide what they want to do for themselves. They don’t have to decide shit as regards US law. They can intimate to me that they don’t want threads about homosexuals, and if I get the feeling that’s what they want, I’ll close 'em down as quick as I find them. WHAT ?? ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/44 "2006-02-11T05:06:47Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > That’s hardly what I’d call abusive; certainly not in the same league as “fuck you”. Nor was it “for no good reason”–I gave my reason above, which you would have seen if you hadn’t been in such a rush to kiss ass. OTOH, **samclem** ’s only reason for _his_ post was retaliation; he as much as admitted as such. “You’re full of shit” is not abusive? Recalibrate your meter, son. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/45 "2006-02-11T05:14:32Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > “You’re full of shit” is not abusive? Only if your epidermis is of insufficient thickness. In which case, moderating a public message board probably isn’t for you. I’ll agree it’s not the kindest possible way to disagree with someone, but if your contention is that it’s just as bad as “fuck you”, then YOUR meter needs recalibrating. Son. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Dead\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Cat)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/46 "2006-02-11T05:21:30Z")
> [@treis](#): > > This is simply further evidence that you do not have a firm grasp of the SDMB rules and your response to Q.E.D. is yet another example of your lack the requisite tact to be a moderator. You simply can’t adequately perform the functions of a moderator and you should resign. If you won’t then you certainly should be fired. I’ll reserve judgement as to whether **samclem** ’s original call was correct or not, but regardless of that and subsequent events, I have to disagree with this. I believe that **samclem** has been and will continue to be an excellent moderator overall, just like the others on this board, so even if he screwed this one up that’s hardly a good enough reason to call for his head. FTR, I don’t think **Q.E.D.** has done anything wrong in either thread. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/47 "2006-02-11T05:23:27Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > Only if your epidermis is of insufficient thickness. In which case, moderating a public message board probably isn’t for you. I’ll agree it’s not the kindest possible way to disagree with someone, but if your contention is that it’s just as bad as “fuck you”, then YOUR meter needs recalibrating. Son. Your contention is that “you’re full of shit” is no good reason to respond with “fuck you”. I disagree. You seem to believe that while you are free to abuse a mod, that mod must be all sweet reasonableness while responding to your abuse. Wrong. Tough. Deal with it. Son. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/48 "2006-02-11T05:31:44Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > You seem to believe that while you are free to abuse a mod, that mod must be all sweet reasonableness while responding to your abuse. I believe nothing of the kind. First of all, I just said I don’t believe that “you’re full of shit” is abusive, which invalidates the first part of your claim right there. Second, I never suggested that he needed to “be all sweet reasonableness”; I only said there was no good reason for his abuse, other than pure retaliation. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/49 "2006-02-11T05:34:59Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > First of all, I just said I don’t believe that “you’re full of shit” is abusive, which invalidates the first part of your claim right there. Your belief that that statement is true invalidates nothing except anyone else’s belief that you are not clueless. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/50 "2006-02-11T05:35:21Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > And, please, don’t pretend to know my purpose and motives for posting that link for **WindWalker**. You don’t. I posted it fully aware that it might be considered a grey area, but since it wasn’t explicity against the rules I did so anyway, because it was the _right damn thing_ to do. Oblivious? No. I knew exactly what it meant, and that’s precisely _why_ I posted it. OK. I take back all the nice things I said about you, then. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![kambuckta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/53a042/32.png) [@kambuckta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kambuckta)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/51 "2006-02-11T05:39:48Z")
Oooooh, you mod/advisory dudes are _so cute_ when you tussle. Just like puppies, only with less bared teeth. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/52 "2006-02-11T05:54:10Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > Only if your epidermis is of insufficient thickness. In which case, moderating a public message board probably isn’t for you. I’ll agree it’s not the kindest possible way to disagree with someone, but if your contention is that it’s just as bad as “fuck you”, then YOUR meter needs recalibrating. Son. Without getting into the specific issue of the OP, I’m afraid I don’t see this huge gulf in civility that you see between the two replies. If “you’re full of shit” isn’t abusive/offensive, I don’t see how you can argue in response that "fuck you’ somehow IS. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/53 "2006-02-11T06:00:08Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Your belief that that statement is true invalidates nothing except anyone else’s belief that you are not clueless. You’re not very good at this logic thing, are you? Take some time and think it over; I’m sure you’ll get it eventually. Hell, I can’t resist that disarming smile of yours, **samclem**. I take back the “full of shit” comment. I still think you are wrong, though. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 6:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/54 "2006-02-11T06:14:10Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > If “you’re full of shit” isn’t abusive/offensive, I don’t see how you can argue in response that "fuck you’ somehow IS. Well, it’s just MHO, of course. But, to me there is a big difference between the two. “You’re full of shit” is just a less-than-polite way of saying “I don’t believe you”. “Fuck you” is just plain crude. I don’t see them as being on the same level at all. ---
**Author:** ![mrrealtime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e8c25b/32.png) [@mrrealtime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mrrealtime)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 6:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/55 "2006-02-11T06:41:29Z")
Clash of the titans! Which has more powers, a moderator or an SDSAB? This was very entertaining! 😉 ---
**Author:** ![mrrealtime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e8c25b/32.png) [@mrrealtime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mrrealtime)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/56 "2006-02-11T06:43:39Z")
By the way…isnt MHO and IMHO just city talk for “fuck you” and “You’re full of Shit” ? ---
**Author:** ![Silentgoldfish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@Silentgoldfish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Silentgoldfish)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 6:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/57 "2006-02-11T06:56:19Z")
Incidentally I think that the women on this board should stop posting. I’m sure they’re breaking Sharia somehow and I don’t think the Reader should be submitted to the possibility of a lawsuit brought by an angry Iranian. ---
**Author:** ![Silentgoldfish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@Silentgoldfish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Silentgoldfish)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/58 "2006-02-11T06:59:51Z")
That’s Sharia **law** aka Shari’ah law, for those nitpickers playing along at home, lest I sound more ignorant. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 7:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/59 "2006-02-11T07:30:04Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > Well, it’s just MHO, of course. But, to me there is a big difference between the two. “You’re full of shit” is just a less-than-polite way of saying “I don’t believe you”. “Fuck you” is just plain crude. I don’t see them as being on the same level at all. That’s one perception. ## I believe they are both vulgar and both in the same ballpark. Like most pit threads, this one is way overblown. **samclem** made a difficult call: reasonable people can disagree on it IMHO. I for one wouldn’t feel peachy keen if the blue meanies decided to f\*rewall this message board on the basis of its permitting links to problematic locations. There are more sides to this debate of course – I’m not sure where my final opinion falls. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2006, 9:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911/60 "2006-02-11T09:00:58Z")
I can understand Google, Yahoo and Microsoft kowtowing to the Chinese; that market is worth potentially billions upon billions of dollars to them. But why should the Chicago Reader give a flying fuck what the Chinese think of them? I really don’t understand Sam’s caution here. Having said that, **Samclem** is one of the best Moderators on the board and to call for his resignation, as one poster did, is ludicrous. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-thread-on-hot-to-bypass-the-china-firewall-have-been-closed/343911.md?page=4)