Commissar, your arguments leave me shaking my head and questioning whether you actually believe what you post. That said, I appreciate that they add a new and unique dimension to the board.
No. And since you’re either unwilling or unable to understand what I’m saying, I’m going to stop explaining now. The warning itself was as clear as can be, so I don’t need to waste more time elucidating it.
It’s about time.
This is a poster who deliberately sought out an American/western message board and, after realizing in his first OP that an anti-religious position wouldn’t gather sufficient heat, pitted the United States (and now virtually exclusively refers to it as “the Empire”, refusing to even use the name “America”). Who then posted an OP expecting other Dopers to support Quadaffi’s tyranny (this after saying that he’d lurked here for a while, as if anybody who’d lurked on the Dope for more than a week would honestly think that there’s a sizable pro-totalitarian faction here). Who then took up referring to the targets of his inflammatory nonsense as “friends” while announcing that he is a “Communist”, despite violating virtually every tenet of communism, supporting the torture and murder of actual communists and claiming that it is tantamount to racism to call him out on his lack of adherence to actual communist ideology.
And now in this thread complains that he’s being suppressed because his views are simply non-mainstream, rather than that the mods are right and he’s trolling. ’
His arguments are contradictory and a pack of rationalizations, his rhetoric is as inflammatory and often counter-factual as possible (did you know that the Soviet Union single highhandedly defeated the Nazis? Strange but true…), and the mods seem to have grown tired of it.
Good.
There is an SDMB rule against being a jerk. You have not been told to modify your opinions in any way, only to stop using language that is deliberately inflammatory.
You are already on thin ice by espousing contradictory beliefs, (indicating troll behavior), and while you have managed to provide a plausible, (although hardly credible), explanation for those contradictions, you have left a strong impression with the staff that you only post with the intent to rile up other posters.
In the current brouhaha, you have only been told to stop using deliberately inflammatory and false labels such as Christendom. (I did not prohibit you from using the word “cowards” although I have demonstrated that your rationalization for employing the term is false.)
I do not play the “rules” game. If a poster is being disruptive, I will attempt to reduce the disruption. If that bothers you, go find a different board to disrupt. (Have you thought about posting among the Freepers?)
My directions in that thread stand.
I thought it was against the rules to try to stir up trouble on other messageboards.
Regards,
Shodan
Yes, by all means, let’s not disturb that archetype of serenity.
I don’t know, there is no standard spelling or translation of the name to English.
And at least this one I know how to pronounce.
(Okay, it’s about as annoying as people who consistently say “Shrub” or “Dubya” for Bush, or “Barack HUSSEIN Obama” for Obama. It stops being funny quickly. Sometimes before the first instance.)
Even then, the difference in dynamics cannot be ignored.
Going to a Jewish message board and referring to Jews exclusively as “the so-called Chosen People” is much more an act of trolling than going to that same board and referring to the Nazis as “goosestepping thugs”.
Going to a black message board and referring to blacks exclusively as “the Negroid subspecies” is much more an act of trolling than going to that same board and referring to the KKK as “Klanner scum”.
Going to an American/western, largely atheistic message and referring to America exclusively as “the Empire”, western powers as “Christendom” and (virtually any of) America’s/the west’s enemies as “Glorious” is much more an act of trolling than going to the same message board and referring to Quadaffi as “Ka-Daffy Duck”.
The Dope is excessively lenient. It isn’t even the contradictory, rationalized, counter-factual, nonsensical views that Commissar has been told to cut out, just the needlessly and deliberately inflammatory rhetoric. Seems more than reasonable, IMNSHO.
I think that’s the ruling the moderators are making here. They would have no problem with a poster who was presenting a genuine viewpoint, even if he’s a communist. The problem is with posters who appear to be presenting a made-up viewpoint to annoy people.
They are neither new nor unique. Jerks are jerks. Ban his ass already and be done with it.
Or more appropriately, send him to the Gulag.
The problem is that none of my language is “deliberately” inflammatory. It can be strong, yes, and it can inflame the more emotional Western posters here, to be sure. But those are both side-effects of my only real intent, which is to discuss current events from viewpoints that I hold regarding such events. Despite your constant attempts to convince me that my intent is something completely different, I think that I am better situated to gauge it than you are.
Additionally, you now claim that you are not ordering me to modify my opinions, but the warning I linked to says otherwise. In it, you explicitly rejected my argument that the Western bombing of Libya was “indiscriminate,” and then proceeded to issue a warning to me. The message seems clear: avoid arguments that you disfavor, or be penalized for making them. To me, at least, this appears to be an order to alter my views.
Moreover, you seek to force me to emasculate my arguments by arbitrarily prohibiting the use of terms that happen to be essential to my position. In arguing that the Libyan conflict is motivated for the most part by insipid Christian hostility towards Islam, and is functionally an extension of a crusading mindset that is still alive and well in the West, it is only natural to use the word “Christendom.” It gets the overall point across without me having to spell out the position in each and every post that I make. Prohibiting me from using this term diminishes my ability to get my point across; not enforcing similar prohibitions against my debate opponents amounts to a clear case of viewpoint discrimination and censorship.
Your first two examples are valid, if mediocre, but your overall argument breaks down when you try to analogize the Straight Dope to a racial or religious message board. I’m not buying it. The Straight Dope does not exist to advance a religious or racial identity or cause, nor does it seek to limit its membership in any real way. The Straight Dope exists, by its own admission, for the sole purpose of “fighting ignorance.” Hard as it may be for you to accept, even a wildly popular Western idea (such as free-market capitalism or representative democracy) can be ignorant, destructive, and plain wrong. Hence, you can either fight ignorance, or you can ban all challenges to mainstream ideas; you cannot simultaneously do both. Much as you must hate it, the Straight Dope is intended to accomplish the prior rather than the latter. For this reason, your argument lacks merit.
Unsourced opinion and incessant sloganeering does not a ‘challenge’ make. I’m just sayin’.
So you can’t concieve of a way to make a reasoned argument without referring to NATO by its given name? How odd.
I think we’re done here. This is another warning. I’m closing this thread and the staff will review your posting privileges.
No serious person could actually believe that “Christian hostility to Islam” is behind the Libyan situation. “Christians” did not start the battle; Muslim Libyans did. Muslims sought secular European assistance. None of the active players from Europe have been remotely “Christian” for years.
If using actual terms instead of Pravda-like epithets “emasculates” your argument, that is simply one more indication that you are more interested in trolling than in a serious discussion. Others have argued against the NATO actions without being accused of trolling, so your claim that my motivation is ideological is nonsense.
I am not going to carry on your fight, here, giving you more exposure. Behave yourself in Great Debates or leave. I don’t really care.