geekhack

geekhack Community => Off Topic => Topic started by: Novus on Thu, 30 April 2015, 18:56:06

Title: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Novus on Thu, 30 April 2015, 18:56:06

Our moderation team really likes to go after these relatively, stupid inconsequential and meaningless things instead of doing actual moderation.
[...]
Even profiles aren't properly regulated.
[...]
You can't have gifs that lag mobile browsers.

Or do you just like complaining?

Hey Hoff, am I not allowed to complain about white supremacy here?
Do we support white supremacy and all the various Nazi atrocities?
Would you like to round up all the Jews and various sub races in America and slaughter them?
It feels like sometimes we condone this behavior here.

Now why do I get that impression?
Well this goes back to a few things.
I remember when I had doctor who gifs 1-2 years ago and the reasons cited when my gifs were removed were something along the lines of this:
1) Some people found them offensive 2) Some people found them annoying 3) Some people were having issues on mobile devices 4) Some people were having issues browsing at work 5) Some people were reporting my posts.

Which is fine and I understand this.
I have to admit that at the time, I was using my gifs to make a point about low value posts in the other boards.
It was a very in your face way of reminding you that just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Consideration goes a long way and that includes not starting a new post when you can use an existing one.
Another sub-point was something like this - it's really hard to browse through the keyboard section on a mobile device when it's cluttered with a bunch of low value posts like what keyboard should I buy, is razer good?

That being said it wasn't really well thought out and I'd say it's water under the bridge except well if you're going to say gifs cause issues for some users, you should just out right ban them on signatures and this applies to everybody.

Then there's the Nazi's and Hitlers.
You've seen them, I've seen them.

Now who in their right mind would think this is something we can condone?
Don't you think this sends the wrong message?

I mean I have a Nazi uniform fetish (http://just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.) as much as the next guy but I do need to ask - are you not bothered by this at the least bit?

I mean are you a white neo nazi white power supremacist yourself?

Or maybe you just don't care about equality or justice.
Maybe it's like that game of thrones thread.
Illegal or not, whatever.
Oh and since we've seen that you don't really care about the law don't hide behind the 1st amendment.

So maybe I have it wrong, maybe you're not a racist but instead maybe you're just afraid to step on some toes and just bend to popular opinion instead of doing what's right.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: hwood34 on Thu, 30 April 2015, 19:04:20
(http://i.imgur.com/WYr3lct.png)
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: tp4tissue on Thu, 30 April 2015, 19:04:26
1wolf..

and here I thought I was a bad writer..

haha..

You gotta make a point buddy,  this post does not take a stance, and your message is unclear.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: azhdar on Thu, 30 April 2015, 19:08:05
(http://static9.depositphotos.com/1192060/1103/i/950/depositphotos_11030710-Office-worker-with-interested-look-on-face.jpg)
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: noisyturtle on Thu, 30 April 2015, 19:14:48
(http://i.imgur.com/IVmXEyC.jpg)
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: VesperSAINT on Thu, 30 April 2015, 19:14:50
I did Nazi this coming...
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: fanpeople on Thu, 30 April 2015, 19:15:32
1wolf..

and here I thought I was a bad writer..

haha..

You gotta make a point buddy,  this post does not take a stance, and your message is unclear.

8200...... :thumb:
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: fanpeople on Thu, 30 April 2015, 19:16:43
Show Image
(http://i.imgur.com/IVmXEyC.jpg)


Please don't post pictures of me and my wife.....
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: nubbinator on Thu, 30 April 2015, 19:18:48
It's an odd world when I find myself thinking that novus, demik, and pai_crai are the voices of reason in here.  Demik was always the speaker of truf, but more have joined those ranks.

It's sad to see all the dismissiveness when it's a legit question.  There's a lot of picking and choosing what to enforce lately, even if some of my posts would fall under that for pictures with swear words.  Some if the most disruptive members were rightfully banned, but they also kept some of the ridiculousness on the other extreme in check.

Anyways, keep challenging the status quo to make this place better.  And most of the offenders are great people, the jokes are just a little too far.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Thu, 30 April 2015, 19:33:37
It's an odd world when I find myself thinking that novus, demik, and pai_crai are the voices of reason in here.  Demik was always the speaker of truf, but more have joined those ranks.

It's sad to see all the dismissiveness when it's a legit question.  There's a lot of picking and choosing what to enforce lately, even if some of my posts would fall under that for pictures with swear words.  Some if the most disruptive members were rightfully banned, but they also kept some of the ridiculousness on the other extreme in check.

Anyways, keep challenging the status quo to make this place better.  And most of the offenders are great people, the jokes are just a little too far.

I'm not easily offended.

I just hate inconsistency. People can have all the nazi **** they want. They are the ones that look like idiots.

BUT DONT TURN AROUND AND REMOVE PICTURES OF WEED OR GIRLS IN BIKINIS AND SITE THE ****ING RULES. Either everybody gets offended or nobody gets offended.

I vote for toughen the **** up its the Internet. I get the mods wanting to have a "safe" environment because we have Tweens and old ****s that act like Tweens but **** be consistent.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: noisyturtle on Thu, 30 April 2015, 19:37:55
2nd on the weed pics (bud 'n caps.) Some of you don't like it which is why it had it's own subforum here, till a few pricks had to go and ruin the fun for everyone else. If it's not in the general pool and you have to go out of your way to access it, what kind of **** move is it to complain about it?
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: DrHubblePhD on Thu, 30 April 2015, 20:08:32
I have spoken to the repeat offenders, and as much as I cannot condone their actions, and I adamantly speak out against the "humor" of sensitive jokes, they have a right to voice whatever opinions they want. Even if it represents themselves in a way that is degrading to their image.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: HoffmanMyster on Thu, 30 April 2015, 20:22:40
Do we support white supremacy and all the various Nazi atrocities?

I don't know about you, but I do not.


I'm having a really hard time following this post.  It seems to be about white supremacy (as evidenced by the title), yet contains more content about Dr. Who gifs.  I will do my best to address the multitude of topics at hand here, but bear with me if I have a hard time, the OP didn't structure his post very well.

1. Nazis are not cool.  I am not a fan of Nazis.
2. You can definitely complain about white supremacy!  Please do!  See #1 for further details. (these two points are out of order compared to your post, but I feel #1 is more important so I put it first)
3. I have no interest in slaughtering anyone.

4. I'm glad you brought up the fact that you were intentionally a huge pain in the ass, I had actually forgotten about that.  Yes, we kindly asked you to remove the (IIRC) 17 MB gifs in your signature.  And when you refused, we did remove them.  You're correct.  If anyone takes issue with that, please send me a PM.
5. I'm really not sure what you mean by this:
I have to admit that at the time, I was using my gifs to make a point about low value posts in the other boards.
It was a very in your face way of reminding you that just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Consideration goes a long way and that includes not starting a new post when you can use an existing one.
Another sub-point was something like this - it's really hard to browse through the keyboard section on a mobile device when it's cluttered with a bunch of low value posts like what keyboard should I buy, is razer good?
You saw low value posts and thought the best thing to do is annoy the crap out of everyone with massive gifs in your signature?  You've lost me.  And yeah, don't make new posts...??  Confusion continues...

6. Obnoxious and trolling gifs cause issues for users.  If you had a single small gif in your profile, no one would have done anything.  You don't get to punch someone, get disciplined, and complain that people aren't being disciplined for poking people.  Not how this works.

7. I have seen the avatars in question.
8. I am not a fan of the avatars in question. Are you suggesting I remove all things from this forum that I don't like?
9. I am not a "white neo nazi white power supremacist".

10. I do care about equality and justice.
11. Maybe what's like the game of thrones thread?

12. Where have we seen I don't care about the law? I'm not hiding behind anything.

13. I am indeed not a racist. And I've stepped on quite a few toes in my lifetime.


I'm really not sure if this is directed at geekhack as a whole, the mod team, or myself (since I was quoted).  I've assumed it was directed at me and responded accordingly.

We seem to get a lot of complaining about the mod team, which I think is pretty normal for a forum of our size.  But I'm not really sure what you're hoping will change.  As I regularly make abundantly clear, my inbox is always open to feedback on anything and everything. 


I'm not easily offended.

I just hate inconsistency. People can have all the nazi **** they want. They are the ones that look like idiots.

BUT DONT TURN AROUND AND REMOVE PICTURES OF WEED OR GIRLS IN BIKINIS AND SITE THE ****ING RULES. Either everybody gets offended or nobody gets offended.

I vote for toughen the **** up its the Internet. I get the mods wanting to have a "safe" environment because we have Tweens and old ****s that act like Tweens but **** be consistent.

I agree with you completely.  Luckily, so does the site ToS. 

For all avatars, signatures, images or links to images, videos, etc. must not include any of the below descriptions:

This includes images of men/women in see-through or nearly see-through clothing
This includes images of men/women in any implied or expressed sexual or illicit act
Images/videos/etc. must not include any act of drug use, condone or celebrate drug use, or even imply drug use.
Images/videos/etc. must not include any act of violence, illegal activity or implied illegal activity or profanity.

Why can't someone remove something that's against the rules and then site the rules?   :confused:


There's a lot of picking and choosing what to enforce lately

There is a report button for a reason, people.  If something needs to be tended to, report it.  "Picking and choosing" is more likely "didn't see it".


2nd on the weed pics (bud 'n caps.) Some of you don't like it which is why it had it's own subforum here, till a few pricks had to go and ruin the fun for everyone else. If it's not in the general pool and you have to go out of your way to access it, what kind of **** move is it to complain about it?

Agreed.



Also, I know it's cool to fight the power and give mods ****, but seriously?  We're not some dark shadowy figure trying to control your life.  I'm a member of this forum just as much as anyone else is.  Do you really think I'm removing things or changing things on a whim to **** with people?  The whole us vs them attitude I see a lot is just ridiculous.  If you have an honest concern or feedback, let someone know.  If you're just *****ing to be a troll, don't waste our time.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Dubsgalore on Thu, 30 April 2015, 20:23:45
"7. I have seen the avatars in question."
(https://i.warosu.org/data/tg/img/0379/45/1423485181433.jpg)
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: tbc on Thu, 30 April 2015, 20:28:24
am i being trolled here?

these last 2 years, i honestly thought the anti-mod team complaints were buddy-buddy jokes.  they were legit serious the whole time?
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: hwood34 on Thu, 30 April 2015, 22:02:14
am i being trolled here?

these last 2 years, i honestly thought the anti-mod team complaints were buddy-buddy jokes.  they were legit serious the whole time?
nope, people think that mods are all seeing beings and that this is their full time job. So they never just miss something, that's just them being intentionally malicious
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Novus on Thu, 30 April 2015, 22:09:04
am i being trolled here?

these last 2 years, i honestly thought the anti-mod team complaints were buddy-buddy jokes.  they were legit serious the whole time?

Well they mostly are just jokes but these jokes do stem from some issues that are overlooked or just forgotten.
Most people that grow frustrated either get a temp ban or take a short breaks.

No Hoff forgive me but I really don't follow here.
How is that you can claim to not be racist while at the same condoning Nazi avatars and Hitler propaganda?
How can you also condone blatantly coded messages with heavy racial undertones like "enjoy your multiculturalism" directed at the Russian member iri residing in the UK?
You've seen the avatars in question, you've seen these posts before and yet you don't do diddly squat about it.
So I hope you do understand where I'm coming from when I ask what's your stance on white supremacy here?
It seems to me that you actively condone it or have a taken a "state's rights" sort of approach towards it.

Now maybe I'm too sensitive and that's fine. I understand if you want to say well I don't want to cross lines and enforce this type of behavior.
It gets a line, where do I stop and I get that ... but then you also go ahead and edit a naruto thread.
Are spoilers against the rules too?
am i being trolled here?

these last 2 years, i honestly thought the anti-mod team complaints were buddy-buddy jokes.  they were legit serious the whole time?



You don't touch a thread where people are pirating episodes illegally.
Where's the consistency? Either touch things that violate the rules, leave them alone don't cherry pick.
Clearly I don't understand where your priorities lie.

I'm not the only one that has called out the mod team for inconsistency.
The mod teams always takes these argumentative defenses like what you've demonstrated.
At the time having 5 gifs in your signature wasn't really against the rules. You say that it's obnoxious, I disagree it's an expression of my love for sci fi. It's no different than pictures of keyboards, clacks or anything else here.
You say that it's 17mb, well alot of content and threads easily exceed that there. Desktops and most connections should have no issues and mobile users can use tapatalk and other things.
You say that you asked me to remove it, but you waited 2 weeks before even approaching me and you didn't cite one rule. You made it very clear that it was because of user pressure that you even approached me about it.
So when you do ask "do i remove things because it bothers me" well yes you do!
I'm also not that the only that's had or used multiple gifs in my signature.

Here's another one. What's the difference between a TP thread and a microsoft windows' thread?
Both are entertaining.
Both are pretty much utter nonsense at face value.
Both have some of the most sarcastic and dismissive replies.
Both have people actively trolling them.

Why is that I always see MW threads locked but I've never seen a TP thread subject to the same kind of moderation.
Explain that. Is TP being more "genuine" than MW?
What is the litmus test you've set here?

Now you might dislike my complaints, dislike the way I protest things and take things too far but take a moment and just look around this thread.
Instead of doing the sensible thing and ignoring this thread, you've got a bunch of people posting a bunch of ****s and weird frogs.

I mean look at you guys, a bunch of scavenging vultures looking for food because you can't hunt.
If you want to tell me that I'm out of line, fine, but set the example and deal with this type of behavior first.
If you think the responses here are fine, then okay, but don't needlessly censure users for things that aren't nearly as malicious.

I think I said this on the other thread but I wouldn't be complaining and having to point these out if you guys simply exercised more common sense and consistency and less discretionary moderation.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: noisyturtle on Thu, 30 April 2015, 22:12:17
You all forget; the mods were just like you and I at one time...
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: hwood34 on Thu, 30 April 2015, 22:15:00
Instead of doing the sensible thing and ignoring this thread, you've got a bunch of people posting a bunch of ****s and weird frogs.
(http://i.imgur.com/QO6Cy9P.jpg)
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Air tree on Thu, 30 April 2015, 22:20:26
I feel like I'm behind on my Geekhack drama....
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: greath on Thu, 30 April 2015, 22:42:50
As someone who frequently browses on my phone's 4g, has a limited data plan, and hates tapatalk: a 17mb signature gif would piss me off too. You're comparing something that makes the site physically harder to use to political and ethical ideologies. I think the lines seem clear. Porn and drugs are not allowed, because those are mod's rules. Everything else generally is fair game. The obnoxious rule is a bit vague, but outside of something that I also agree would make the site a nightmare when browsing on mobile, where else have the mod's enforced this rule.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: noisyturtle on Thu, 30 April 2015, 22:49:23
Other than posting a penis or drugs, how does one get banned around here?
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: tp4tissue on Thu, 30 April 2015, 22:52:22
Tp4's wit and sarcasm is the natural force which equilibrates all of existence.


(http://textemoticons.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/th_aji.gif)


Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: jonathanyu on Thu, 30 April 2015, 23:13:38
Other than posting a penis or drugs, how does one get banned around here?
cheese+nipple? that's what i heard
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Sniping on Thu, 30 April 2015, 23:33:49
Other than posting a penis or drugs, how does one get banned around here?
cheese+nipple? that's what i heard

heh
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Hak Foo on Thu, 30 April 2015, 23:35:41
*Reads topic line*

Of course Whites are superior.  Nobody likes bBacks.  Of course, some people have a sick preference for Yellows and Browns.

We are talking about ALPS switches, right?

:D :D :D
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 02:03:40
Other than posting a penis or drugs, how does one get banned around here?

Well I got banned for closing threads I started. Then got removed as OP from other threads.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: sth on Fri, 01 May 2015, 02:08:36

no kidding
Other than posting a penis or drugs, how does one get banned around here?

Well I got banned for closing threads I started. Then got removed as OP from other threads.

hi demik
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 02:14:50
Hi sth
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: sth on Fri, 01 May 2015, 02:20:43
well here we are
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: noisyturtle on Fri, 01 May 2015, 02:34:29
well here we are

now there's an avatar I haven't seen in a long time, welcome back
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 02:36:14
well here we are

Indeed.

Aside from edgy nazi avys, you haven't missed much.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: sth on Fri, 01 May 2015, 02:40:02
i have more posts than you now, it doesn't feel right  :(
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 02:44:32
Ain't nothing but a number
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: sth on Fri, 01 May 2015, 02:45:23
creepy
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 03:03:04
:(
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: madhias on Fri, 01 May 2015, 03:23:08
Creepy is coming to a keyboard forum and read about 20 or mid 20 aged boys nazi opinions. Avatars which should be edgy and cool, and stupid opinions on races. Definitely ****ty. /pol/ seems to be strong here :(
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: clacktalk on Fri, 01 May 2015, 03:32:49
Creepy is coming to a keyboard forum and read about 20 or mid 20 aged boys nazi opinions. Avatars which should be edgy and cool, and stupid opinions on races. Definitely ****ty. /pol/ seems to be strong here :(

well put. i don't think anyone can say it any better
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 03:36:01
Ok so the only actual issue anyone seems to have is consistency... which is something we would all like, hell when I asked about a thread being approved hoff chewed me a new ******* and then ekw808 sent me a friendly pm about it.
But the OP's examples seem pretty dumb, 17mb gif spam vs one thread talking about a TV show that wasn't out yet? Let's be ****ing real.

As far as the rules go, I say have less rules and more emphasis on mod's doing and moderating how they see fit, it's how it tends to work anyway. I wish we had a general chat thread that was for everything (inc nsfw posts) and I wish t4p threads would slow down, but far as much else goes it's fine.

The whole thing about gif's ****ing it up for mobile uses is kinda funny because as I've posted in the bug reporting thread a few times (as others have) mobile browsing the forum is a broken mess anyway.



It's good to **** on the mods every now and then, but for the most part they do a good job, prob not the best I've ever come across but they seem pretty legit. Everyone has good and bad days and some days I'm sure I'd be more into some bull**** than others...
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: billnye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 05:15:00
I wanted to make an apology post.

I honestly wasn't trying to be some edgy teenager by making Rommel my profile picture.

Rommel and his Afrika Korps were never charged with a war crime and consistently denied orders to kill Jewish soldiers and civilians that they came across. Rommel wasn't a Nazi, he was a German man that fought for his country; similar to Robert E. Lee in the American Civil War.

I apologize to anyone I offended and I hope you don't imagine me as some deranged neonazi because I am not one.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: berserkfan on Fri, 01 May 2015, 05:23:59
Opening Post was confusing and not exactly well written.

As for Hitler and Nazi avatars, I don’t even understand what’s wrong. They aren’t against the law in most countries. They aren’t even being used in an intimidating fashion – eg not paired with anti Jewish slogans.

17mb signature would be quite irritating.

As for Hitler, I am really tired of the masturbatory 70th anniversary end of WW2 BS festivities ongoing in the Western press now. These are being conducted by the winners of WW2 to keep on asserting their supremacy and legitimacy over the rest of the world. Fact is, every person good or bad has his own impact on the world (often unintended). Hitler was an evil and deluded person, but he did the majority of the human race (a majority that in fact he despised) a lot of unintended good.

If Hitler hadn’t caused chaos in Europe, sapped the strength of European empires, forced the USA to come out of isolation and reform the world system including imposing free trade agreements and twisting reluctant European arms into decolonization, the vast majority of the human race could still be downtrodden by colonial masters.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: bueller on Fri, 01 May 2015, 05:26:42
People are too easily offended. Who cares if someone has a Hitler avatar, so long as the stuff they post is on point it shouldn't be an issue.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 05:29:21
Opening Post was confusing and not exactly well written.

As for Hitler and Nazi avatars, I don�t even understand what�s wrong. They aren�t against the law in most countries. They aren�t even being used in an intimidating fashion � eg not paired with anti Jewish slogans.

17mb signature would be quite irritating.

As for Hitler, I am really tired of the masturbatory 70th anniversary end of WW2 BS festivities ongoing in the Western press now. These are being conducted by the winners of WW2 to keep on asserting their supremacy and legitimacy over the rest of the world. Fact is, every person good or bad has his own impact on the world (often unintended). Hitler was an evil and deluded person, but he did the majority of the human race (a majority that in fact he despised) a lot of unintended good.

If Hitler hadn�t caused chaos in Europe, sapped the strength of European empires, forced the USA to come out of isolation and reform the world system including imposing free trade agreements and twisting reluctant European arms into decolonization, the vast majority of the human race could still be downtrodden by colonial masters.


what the ****
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: katushkin on Fri, 01 May 2015, 07:20:30
Opening Post was confusing and not exactly well written.

As for Hitler and Nazi avatars, I don’t even understand what’s wrong. They aren’t against the law in most countries. They aren’t even being used in an intimidating fashion – eg not paired with anti Jewish slogans.

17mb signature would be quite irritating.

As for Hitler, I am really tired of the masturbatory 70th anniversary end of WW2 BS festivities ongoing in the Western press now. These are being conducted by the winners of WW2 to keep on asserting their supremacy and legitimacy over the rest of the world. Fact is, every person good or bad has his own impact on the world (often unintended). Hitler was an evil and deluded person, but he did the majority of the human race (a majority that in fact he despised) a lot of unintended good.

If Hitler hadn’t caused chaos in Europe, sapped the strength of European empires, forced the USA to come out of isolation and reform the world system including imposing free trade agreements and twisting reluctant European arms into decolonization, the vast majority of the human race could still be downtrodden by colonial masters.

The title was not really related to the OP really.

But this topic definitely is not about trying to justify the Nazis. Like at all.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: HoffmanMyster on Fri, 01 May 2015, 07:21:37
Ok so the only actual issue anyone seems to have is consistency... which is something we would all like, hell when I asked about a thread being approved hoff chewed me a new ******* and then ekw808 sent me a friendly pm about it.

Sorry about that, that was my fault.  I was particularly irritable at that time, and we've had countless people ignore the rules and then complain so it was an "oh another one of these" moment for me.  I should have sent you a PM.  That said, you also should have sent a mod a PM.  ;)

 :-*
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 07:24:15
Ok so the only actual issue anyone seems to have is consistency... which is something we would all like, hell when I asked about a thread being approved hoff chewed me a new ******* and then ekw808 sent me a friendly pm about it.

Sorry about that, that was my fault.  I was particularly irritable at that time, and we've had countless people ignore the rules and then complain so it was an "oh another one of these" moment for me.  I should have sent you a PM.  That said, you also should have sent a mod a PM.  ;)

 :-*

Yeah yeah like I said you guys are 'technically' people too and we all have good and bad days which is why asking for consistency is always going to be difficult.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: HoffmanMyster on Fri, 01 May 2015, 07:33:20
you guys are 'technically' people too

:(
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 07:33:50
you guys are 'technically' people too

:(

 :-*
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: SpAmRaY on Fri, 01 May 2015, 07:54:00
clearly whites aren't supreme, they have very inconsistent clicks due to the factory lube conspiracy

clear mx is clearly supreme but its still not topre, topre ftw

oh and mods are people to, just look at how many members became mods and then disappear, it seems to take all the fun out of being here
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: vivalarevolución on Fri, 01 May 2015, 08:03:16
Being a moderator is a volunteer job, we can't expect top quality all the time.  For the most part, they do a good job for volunteering their time and this is a better-than-average forum, as Internet forums go.

Except that the only thing that seems sellable in classifieds anymore is keycaps, but that's a different story.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: tigersharkdude on Fri, 01 May 2015, 08:07:36
(http://th02.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/i/2011/284/0/7/betty_white_for_president_by_picklejuice13-d4cj32y.png)
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: BunnyLake on Fri, 01 May 2015, 08:15:15
i may not agree nazis, but gosh if the germans dont have a good answer for people like this

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/04/moaning_ban
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: iri on Fri, 01 May 2015, 08:15:16
it's so nice to have a functioning ignore list here. saves traffic and time from being wasted on 17mb signature gifs or retarded teenagers' avatars and posts.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: paicrai on Fri, 01 May 2015, 11:07:21

I wanted to make an apology post.

I honestly wasn't trying to be some edgy teenager by making Rommel my profile picture.

Rommel and his Afrika Korps were never charged with a war crime and consistently denied orders to kill Jewish soldiers and civilians that they came across. Rommel wasn't a Nazi, he was a German man that fought for his country; similar to Robert E. Lee in the American Civil War.

I apologize to anyone I offended and I hope you don't imagine me as some deranged neonazi because I am not one.
enjoy your multiculturalism sweetie;)
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: hwood34 on Fri, 01 May 2015, 11:29:29
it's so nice to have a functioning ignore list here. saves traffic and time from being wasted on 17mb signature gifs or retarded teenagers' avatars and posts.
you'd be surprised at how many functioning, voting adults can do worse
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 12:06:49

I wanted to make an apology post.

I honestly wasn't trying to be some edgy teenager by making Rommel my profile picture.

Rommel and his Afrika Korps were never charged with a war crime and consistently denied orders to kill Jewish soldiers and civilians that they came across. Rommel wasn't a Nazi, he was a German man that fought for his country; similar to Robert E. Lee in the American Civil War.

I apologize to anyone I offended and I hope you don't imagine me as some deranged neonazi because I am not one.
enjoy your multiculturalism sweetie;)

Yeah I call bull****.

Wife's bike got stolen. Bye bye five hundred pounds.
I hope you're enjoying the multiculturalism of your new home :) :) :)

If you aren't trying to be edgy you obv have alternative views on race. What with the questionable **** you say and the avys.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: metalliqaz on Fri, 01 May 2015, 13:42:20
Dafuq did I jus read?
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:07:26
I think it's clear that my education was far different from most other people in this thread. I was taught about the horrific things that the Nazis did, but also about the amazing things they did for their country & people. It seems that most other people have been brainwashed into thinking that the Nazis were pure evil, and the worst group of people in the history of mankind. It really sickens me how biased the education system is in America & Britain (excluding my school, apparently). Instead of pointing out what the Nazis did wrong and what they did right, then trying to learn from those things, we just brainwash our population into thinking they were pure evil from an early age. Anyone who says otherwise is branded as anti-semitic, racist, and a monster. Any media which says otherwise is branded as extremist. Banning Nazi-related avatars is no better than this.

If bad groups of people = offensive groups of people, then you should find my current avatar FAR more offensive than any Nazi-related avatar. Barack Obama - the face of the US Government. The most horrific, unethical, monstrous group of people that's existed in the past few hundred years. A group of people that has decimated and torn apart countries just to line their own pockets. A group of people who is in the process of ripping their own country apart. Again, just to line their own pockets. You say 6,000,000 Jews (a grossly exaggerated figure), I say 6,000,000 Libyans.

I saw billnye apologizing for his Rommel avatar. Firstly, I would like to give a reason for me having Hitler as my avatar. It was because, iirc, I lost a bet. I won't use that to defend myself though, as I probably would have had him as my profile picture at some point even if it weren't for that. While I agree with most people - Hitler had some pretty serious mental problems and did some pretty ****ty things, I have a tremendous amount of admiration for the way he came to power, and his intentions for his country and people. You cannot deny he loved his country and his people, and you cannot deny that while he was in power (until before the start of WW2) he transformed his country into a powerhouse against all odds.

I will not apologize for having Hitler as my avatar. If you were offended by a picture of a person who died 70 years ago then you deserve to be offended. :)

I'm sure I'll be branded as a racist anti-semite for this post. Frankly, I do not care. I would rather be branded as such than surrender my opinions to political correctness.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:14:30
Sorry, got a bit distracted there. I actually intended to just make a 1-line post which directly addressed the OP :

If someone has a Nazi-related avatar that does not make them a white supremacist. It does not even mean they support/agree with any of the Nazis actions. Don't make assumptions like that.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:15:47
I respect the KKK because they love their people.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:21:13
Sorry, got a bit distracted there. I actually intended to just make a 1-line post which directly addressed the OP :

If someone has a Nazi-related avatar that does not make them a white supremacist. It does not even mean they support/agree with any of the Nazis actions. Don't make assumptions like that.

What kind of nonsense is this?
An avatar is an image you attach to your account. The image you pick is by default the image people associat with you. If you pic the picture of a Nazi general in full uniform, then people will associate you with said Nazi and Nazism.
If you don't want that to happen, don't pick a Nazi officer as your avatar.

It's like when you had a Nige avatar, how was it wrong of anyone to assume you where a UKIP supporter?


And while the Nazi's did some good and the Blitz has helped the UK's big cites with town planning, they also went about committing the worst genoside (?) in recorded history.
It's like how old Italians glorify Musolini and the famous fact that the trains always ran on time, and then forget that he brutally murdered anyone in his path.
Like let's be ****ing real and have some perspective.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:31:33
You bring up the U.S. and compare it to nazi Germany. Remind me what the Jews did to Germans that warranted the genocide. Compared to us and ISIL. See I would have agreed with you if you would have brought up the systematic elimination of native americans..  But then I remembered that was British immigrants.

But my education is obviously not on par with yours.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:33:55
I respect the KKK because they love their people.
The two really cannot be compared.

The KKK are a bunch of idiots who think they're making a difference and benefiting their people by doing their little rallies, whereas Hitler really did make a difference to his country and to his people.

When he came to power his country was in a hopeless financial and industrial state. The German people had no faith in their country, no hope. By the time WW2 started he had transformed his country into a powerhouse, and he made the German people believe in their country more than ever. That is what I find admirable, and only that.

And while the Nazi's did some good and the Blitz has helped the UK's big cites with town planning, they also went about committing the worst genoside (?) in recorded history.
It's like how old Italians glorify Musolini and the famous fact that the trains always ran on time, and then forget that he brutally murdered anyone in his path.
Like let's be ****ing real and have some perspective.
I clearly said that the Nazis did horrific things, and that Hitler had serious mental problems and did terrible things.

If you pic the picture of a Nazi general in full uniform, then people will associate you with said Nazi and Nazism.
I wouldn't associate somebody with a Nazi uniform with Nazism. I would think that the reasons behind the avatar were more complex than "Woo, Nazism!". I wouldn't make an assumption with so little information.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:33:56
Also if you have admiration for how Hitler came to power then you either don't know history well or are a very disturbed little boy.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: jwaz on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:36:55
creepy

omg hi, sth
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:51:12
You bring up the U.S. and compare it to nazi Germany. Remind me what the Jews did to Germans that warranted the genocide. Compared to us and ISIL. See I would have agreed with you if you would have brought up the systematic elimination of native americans..  But then I remembered that was British immigrants.

But my education is obviously not on par with yours.
Firstly, I did not mean to imply that my education was better than anyone in this thread. I was just saying how biased the British and American education system is when it comes to the Nazis.

Secondly, who ever mentioned ISIL?

I mentioned Libya. A country that was among most prosperous democracy in Africa with a leader that, again, only wanted the best for his country & people. Thanks to the US, that man is dead. His country is war-torn and decimated. All in order to boost the petrodollar. Of course, popular media would have you believe otherwise..
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:53:13
You might have done a better job of not implying that, if you had gone to a better school... Though I'm curious which public school you went too...
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:54:22
Dude that's exactly what you implied. Even singling out your specific school.

And let's not fool ourselves here, the UK/Europe has as much oil blood on their hands as the U.S. does.

And for as much as you and bill claim to be Libertarian, you sure have a hard on for fascism.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: jdcarpe on Fri, 01 May 2015, 14:59:58
did someone say ISIL?

(http://i.imgur.com/7AwjPNF.png)
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:03:04
Dude that's exactly what you implied. Even singling out your specific school.

And let's not fool ourselves here, the UK/Europe has as much oil blood on their hands as the U.S. does.
As I said, I really did not mean to imply that at all. Until recently I thought everyone was taught the same things I was when it came to the Nazis. It's become apparent to me that isn't the case, and that I was lucky to not receive the same amount of bias. I can safely say that (perhaps outside of my History lessons) my education is on par with state educated children in Britain.

@baldgye, I do not go to a public school. (Worth noting to non-UK readers that public school is where all the upper-class kids go, I know it sounds like the opposite.)

Oh, don't get me wrong, the EU is just as guilty as the US for going along with their schemes. I just mentioned the US government specifically because we were talking about single groups of people. Furthermore, I think the USA is the greatest nation on Earth. I just hate your government with a passion. I also hate the EU, but love Europe.

Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: meiosis on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:09:53
What a time to be alive
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:14:41
Ha the fact you think public school is only for the upper classes shows how young you are, or brainwashed...
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:17:48
Ha the fact you think public school is only for the upper classes shows how young you are, or brainwashed...
I never said that. I said public school is where all the upper class kids go. I didn't say that nobody outside the upper class went to them.

There is a distinct difference between what I said and what you thought I said.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:21:28
Then you'd also be wrong about that :)
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: paicrai on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:30:15

I think it's clear that my education was far different from most other people in this thread. I was taught about the horrific things that the Nazis did, but also about the amazing things they did for their country & people. It seems that most other people have been brainwashed into thinking that the Nazis were pure evil, and the worst group of people in the history of mankind. It really sickens me how biased the education system is in America & Britain (excluding my school, apparently). Instead of pointing out what the Nazis did wrong and what they did right, then trying to learn from those things, we just brainwash our population into thinking they were pure evil from an early age. Anyone who says otherwise is branded as anti-semitic, racist, and a monster. Any media which says otherwise is branded as extremist. Banning Nazi-related avatars is no better than this.

If bad groups of people = offensive groups of people, then you should find my current avatar FAR more offensive than any Nazi-related avatar. Barack Obama - the face of the US Government. The most horrific, unethical, monstrous group of people that's existed in the past few hundred years. A group of people that has decimated and torn apart countries just to line their own pockets. A group of people who is in the process of ripping their own country apart. Again, just to line their own pockets. You say 6,000,000 Jews (a grossly exaggerated figure), I say 6,000,000 Libyans.

I saw billnye apologizing for his Rommel avatar. Firstly, I would like to give a reason for me having Hitler as my avatar. It was because, iirc, I lost a bet. I won't use that to defend myself though, as I probably would have had him as my profile picture at some point even if it weren't for that. While I agree with most people - Hitler had some pretty serious mental problems and did some pretty ****ty things, I have a tremendous amount of admiration for the way he came to power, and his intentions for his country and people. You cannot deny he loved his country and his people, and you cannot deny that while he was in power (until before the start of WW2) he transformed his country into a powerhouse against all odds.

I will not apologize for having Hitler as my avatar. If you were offended by a picture of a person who died 70 years ago then you deserve to be offended. :)

I'm sure I'll be branded as a racist anti-semite for this post. Frankly, I do not care. I would rather be branded as such than surrender my opinions to political correctness.
god what the **** am i reading
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:31:17
Then you'd also be wrong about that :)
I'm talking about public schools specifically, e.g Eton. I don't mean private schools or independent schools, but rather the more expensive, more elite public schools.

I may still be wrong, just wanted to make sure there's no confusion.

Anyway, you picked on my explanation of something. It was not really relevant to any argument, I just wanted to make it clear to people living outside the UK. Perhaps a better explanation would've been :

Public schools are fee-paying schools that usually cost quite a lot.

god what the **** am i reading
Right on time! ;D


Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Lurch on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:33:21
What a time to be alive
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:35:06
As someone who went to public school I have a somewhat different view...


I also went to state school and the 'best' state school in my area, so I worry about your idea of a 'good' education
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:41:01

I think it's clear that my education was far different from most other people in this thread. I was taught about the horrific things that the Nazis did, but also about the amazing things they did for their country & people. It seems that most other people have been brainwashed into thinking that the Nazis were pure evil, and the worst group of people in the history of mankind. It really sickens me how biased the education system is in America & Britain (excluding my school, apparently). Instead of pointing out what the Nazis did wrong and what they did right, then trying to learn from those things, we just brainwash our population into thinking they were pure evil from an early age. Anyone who says otherwise is branded as anti-semitic, racist, and a monster. Any media which says otherwise is branded as extremist. Banning Nazi-related avatars is no better than this.

If bad groups of people = offensive groups of people, then you should find my current avatar FAR more offensive than any Nazi-related avatar. Barack Obama - the face of the US Government. The most horrific, unethical, monstrous group of people that's existed in the past few hundred years. A group of people that has decimated and torn apart countries just to line their own pockets. A group of people who is in the process of ripping their own country apart. Again, just to line their own pockets. You say 6,000,000 Jews (a grossly exaggerated figure), I say 6,000,000 Libyans.

I saw billnye apologizing for his Rommel avatar. Firstly, I would like to give a reason for me having Hitler as my avatar. It was because, iirc, I lost a bet. I won't use that to defend myself though, as I probably would have had him as my profile picture at some point even if it weren't for that. While I agree with most people - Hitler had some pretty serious mental problems and did some pretty ****ty things, I have a tremendous amount of admiration for the way he came to power, and his intentions for his country and people. You cannot deny he loved his country and his people, and you cannot deny that while he was in power (until before the start of WW2) he transformed his country into a powerhouse against all odds.

I will not apologize for having Hitler as my avatar. If you were offended by a picture of a person who died 70 years ago then you deserve to be offended. :)

I'm sure I'll be branded as a racist anti-semite for this post. Frankly, I do not care. I would rather be branded as such than surrender my opinions to political correctness.
god what the **** am i reading

Hitler praise being justified. Or something similar. Scary isn't it.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:47:34

I think it's clear that my education was far different from most other people in this thread. I was taught about the horrific things that the Nazis did, but also about the amazing things they did for their country & people. It seems that most other people have been brainwashed into thinking that the Nazis were pure evil, and the worst group of people in the history of mankind. It really sickens me how biased the education system is in America & Britain (excluding my school, apparently). Instead of pointing out what the Nazis did wrong and what they did right, then trying to learn from those things, we just brainwash our population into thinking they were pure evil from an early age. Anyone who says otherwise is branded as anti-semitic, racist, and a monster. Any media which says otherwise is branded as extremist. Banning Nazi-related avatars is no better than this.

If bad groups of people = offensive groups of people, then you should find my current avatar FAR more offensive than any Nazi-related avatar. Barack Obama - the face of the US Government. The most horrific, unethical, monstrous group of people that's existed in the past few hundred years. A group of people that has decimated and torn apart countries just to line their own pockets. A group of people who is in the process of ripping their own country apart. Again, just to line their own pockets. You say 6,000,000 Jews (a grossly exaggerated figure), I say 6,000,000 Libyans.

I saw billnye apologizing for his Rommel avatar. Firstly, I would like to give a reason for me having Hitler as my avatar. It was because, iirc, I lost a bet. I won't use that to defend myself though, as I probably would have had him as my profile picture at some point even if it weren't for that. While I agree with most people - Hitler had some pretty serious mental problems and did some pretty ****ty things, I have a tremendous amount of admiration for the way he came to power, and his intentions for his country and people. You cannot deny he loved his country and his people, and you cannot deny that while he was in power (until before the start of WW2) he transformed his country into a powerhouse against all odds.

I will not apologize for having Hitler as my avatar. If you were offended by a picture of a person who died 70 years ago then you deserve to be offended. :)

I'm sure I'll be branded as a racist anti-semite for this post. Frankly, I do not care. I would rather be branded as such than surrender my opinions to political correctness.
god what the **** am i reading

Hitler praise being justified. Or something similar. Scary isn't it.

There is scarier stuff going on in Wales
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:48:30
There is scarier stuff going on in Wales
Good one.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: madhias on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:48:37
You cannot deny he loved his country and his people, and you cannot deny that while he was in power (until before the start of WW2) he transformed his country into a powerhouse against all odds.

OMFG.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:50:23
OMFG.
Well, can you deny it? Just the same as I cannot deny that he did terrible, terrible, unjustifiable things, I don't think you can.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 15:55:33
Against all odds = being stopped from ending a race
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: madhias on Fri, 01 May 2015, 16:02:29
OMFG.
Well, can you deny it? Just the same as I cannot deny that he did terrible, terrible, unjustifiable things, I don't think you can.

Nothing was turned in 'a powerhouse against all odds'. Seriously, don't show your political attitude in that way in an official, open forum. I don't know what you want to achieve, but it is stupid to compare completely different things to trivialize the nazis.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 16:11:00
Photekq is a good example of why the new EU's laws on the right to be forgotten on the Internet are a good thing
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Fri, 01 May 2015, 16:17:02
Photekq is a good example of why the new EU's laws on the right to be forgotten on the Internet are a good thing
Usually I stop talking when a discussion deteriorates to a comment like this. I'll do what I usually do, unless something else meaningful gets posted.

Thanks baldgye & others.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 16:30:26
Don't thank me, thank the third reich
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 16:36:05
Now the real question is.. Can I post girls in bikinis?
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: tjcaustin on Fri, 01 May 2015, 16:36:51
Now the real question is.. Can I post girls in bikinis?

Heidi did nothing wrong.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 01 May 2015, 16:37:12
Only Nazi bikinis
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Fri, 01 May 2015, 16:41:43
Now the real question is.. Can I post girls in bikinis?

Heidi did nothing wrong.

Mine and hitler's wet dream
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: greath on Fri, 01 May 2015, 16:45:19
Only Nazi bikinis

(http://i.imgur.com/72IlxjX.jpg)
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: nubbinator on Fri, 01 May 2015, 17:19:49
Now the real question is.. Can I post girls in bikinis?

Heidi did nothing wrong.

Mine Mein and hitler's wet dream
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: berserkfan on Fri, 01 May 2015, 20:33:39
Sorry, got a bit distracted there. I actually intended to just make a 1-line post which directly addressed the OP :

If someone has a Nazi-related avatar that does not make them a white supremacist. It does not even mean they support/agree with any of the Nazis actions. Don't make assumptions like that.

I respect the KKK because they love their people.

Photekq, it is clear from your post why we can communicate and have mutual respect. You were making points that I wanted to drive home as well. I am suspecting you have some pretty good education here because it doesn’t sound like the type of education that comes from reading The Sun and Dandy and Beano comics.

The purpose of learning history is to learn from other people’s experiences so that we do not repeat the same mistakes. We all say Nazis now are evil, but a lot of people in Europe, German and otherwise, believed in Fascism in the 1930s.

Fascism also originated in an environment of racial supremacy. When Hitler was putting people in gas chambers, he was Adolf come Lately. Other European empires had spent hundreds of years genociding non European peoples. The Germans merely made these horrors even more systemic and blatant. EG most of the expansion of the USA was filled with small scale massacres of ‘redskins’ and giving them smallpox blankets and what not, rather than committed at a single concentration camp with gas ovens with huge piles of bodies that would sicken the conscience of even committed KKK members.

You wanna talk about numbers, USA, Spain, England, Portugal, Russia and Belgium have way more numbers than the 11-12m attributed to the Holocaust. Before we ban Hitler’s avatar, let’s ban Andrew Jackson’s first. He drove out the Untermenschen and created much Lebensraum for white Americans but was smart enough to do it via death marches so there isn’t a single mass grave for future historians to exhume.

Demik, I don’t think we ‘respect’ anyone because they loved their people. Photekq was probably pointing out that in the Nazis’ eyes, they were good people because Jews were bad. This is a terrible delusion to act on, but everyday people continue to act on their delusions and in the 21st century we have worse delusions to worry about since Neo Nazis are fringe movements. Go ask the Muslims about their holy wars. Many Muslims believe violent jihad is sanctioned by the Koran and permissible in any place not under Islamic law (dar al Harb). But when you ask them what kind of God their Allah is, they will say Allah is benevolent and compassionate and what not.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: pasph on Fri, 01 May 2015, 21:23:48
I hope sprit will deliver my stuff soon so i can be out of all of this ****
Dear berserkfan the fact that nazi's crimes against mankind, cause this is what they are not simply something someone 'don't like' or 'aren't cool', are not the only one in the history don't makes Hitler a good guy or simply an old story we can forget
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: greath on Fri, 01 May 2015, 22:00:38
I hope sprit will deliver my stuff soon so i can be out of all of this ****
Dear berserkfan the fact that nazi's crimes against mankind, cause this is what they are not simply something someone 'don't like' or 'aren't cool', are not the only one in the history don't makes Hitler a good guy or simply an old story we can forget

Berserkfan wasn't saying Hitler was a "good guy." He was saying that there were aspects of the man, when taken out of context, that could been seen as redeemable qualities.

Pointing out intelligence in a man who committed horrible deeds is not saying the deeds are not horrible. That would be like saying "you can't say any positive traits about the US founding fathers because they owned slaves," or "you can't say anything positive about Nirvana's music because Kurt Cobain committed suicide." 

What Hitler did is unforgivable, and I don't know anyone sees those actions in any other light. That does not mean we cannot respect his ability to motivate a nation of people. Mutual exclusivity does not apply here, and I'm pretty sure that's what Berserkfan was trying to say.

My apologies Berserkfan if I am putting words in your mouth which you did not intend.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Sat, 02 May 2015, 04:19:18
Hitler was not intelligent, he was a lunatic.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: tufty on Sat, 02 May 2015, 06:03:46
Holy ****, I can't believe I'm about to post in this.

Hitler's rise to power was via the German Worker's Party DAP which became the National Socialist Party or, as we now know it, the Nazi party.  From its inception post WWI, this was an anti-marxist, anti-democratic, and, above all, anti-semitic party.

As an aside here, anti-semitism isn't anything new over here in the old world.  In the 13th century, before any of you hamburger wogs had decided to bugger off and **** the redskins up, us brits were shipping jews out into the channel on the pretext of "repatriating" them, dumping them overboard, and coming back into harbour to pick up  new load.  During and after the black death, guess who was blamed?  So, it's not new.  But "Mein Kampf" went quite a lot further than most.

So, the DAP was, like current day France's "Front National", the UK's "UKIP" and so on, a single-issue party; one who blamed the woes of a nation on the "other".  One who claimed to be for and of "the people" but was actually far closer to a feudalistic "us and them" setup.  Parties like these prolifer in difficult times, and post 2008 it's hardly a surprise to find parallels the world over.  The only real difference is that Hitler appears to have actually believed the tripe he was spouting.  And boy, did he spout.  He was a very good speaker, but being a good speaker doesn't make one a good person (see, for example, Jeffrey Archer - an atrocious author but excellent speaker - he could have been prime minister if it weren't for the ****s, the insider trading and the lying to parliament, really).  Hitler didn't have to worry about niceties like that though - anyone who stood in his way got a visit from the boys in brown shirts.

Hitler turned Germany into a "powerhouse" by borrowing and printing money, and by forcing companies into state control.  Inflation soared, wages fell.  The only way Germany could possibly have repaid its debts was via aggressive expansion.  Unemployment fell mainly by removing women from the workforce to make space for the massively unemployed male population, and later, of course, by conscription.

The financial crisis created by Hitler's policies, of course, was put down to the jews.

It was all smoke and mirrors.  Hitler might not have been the most evil man to have ever lived, nor even the most evil man of the century, but he was certainly no economic genius.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Air tree on Sat, 02 May 2015, 06:08:15
What a cluster **** this thread has turned into...(Not that it wasn't one at the start)  :))
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Sat, 02 May 2015, 06:14:50
What a cluster **** this thread has turned into...(Not that it wasn't one at the start)  :))

I guess that's what happens when you call out a bunch of Hitler fans eh? Lmao
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: iri on Sat, 02 May 2015, 07:09:28
What a cluster **** this thread has turned into...
dear, this is the thread about white supremacy.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: greath on Sat, 02 May 2015, 07:20:48
Tufty: so you are saying you don't believe Hitler had great demagogic skill? To me this is an intelligence. I do not presume to know how economically intelligent Hitler was.


I guess that's what happens when you call out a bunch of Hitler fans eh? Lmao

I'm arguing that you are falling into the Fallacy of Composition/Division. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_division) For example, I can't tell if you're an idiot that is simply missing what I'm saying, or if you're a troll. This does not mean you know little about keyboards. If I had said "therefore you must know nothing about keyboards," I would be taking the same pitfall :)

Many people possess the ability to respect a specific characteristic of a person without respecting the person as a whole. I guess you don't, but that doesn't mean you should put words others' mouths. Especially such a vile association as calling someone a "Hitler fan." It deeply offends me that by saying "Hitler had a couple of qualities, such as demagogic skill, that I can respect," you would attempt to associate me as someone who is a fan of the overall vile man.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Sat, 02 May 2015, 07:25:39
I'm an idiot or a troll for not sharing the same opinion as you and having very little interest in discussing it?
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Sat, 02 May 2015, 07:43:49
I guess that's what happens when you call out a bunch of Hitler fans eh? Lmao
Oh go away. I'm not a fan of Hitler. I respect some (that word is very important) of the things he did, and I think he was a brilliant public speaker. I am NOT a fan of him on the whole, and I do not respect him on the whole.

Besides, I did not respond because I got called out for being a 'Hitler fan', I responded because Novus was clearly suggesting that all Nazi-related avatars be removed. That's something I strongly disagree with. Not because I don't want to see the Nazis get trodden on, but because I don't think any avatars should be deleted.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: greath on Sat, 02 May 2015, 07:46:27
I'm an idiot or a troll for not sharing the same opinion as you and having very little interest in discussing it?

You're either:

* An idiot for the inability to realize that saying "Hitler had 1 or 2 respectable qualities" does NOT make a person a "Hitler fan" (again, Fallacy of Division).

or

* A troll for trying to rile people up by accusing them of being "Hitler fans."

I guess a third option is you have very little care for your words, so I apologize for narrowing your accusation down into only those two categories. If it is simply you have little care then realize that accusing someone of that is generally NOT taken lightly.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Sat, 02 May 2015, 07:51:31
Or another option, I'm off the opinion Hitler had no redeeming features.... Except his dreamy eyes ofc *O*
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: greath on Sat, 02 May 2015, 07:59:46
Or another option, I'm off the opinion Hitler had no redeeming features.... Except his dreamy eyes ofc *O*

Lol. And I mean... the guy did kill Hitler...
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Air tree on Sat, 02 May 2015, 08:04:54
Or another option, I'm off the opinion Hitler had no redeeming features.... Except his dreamy eyes ofc *O*
Just stare into those blue oceans  on that mans face.
(http://rarehistoricalphotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/A-rare-color-photo-of-Adolf-Hitler-which-shows-his-true-eye-color-date-unknown.jpg)

*I'm not a nazi supporter, just Hitler eye lover.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: demik on Sat, 02 May 2015, 08:51:08
Hitler did have good taste in women

White girls <3
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Sat, 02 May 2015, 09:04:57
Hitler did have good taste in women

White girls <3

His cousin was pretty fly, shame she had a big mouth tho...
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: tufty on Sat, 02 May 2015, 09:55:15
Tufty: so you are saying you don't believe Hitler had great demagogic skill? To me this is an intelligence. I do not presume to know how economically intelligent Hitler was.
Of course he was a demagogue, but I really don't think he was all that intelligent.  That's not what I was arguing anyway - Photekq claimed Hitler was some sort of economic genius, having turned Germany into a powerhouse, and that this was somehow worthy of respect. 

I'm just pointing out that, in fact, all he did was rob Peter to pay Paul, and blame it all on the Jews.  If you want an analogy of Hitler's policy from 1933 through to 1939, go and take out multiple loans you can't hope to ever pay back, guaranteed on a property which is not yours, then use the money to go and buy yourself a Ferrari.  If anyone points out that the Ferrari isn't really yours, call them a filthy islamic terrorist and have them sent to Guantanamo.

those eyes, though.  *swoon*
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: neverused on Sat, 02 May 2015, 10:26:49
Maybe you should use the Report feature for these "offensive" posts instead of *****ing like a 12 year old girl?  Not removing certain images or threads about downloading content is not the end of the world. I personally don't engage in or condone either, but it's as simple as ignoring it. This is the Internet, there will always be something you don't like and the moderation staff can only catch so much. Remember too that they have to use their own judgment to take action and you probably won't always agree with that.

But don't be a prick. Don't have a history of being an obnoxious poster and post 17 Mb gifs, then get butt hurt when they are removed and try to tattle on other people. Man up and deal with your **** first. Don't try to attribute psuedo-racism to the moderating staff just because you don't like having action taken against your post but not others. If you do, you come off like a *****y little kid stomping his feet that has no appreciation for the true impact of his accusations.  I would hope that if you had a better understanding of the impact of actual racism or discrimination, you'd be able to recognize it when it actually did occur and not just when you want to find something to complain about.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: paicrai on Sat, 02 May 2015, 14:39:52
Maybe you should use the Report feature for these "offensive" posts instead of *****ing like a 12 year old girl?  Not removing certain images or threads about downloading content is not the end of the world. I personally don't engage in or condone either, but it's as simple as ignoring it. This is the Internet, there will always be something you don't like and the moderation staff can only catch so much. Remember too that they have to use their own judgment to take action and you probably won't always agree with that.

But don't be a prick. Don't have a history of being an obnoxious poster and post 17 Mb gifs, then get butt hurt when they are removed and try to tattle on other people. Man up and deal with your **** first. Don't try to attribute psuedo-racism to the moderating staff just because you don't like having action taken against your post but not others. If you do, you come off like a *****y little kid stomping his feet that has no appreciation for the true impact of his accusations.  I would hope that if you had a better understanding of the impact of actual racism or discrimination, you'd be able to recognize it when it actually did occur and not just when you want to find something to complain about.
ahhahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahhahahhahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: neverused on Sat, 02 May 2015, 14:41:54
Maybe you should use the Report feature for these "offensive" posts instead of *****ing like a 12 year old girl?  Not removing certain images or threads about downloading content is not the end of the world. I personally don't engage in or condone either, but it's as simple as ignoring it. This is the Internet, there will always be something you don't like and the moderation staff can only catch so much. Remember too that they have to use their own judgment to take action and you probably won't always agree with that.

But don't be a prick. Don't have a history of being an obnoxious poster and post 17 Mb gifs, then get butt hurt when they are removed and try to tattle on other people. Man up and deal with your **** first. Don't try to attribute psuedo-racism to the moderating staff just because you don't like having action taken against your post but not others. If you do, you come off like a *****y little kid stomping his feet that has no appreciation for the true impact of his accusations.  I would hope that if you had a better understanding of the impact of actual racism or discrimination, you'd be able to recognize it when it actually did occur and not just when you want to find something to complain about.
ahhahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahhahahhahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
As always, you are so well spoken paicrai.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: paicrai on Sat, 02 May 2015, 19:31:41
Maybe you should use the Report feature for these "offensive" posts instead of *****ing like a 12 year old girl?  Not removing certain images or threads about downloading content is not the end of the world. I personally don't engage in or condone either, but it's as simple as ignoring it. This is the Internet, there will always be something you don't like and the moderation staff can only catch so much. Remember too that they have to use their own judgment to take action and you probably won't always agree with that.

But don't be a prick. Don't have a history of being an obnoxious poster and post 17 Mb gifs, then get butt hurt when they are removed and try to tattle on other people. Man up and deal with your **** first. Don't try to attribute psuedo-racism to the moderating staff just because you don't like having action taken against your post but not others. If you do, you come off like a *****y little kid stomping his feet that has no appreciation for the true impact of his accusations.  I would hope that if you had a better understanding of the impact of actual racism or discrimination, you'd be able to recognize it when it actually did occur and not just when you want to find something to complain about.
ahhahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahhahahhahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
As always, you are so well spoken paicrai.

Maybe you should use the Report feature for these "offensive" posts instead of *****ing like a 12 year old girl?
This is the Internet
But don't be a prick.
Man up and deal with your **** first.
*****y little kid stomping his feet
hell yeah son
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: berserkfan on Sat, 02 May 2015, 22:09:03
I dislike it when people don’t make the effort to read my posts and understand the complexity and nuances and breadth of what I am saying.

Like most Europeans pasph has this annoying habit of saying how evil the Nazis/ Germans were -and deliberately shy away from any honest talk about evil in perspective (which is far from a Nazi or German thing).

Incidentally, Mussolini used concentration camps and death marches on Libyans 6 years before Hitler came to power, and wiped out 1/3 of Cyrenica. Mussolini started a Lebensraum movement on Libya in 1937, before Hitler invaded Poland to do the same. He evicted lots of Libyans to make room for colonists to farm. Today Italians are still electing Mussolini’s clan into power. Thanks to having switched sides at the right moment the Italians got away without having to be denazified/ de-fascisted.

Unless you are an European from one of the ‘bullied small guys’ eg Ireland/ Latvia/ Slovakia or one of the Scandinavian countries, don’t let me hear you talk about how uniquely bad Hitler was or I will pull examples of systematic genocide, large scale anti-Semitism, ethnic cleansing, etc from your own (conveniently forgotten) history.

Incidentally, Hitler played the Good Guy when Mussolini invaded Ethiopia. IIRC he was the only Western power to send aid to the Ethiopians. In contrast the ‘good guys’ who have currently written history, UK and France, were very quick to recognize Italian rule over Ethiopia and fell over each other to get sanctions against Italy (imposed by the League of Nations) lifted so that they could get back to normal business exporting to Italy.

The lesson I get from European history is not that ‘Hitler is evil’, but that ‘be on the side of the victors and you can write all the propaganda you want’. I wonder how many people realize that the English colonized, enslaved and genocided the Irish for hundreds of years before the IRA harmed a single English hair. There were a lot of vile Englishmen who, thanks to being on the winning side of history, don’t get bad press unlike Hitler.

Tufty, I love your economics discussion about Hitler’s policies. A lot of people think Hitler was a great economist when he actually happened to ‘do the right thing’ (for most unemployed Germans) by using the wealth of an ethnic minority to fund it. He could have 'done the right thing' by using the wealth of all wealthy Germans to help out the impoverished German masses who were genuinely desperate at that time, but that would have been Communist and therefore 'Evil'...
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: tufty on Sun, 03 May 2015, 02:03:42
A lot of people think Hitler was a great economist when he actually happened to �do the right thing� (for most unemployed Germans) by using the wealth of an ethnic minority to fund it.
Not initially.

He *blamed* the jews, who, according to Nazi propaganda had caused the hyperinflation episode in 23/24, the great depression and the Weimar deflation policy in 30-32. It was only later that he had the bright idea of making the jews pay for their imagined "crimes".

Ironically enough, his economic "miracle" of 33-39 was based on exactly the same policies as the hyperinflation episode - inflate the problem away by printing banknotes you can't hope to redeem.  The rest was a bunch of massive public works programs and war preparations, along with removing women (and, of course, jews) from the workforce, to reduce apparent unemployment.  Any financial repercussions were blamed on the stinking jew bankers, and anyone who complained got the living **** kicked out of them.  If they were lucky.

He didn't "do the right thing" at all.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: pasph on Sun, 03 May 2015, 05:48:50
I dislike it when people don’t make the effort to read my posts and understand the complexity and nuances and breadth of what I am saying.

Like most Europeans pasph has this annoying habit of saying how evil the Nazis/ Germans were -and deliberately shy away from any honest talk about evil in perspective (which is far from a Nazi or German thing).

Incidentally, Mussolini used concentration camps and death marches on Libyans 6 years before Hitler came to power, and wiped out 1/3 of Cyrenica. Mussolini started a Lebensraum movement on Libya in 1937, before Hitler invaded Poland to do the same. He evicted lots of Libyans to make room for colonists to farm. Today Italians are still electing Mussolini’s clan into power. Thanks to having switched sides at the right moment the Italians got away without having to be denazified/ de-fascisted.

Unless you are an European from one of the ‘bullied small guys’ eg Ireland/ Latvia/ Slovakia or one of the Scandinavian countries, don’t let me hear you talk about how uniquely bad Hitler was or I will pull examples of systematic genocide, large scale anti-Semitism, ethnic cleansing, etc from your own (conveniently forgotten) history.

Incidentally, Hitler played the Good Guy when Mussolini invaded Ethiopia. IIRC he was the only Western power to send aid to the Ethiopians. In contrast the ‘good guys’ who have currently written history, UK and France, were very quick to recognize Italian rule over Ethiopia and fell over each other to get sanctions against Italy (imposed by the League of Nations) lifted so that they could get back to normal business exporting to Italy.

The lesson I get from European history is not that ‘Hitler is evil’, but that ‘be on the side of the victors and you can write all the propaganda you want’. I wonder how many people realize that the English colonized, enslaved and genocided the Irish for hundreds of years before the IRA harmed a single English hair. There were a lot of vile Englishmen who, thanks to being on the winning side of history, don’t get bad press unlike Hitler.

Tufty, I love your economics discussion about Hitler’s policies. A lot of people think Hitler was a great economist when he actually happened to ‘do the right thing’ (for most unemployed Germans) by using the wealth of an ethnic minority to fund it. He could have 'done the right thing' by using the wealth of all wealthy Germans to help out the impoverished German masses who were genuinely desperate at that time, but that would have been Communist and therefore 'Evil'...
PM sent
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Signature on Sun, 03 May 2015, 10:46:32
 Kim Jong Un?
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: iri on Mon, 04 May 2015, 08:58:31
what great did hitler do to his nation? let's probably start with this little war that cost Germany over 7 million lives.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: baldgye on Mon, 04 May 2015, 10:13:45
what great did hitler do to his nation? let's probably start with this little war that cost Germany over 7 million lives.

Only to cut unemployment! He really is an economic genius!
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: Photekq on Mon, 04 May 2015, 10:18:17
Only to cut unemployment! He really is an economic genius!

By the time WW2 started he had transformed his country into a powerhouse

If you want to argue against what I've said, fair enough. But at least actually read it properly first. I only talked about up until the war started. I never said a word about after it started.
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: paicrai on Mon, 04 May 2015, 17:27:40
is it true that bill and photek tried to boycott sniper elite v2 because you can shoot hitler in the nuts
Title: Re: What's our stance on white supremacy here?
Post by: samwisekoi on Mon, 04 May 2015, 19:16:31
WTF?

Ok, I've been away for a while, and when I saw this thread I seriously thought "ha ha, a joke thread about ALPS switches".  Seriously.

Nope, wrong.  It is a thread about impartial moderation with a long-winded OP in possibly questionable taste.  Which HoffMyster actually answered!

Ok, then we get the typical GH back-and-forth BS, escalating into many instances where I see asterisks instead of words.  Still, ok for the OT sub-forum, I suppose.

But then, **** me if this thread doesn't ACTUALLY BECOME A THREAD ABOUT ***ING WHITE SUPREMACY AND NAZI HISTRIONICS!  Seriously?

Astoundingly, I find myself agreeing with ****ing Demik here.  It is the Internet; get a thicker skin.  However -- and this is where I am going to depart from that little train -- THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL FORUM.

So.  I think the question has been asked and answered.  Are annoying 17MB GIFs cool?  Nope.  Are illegal or sexual images in avatars cool?  Nope.  Are pictures of historical figures illegal or sexual?  Still nope.

But has this thread deteriorated to the point where it should be locked?  Oh yes.

Gentle readers, please take further commentary to /pol/ or some such if you really must continue.  Actual human beings with feelings who happen to be moderators here, please lock this or let me know that I can do so.

Now, everybody please go look at Matt3o's latest cool design or even my latest semi-technical build-log.

Thank you very much and have a nice day!

 - Ron | samwisekoi