|
Damn, that hurts.
Gary Kirkham
A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Does this mean then that every post that mentions politics, sex, or religion should be flagged and reported in here from now on?
Or is it just the politics, sex, and religion that some disagree with that?
Cos there is plenty that gets brought up in the lounge, plenty that just gets ignored, plenty that leads to interesting, adult discussions.
I do not believe that anyone reported the signature in question for flouting the rules, they did so because they object to the anti Isreal sentiment of it. There was an article in the UK recently about how public figures that stand up against Isreal have an unfortunate habit of turning up dead.
I myself had a link to a political petition, albeit a local one, in my sig for quite some time. There was no objection or reporting of that that I am aware of.
Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them.
|
|
|
|
|
Those rules are for the lounge, so you can move politics and others to the soapbox...
The problem is that a signature containing politics going with you everywhere...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent point, and it reinforces the point of this whole discussion: what should we do?
We have rules and we try and enforce them when we're aware of issues. We can't be everywhere all the tine so lots of things get through, with the community generally picking up on the worst of them.
In this particular case it generated quite a bit of email to myself and Sean so we took a look, had a chat with the poster, and then it turned into a debate for the point of having a debate instead of trying to reach mutual understanding.
chriselst wrote: there is plenty that gets brought up in the lounge, plenty that just gets ignored, plenty that leads to interesting, adult discussions
That's the core, right there.
Interesting adult conversations are great. We have multiple forums that cater to multiple different topics. We have C# for C#, VB for VB, and the Soapbox for all the big political, religious ans sexual (sometimes at the same time) debates. The lounge is like the front room. Everyone's polite, everyone should be respecting everyone else, and everyone should have a decent, relaxing time.
If they want to start getting into a good, down-and-dirty debate then move to the side and go for it. But don't have it in the doorway.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
And thank you for your honesty and stating what is obviously true. It isn't politics, its the anti Israel right wing sentiment that objectionable, and clearly the attempt to repress it is the most blatant form of bias and mob censoring.
|
|
|
|
|
Your current signature-link (as in this post) is your doing, or someone hacked in?
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Its my doing, do you like it? I thought it humourous.
|
|
|
|
|
In fact and in contrast to your previous sign (which I didn't found abusive) this one I found abusive...And forgive me, but also a bit childish...Sorry to say, but it is much more possible that the new sign will cause a ban on you much faster than the old...
|
|
|
|
|
Well, as someone pointed out, swear words are legal in sigs, and this is merely a pictorial representation.
Anyway, its meant to be funny. Hopefully you understand that, no?
|
|
|
|
|
It isn't the words that matters, but the purpose of them.
Your old sig wasn't offensive, your new one was. Especially as the address was a bit unclear if you haven't followed the whole mess.
Good thing you removed it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A bit flat, but I can't see how one can find THAT abusive!
|
|
|
|
|
I hope you realize that no signatures displayed now...
|
|
|
|
|
It seems as if we have all lost our signatures.
Has Chris done a blanket ban on them despite the overwhelming support for my sig in this thread? Seems so.
|
|
|
|
|
He maybe wanted a silent night
|
|
|
|
|
My half cent:
The link is to support a cause. So if someone really cares for animals he could have a link to support PETA - even if that would offend ME (as PETA is aginst scientific experimentation on animals), or some other could have a link to a petition for gay rights in some country and that could offend some extra-conservative user.
Now, would you really want to ban anything not related to technical topics only because a limited number of users brought in the "abuse report" war?
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not even sure why this is being discussed so much. In fact, almost all of the discussion is on whether it is offensive or not. That is not the point, as I see it. In fact I see it very black and white. The Lounge rules state no politics and the sig clearly had a political message in it. Case closed. It violates the lounge rules.
Now, do I personally care enough to mark it abusive, no. But it is against the rules so if anyone marks it abusive, then they are correct.
I say leave it all as is.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Your words, I fully support.
Bruno
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
So everything that anyone decides to perceive as breaking the rules should be voted as abuse?
Right.
Might as well quit the site today, because it'll turn into an unbearable rat-hole within a couple of months.
Or did you mean that it's only the things that you decide to perceive as breaking the rules should be voted as abuse?
If so, I'll quit the site right this minute, because it'll turn into an unbearable rat-hole within a couple of weeks.
"Playing nicely with the other children" does not include the statement "I'll decide what's right and wrong!"
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: So everything that anyone decides to perceive as breaking the rules should be voted as abuse?
|
|
|
|
|
It is very hard to define what is _not allowed_. Personally I would define what is allowed: In technical section only technical things are allowed, no matter it is an answer, comment, signature *) or what else.
*) Now the question remains: Is a signature very different from the user profile - where one can put "everything"? Either by text (in worst case a "special" user name) or an "special" picture...
It becomes a never ending storry.... I'm hoping that users here are that polite simply to accept the rules. If not, abuse reports have to be taken into account.
Conclusion: Only neutral things in technical part!
Take an example from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasonry[^]
Bruno
[sorry for my strange English, I hope you can understand my message]
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
While I agree that considering the rules, the link is breaking them and as such shouldn't be allowed. However, to say that the Matt is doing so just to bring attention to himself I think is incorrect. This came to a head, in my opinion, because a certain individual (or individuals) is making this personal against Matt because he (or they) perceives Matt as being anti-Semitic and have come to have a personal vendetta against Matt. There have been quite vigorous fights in the backroom considering the Israel/Palestinian issue. And it is clear to me there is the desire to silence Matt at all costs.
While the link text is political and so is the petition, I don't think any reasonable person would find it offensive. Even to those who are quite on the opposite side of the issue from Matt but are fair-minded.
As such, I think Matt or anyone else should be allowed to link to a petition they feel strongly about.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: to say that the Matt is doing so just to bring attention to himself I think is incorrect
Fat_Boy has already said that he just likes a good, hearty debate.
So we're having one
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|