I was a bit off, but not much. Stalin killed 43,000,000 million civilians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democide I wrote "(Jewish) Stalinism/communism' because Stalinism is offspring of Jewish communism.
so, our friend Tiraille is one of them, right? just ban him again, block the mail address domain name for the period of time of your choice, and notify the domain owner that he's been banned and is a repeat offender, and that you will block the domain name permanently if they don't inform you of measures taken to avoid a repeat... there is a very good site that lists all black-listed domain names fyi...
This is obviously a business. But I think banning anybody is bad business. I learned a bit watching people respond to publisher. His verbal assults cause people to react. I learned a little bit about both sides. when I hear people spouting stuff about the talmud approving molestation - I will now know the guy saying it is clueless. I think I am better off for reading some of the far out stuff. It is interesting to see the work of certain minds.
The problem with banning posters and censoring posts is that it starts us down a very slippery slope. Today, Publisher is banned. Tomorrow, who? People who don't accept the global warming alarmism perhaps? Isn't that the point of calling GW skeptics "deniers?" To put them on the same moral plane as holocaust deniers? It's ironic that the same people who want to ban un-PC viewpoints will also argue that it is an outrage to end public funding for artwork that insults religion. Unless of course that religion is islam, then it is an outrage to disrespect it.
"It's ironic that the same people who want to ban un-PC viewpoints will also argue that it is an outrage to end public funding for artwork that insults religion. Unless of course that religion is islam, then it is an outrage to disrespect it." It is a commentary on who has the power. What is political correct or not is determined by who has the power.
Yes, inform the owner of hotmail.com a.k.a Microsoft that one of their accounts is a repeat offender at ET. Threaten Microsoft that if they don't do something to stop their members creating multiple hotmail accounts in order to post questionable content on ET then ET will have to block hotmail permanently. I'm sure once given this ultimatum the humble Microsoft will act swiftly to thwart these evil-doers rather than risk the wrath of the mighty ET.
Not always Nutmeg. Often the squeakiest wheel get's the grease. Nixon's "silent majority" get the shaft. A couple of years ago I had the unfortunate but neat experience of being a Congressional candidate in a suicide run. No one knew I was alive. In big cities like NY, L.A. and Chicago, cities who may have a dozen or more Congressional's occurring within their metro areas, coverage is slow for the uneventful shoe-in races. But then I made some remarks about Islam. Nothing over the top. Certainly not the type of stuff I say fucking around with people's heads on ET. Just pedestrian thoughts like expansionist Islam is a threat, we should monitor activity in rogue Mosques, that kind of common sense. Then CAIR called a press conference. Who the hell is CAIR? By the end of the week I was in newspapers and right-wing websites, shit I was listening to NPR one afternoon and some sandal wearing pinko called my dialogue "hateful." Within weeks a newspaper falsely attributed a quote to me as saying the teachings of Islam itself (the Koran) promotes violence. I never said anything (nor do I believe that) of the kind. What was ironic was that CAIR didn't respond to my remarks as much as challenge my right to make those remarks. When people label statements as "insensitive" or "hateful" they're merely dodging the debate over the validity of the comments in question. People have a right to hate. People may have a reason to hate.
For those uninformed, Baron responds to noise. There were lots of complaints, therefore he acted. Face it, we have a preponderance and dominance of members who are of an ethnic, or religious, or political persuasion and similarity. When those members read something that is attacking their own beliefs, or that they find terribly offensive, they complain to management. If we see similar type of hated speech directed at their opponents (say Muslims), they don't complain. It is all about the number of complaints that determines what or who gets banned or threads closed and removed, not much more than that... If you are a minority, you have little power with complaints, and if you are in the majority of complainers, you generally get response. Those thinking that there is going to be some sort of fairness in the way in which threads are moderated, or members banned etc, don't understand the way politics really works here at ET. It is all about the squeakiest collective wheel getting the grease. There is no logical reason to tolerate hate speech towards one group and not another group, unless the decision making is on the basis of noise. I suspect this is the fact, because I was once warned about the use of the term "fucking" Christians, and apparently many complained. I seriously doubt those same would have complained if I had said "fucking" Muslims, or "fucking" Hindus, etc. People around here generally don't complain on real logical principals, but on the basis of what bothers them personally. Baron has pretty much confirmed this in the past, stating that he is apolitical and just trying to silence the noise when it happens. This is Baron's world, his rules, his management...we just post in it...
It is for Mel Brooks, the makers of the Producers, etc ..... It's not a fun joke for the propagandists, but they themselves certainly tend to be one. "Hilter a kind and gentle man" ????, ... I mean, that's gold.