1 month ban cause... biblical saying?

[Kadagar_AV]

The post that started all of this:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=2447689

For lazy readers:

“If you kill anyone, or contribute to the killings of others, I hope the same fate comes to you.

Good luck!

Try and do some good, will you?”


Obviosly a very very VERY bad thing to say.

I mean, who would go eye for an eye (sarcasm), to quote one of the scriptures.

If someone on the forum went out and said he would kill his next door neighbour… That responce would probably have been, well, understating things.

If someone went out on the forum and said that he wanted to kill a human being, that responce would probably have been ok, no?

But hey, if it’s a US army trooper off to have some people killed, then it’s NOT ok?

And please don’t argue the point that US army troopers don’t kill people… It’s kind of what the whole military is meant for, you know, killing beings.


Dear Kadagar_AV,

You have received an infraction at The Guild.

Reason: Minor
-------
In the 'wish me luck in Afghanistan' thread you stated that, if MRD contributes to the killing of another whilst serving, you hope that he himself will be killed. This post is incredibly inappropriate and poorly timed, not to mention bordering on a threat to another member. Please think about what you post before you put it up and remember that wishing violence upon another human being is just plain wrong.
-------

This infraction is worth 1 point(s).

Original Post:
2447689

If you kill anyone, or contribute to the killings of others, I hope the same fate comes to you.

Good luck!

Try and do some good, will you?

Ok… Minor reason, one infraction… I could take that.

But then some points strikes me…. Poorly timed? Seems like the perfect time to remind someone that what goes around comes around (and often harder), and wishing him that he does SOME GOOD.

Then second point… me even bordering to a threat to another member… I have NO idea of what perspective you would need to even come close to reading that post as me threatening another member. No seriously, go back and re-read my post just for laughs.


And third, and this is the most fun one (believe it or not): that a mod gives me a warning point cause… wait for it… wishing violence against another human being is just plain wrong… And my post was about…. Wishing violence against another human being is just plain wrong…

You shouldn’t need an overly alert sarcasm indicator to get the pun.


And again, this all I could take as human error, get the infraction, move on with my life. But this is where the real comedy starts.


Hello Kadagar_AV,

this is a follow up to the infraction you received for your comment in MRD's Afghanistan thread.

Considering the number of patrons who serve(d) in the military (not only US) or who have family/friends in the military your comment was particularly nasty and inappropriate.

To give you some cool down time staff decided to cancel your Backroom access for 1 month effective today (in addition to the WP you received).

Ser Clegane

(cc: Backroom moderators)

First of all Sir Clegane, thank you for spelling my avatar right. You have no idea of how many people miss the subtle nuances of spelling…

So, I get banned for a month… Because you have people in the military (or relatives) on the forum?

So, people doing army time is something the rest of the world should somehow bow down to, and not question?

Bear in mind, this was posted in the BACKROOM where we discuss politics (and sensible topics).

I would argue that my post was political as well as sensible.

Is the backroom some place where we can discuss worldwide politics as well as sensible questions, or do we have some military dogma (western ((US)) centered) to follow?

Again, the initial minor infraction I could shrug off as human error. The one month ban I find hard to understand for making the point of “eye for an eye” or “what goes around comes around” and ending it with my best wishes for the individual to do some good…

[Centurion1]

my cousins in iraq and afghanistan dont need your advice. And i who am about to join the military don't need your advice, neither do my father, uncle, or two grandfathers. neither does my friends father who just died in afghanistan after getting deployed. yeah he got what was coming to him didnt he.

ill be waiting for you in a month.

:thumbsdown:

[Myrddraal]

I think the point isn't so much that you object to people killing each other, but rather that you wished death on a member who was currently about to undertake a great physical and mental challenge. What if, as a soldier going into a warzone, MRD killed someone in the last defence of his life, would that be ok? But you didn't qualify you statement at all, you just said 'I hope you die'. If you can't see how that's bordering on a threat, I think perhaps you might be having a hard time looking beyond the political issues and seeing the person behind the username who you are addressing, and seeing how your words will affect them. Perhaps a break from the backroom would be a good thing if this is the case?

[Kadagar_AV]

my cousins in iraq and afghanistan dont need your advice. And i who am about to join the military don't need your advice, neither do my father, uncle, or two grandfathers. neither does my friends father who just died in afghanistan after getting deployed. yeah he got what was coming to him didnt he.

ill be waiting for you in a month.

:thumbsdown:

First of all... dont you kind of prove my point be pointing to military examples as a reason why the post would be wrong?

secondly: My Captain just got killed in Afghanistan, I who has allready served in the army in actuall warfare am not very impressed by your willingness to join up...

Secondly, your cousins in Afghanistan probably would appreciate my advice. I mean, strict operational advice. If you want some to pass on, contact me in PMs. Remember you can filter it, so no political issues will filter through, they are not members of the backrrom but you are. This post is about backrrom policy, not warfare in afghanistan.

BUT again, if you want to filter some advice, I can send a PM about where to get new boots that is way better at keeping sand away (and brand so they can order of internet), and also where you can get the very best socks. I could also give some advice about how to dress properly in Afghanistan, as the US standard uniform is either cold/warm weather, whereas nights there can be utterly cold and days very very warm. Then some other advice. Again, been there done that, offer you to be abel to filter some to them, stuff I KNOW is not US protocol. Why? Cause you are a fellow orgah, I am sure these people mean something for you.

And I do prefer having fellow orghas cousins being more comfortable even in a war where I do not care who die and not.

Get my point?

My father was captain in the soviet red army, mountain ranger, served in tceckoslovakia (sp?)...

My grandfather was AUSTRIAN... In the WWII he was to busy to blow up Hitlers trains in the resistance movement to care much about nationalistic interests...

You know, my grandfather was oen of them who went against his own country to do what is RIGHT, based on an INFORMED descission... I am sure your grandfathers did the same... They didnt care about nationalistic propaganda but based their own oppinion... right?

Sorry for the loss of your friends, where were they stationed?

Respect to you though, for having the guts to, even with friends dead there, master teh guts to go to (possibly if you qualify) Afghanistan to FINALLY capture Usama Bin Laden and once and for all stop terrorism...


[insert emoticon of happy american cheerleader smiley]

[Kadagar_AV]

I think the point isn't so much that you object to people killing each other, but rather that you wished death on a member who was currently about to undertake a great physical and mental challenge. What if, as a soldier going into a warzone, MRD killed someone in the last defence of his life, would that be ok? But you didn't qualify you statement at all, you just said 'I hope you die'. If you can't see how that's bordering on a threat, I think perhaps you might be having a hard time looking beyond the political issues and seeing the person behind the username who you are addressing, and seeing how your words will affect them. Perhaps a break from the backroom would be a good thing if this is the case?

Funny, I do not see that part of my post. Would you mind showing me?

PS: Oh you meant the part of me saying that if he kills someone I hope the same fate comes to him?

Well, I SERIOSLY hope he doesnt kill someone... this would in return mean I hope no one kills him... so I dont quite get how you can argue that I " hope he would die"?

[drone]

Given the nature and intent of the thread, the post was in very poor taste. Given the operational info given later in the thread, yup, still in very poor taste. I'm not really sure why you would think that post would not result in mod action.

If you pay Swedish taxes, you contribute to the killing of people in Afghanistan. I contribute to the killing of people in Afghanistan. Most members on this board contribute to the killing of people in Afghanistan. This doesn't mean we like that fact. Or appreciate people wishing us harm because of it.

[Myrddraal]

Perhaps I should have said 'I hope you would die'. Does that make it better? Not really. You are wishing death upon another member, albeit conditionally, it's still not very nice and definately personal.

[pevergreen]

First of all Sir Clegane, thank you for spelling my avatar right. You have no idea of how many people miss the subtle nuances of spelling

I sympathise with you.


secondly: My Captain just got killed in Afghanistan

Lets hope this doesnt turn into a "my x got y more than your z did"

I know you don't intend for it to, just came across that way a little to me.

Comparing what you said with a biblical saying is a bit off, the connection is there, but its weak. IMO the words were poorly chosen, and I thought MRD was more of a Non Combat Role. (I may be wrong, just the impression I've gotten from talking/playing Left4Dead with him)

[Askthepizzaguy]

Speaking as someone who thinks you have every right to say this publicly outside of the forum, where personal freedom of expression usually trumps how people might feel about it, I would like to say this:

We in the forum are peaceful denizens of a benevolent Tosacracy. I can't post certain songs, images, or say certain words, such as a four-letter word which doesn't actually cause any harm to anyone. I have pretty much every right to say it right now, in my own home. Or out on the street. I can even post it online and make pages and pages covered with the word. But, here in the Benevolent Tosacratic Republic of Orgahstan, I must obey certain rules. I'm not one who has the rules committed to memory, as I am not one of the Mod-gods. I am not all-knowing and all-powerful, and my little opinion on the matter, matters as much as yours does, which is not much in the scheme of things.

I think it may be a stretch to say that what you were doing was threatening Major Robert Dump. You weren't posting lewd pictures at him (He might like that, who knows?) or swearing, or mocking his belief system. That's why, when I saw your post, I read it, sighed, and replied in a way which I felt would ease the backlash. I could smell the animosity about to come... well, it did. What you said was quite offensive to many people. Others might hold a view that they agree with you. But in the end, if what you're saying is causing a disruption which threatens to derail the thread, or if what you're saying should be said in another thread, I've noted that the Mod-gods sometimes lock the thread, or remove the offending posts, or implore you to take your business to a different thread. In a thread about well-wishing for a guy who is ordered into a dangerous combat zone, you decided to make a political statement, and word it in such a way that would be quite offensive to people. Not a crime in and of itself, most anywhere else. But on the .org that can get dangerously close to trolling just to provoke a reaction, and in any case, it's neither welcome nor acceptable on a thread like that. Much like how in this country, when a soldier dies and has a funeral, the people who get their jollies from shouting "you deserved it" to the dead soldier and their family and friends have to stay back and out of sight. They can say what they want, but there's much to say about politeness and civility, especially in a difficult time.

Here, you won't find such liberal standards for speech. If no one but the Mod-god thinks it is offensive, then it is offensive enough to potentially be removed. It is only their judgment which matters. If other Mod-gods disagree with the decision, then maybe there is wiggle room and it gets put back. But if a moderator and many respondents think what you said would be better off said elsewhere or not said at all, the best policy is to remove it to avoid a flame war. Here, you can't even speak languages other than English unless you go to the talk-your-own-language thread. There are certain community standards which are upheld by a staff of volunteers to the best of their ability. While some of their decisions may not seem fair to you or me, it is their house, their rules.

Let's reverse it. Let us suppose someone started a thread wishing someone well for choosing to become a pacifist, religious monk. Now imagine I came in and stated my opposition to religion, saying it's all a bunch of baloney, and that this person was making a stupid choice, and the best way to make peace is to prepare for war, and other such anti-pacifist things. Maybe I have every right to say that, but that particular thread, it is out of place, off-topic, and borderline trolling. If my posts were removed because they were in bad taste, that's because they are. If they are removed because they are off-topic, that's because they are. If my posts are removed because they are borderline trolling, well, it wasn't even borderline. It was a very deliberate attempt to poo all over this other person's livelihood, beliefs, and disrupt the thread (which was non-political) to make a political statement. It was a troll.

As for the 1 point infraction or a ban, I don't know if they were deserved, but then again, I don't know what else was going on or what might have been said privately or if you had other points or if this wasn't the first time you did that. I'm just another hapless denizen of Orgahstan... thankfully it isn't my role to judge. The staff has given me points I disagreed with. Not much you can do about that except what you're doing, which is disputing the severity of the reaction.

I wish you well in that endeavor. I just wanted to give you another perspective, which hopefully illuminates how others may have perceived your post and why they aren't objecting to the time-out. Me personally, I wouldn't have banned you, or even reported the post, but I might have moved your post out of there and given a no-point warning. I'm a big softy like that. But, I can also see why someone might ban, even with my limited knowledge of what happened. The post was IMO inappropriate and it did invite a staff reaction of some kind.



By the way I'm aware these comments are from the peanut gallery, please feel free to ignore them.

[Beskar]

There are different ways of looking at things Kadagar_AV, and your post in many ways is looking at things in the wrong way.

Sorry to use this example, but lets say Centurion1, he is a proud member who is willing to risk his own life for his country, doing what a great many people wouldn't even dare do. The war in the Middle-East might be a sham, but you cannot fault the people of the armed forces who are sent there because Wall Street wanted to make a buck off the oil prices. Many of the people might go there on reconstruction, others for security to help the locals, other on Bomb-defusion duty such as in Hurtlocker, to protect children and civillians of the area.

I think with the forum, I am sure everyone would be open and admit that saying the war is a sham, and insulting the people behind it making those decisions for their motives in their matter, but the big point in contention is insulting those who are willing to die for their nations, and unfortunately, you have to also sympathiese with them, because the great many probably do not want to go near Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place but have to. I believe MRD the member you said that comment to was on Convey duty and Combat Medic duty. His task was to make sure food, water and supplies reach people through a wartorn place, and to provide medical care. He wasn't there to "have a pop at rag heads" and I doubt many soldiers actually have this mentality either.

The tl;dr version: Attack the people behind the war, and not the victims of their decisions.

[Andres]

Well, I SERIOSLY hope he doesnt kill someone... this would in return mean I hope no one kills him... so I dont quite get how you can argue that I " hope he would die"?

Ehm, if what you wanted to say was:


I really hope you don't have to kill anyone. Do some good over there, that country needs all the help it can get! Good luck and come back safe!

Then:


If you kill anyone, or contribute to the killings of others, I hope the same fate comes to you.

Is about the worst way to say it...

But then again, I'm not a native speaker either, so what do I know? Silly me.

[Beskar]

Most simplistic way of looking at that statement is "Death of others = Death for yourself".

Though, I doubt it was the meaning of that taking human life is such an emotional pain and burden, that it could be the death of your former self.

[PanzerJaeger]

A month is nothing... consider yourself lucky.

[caravel]

A one pointer for such a comment seems unduly harsh IMHO - though I do think you were merely trolling for responses.

I think some people need to realise that not only are such comments in poor taste but indeed so are threads of that type. Many of us, including myself, don't "support the troops" or the war and thus cannot logically support those that go to take part in such illegal conflicts. There are two sides to every war, in supporting/condoning such threads the .org is, perhaps unwittingly, taking sides (or at least appearing to do so)?

Personally I think somone needs to inject a negative comment into such threads, if only to show how hypocritical they appear. Without different perspectives on such issues, then what point is there in the backroom? In all cases I think staff should try to remain impartial rather than resorting to the "we have members who serve in the military" argument.

There is another post in the thread where the poster encourages the "killing of extremists". Personally I find this sentiment absolutely abhorrent.

:2cents:

[Kagemusha]

First of all... dont you kind of prove my point be pointing to military examples as a reason why the post would be wrong?

secondly: My Captain just got killed in Afghanistan, I who has allready served in the army in actuall warfare am not very impressed by your willingness to join up...

Secondly, your cousins in Afghanistan probably would appreciate my advice. I mean, strict operational advice. If you want some to pass on, contact me in PMs. Remember you can filter it, so no political issues will filter through, they are not members of the backrrom but you are. This post is about backrrom policy, not warfare in afghanistan.

BUT again, if you want to filter some advice, I can send a PM about where to get new boots that is way better at keeping sand away (and brand so they can order of internet), and also where you can get the very best socks. I could also give some advice about how to dress properly in Afghanistan, as the US standard uniform is either cold/warm weather, whereas nights there can be utterly cold and days very very warm. Then some other advice. Again, been there done that, offer you to be abel to filter some to them, stuff I KNOW is not US protocol. Why? Cause you are a fellow orgah, I am sure these people mean something for you.

And I do prefer having fellow orghas cousins being more comfortable even in a war where I do not care who die and not.

Get my point?

My father was captain in the soviet red army, mountain ranger, served in tceckoslovakia (sp?)...

My grandfather was AUSTRIAN... In the WWII he was to busy to blow up Hitlers trains in the resistance movement to care much about nationalistic interests...

You know, my grandfather was oen of them who went against his own country to do what is RIGHT, based on an INFORMED descission... I am sure your grandfathers did the same... They didnt care about nationalistic propaganda but based their own oppinion... right?

Sorry for the loss of your friends, where were they stationed?

Respect to you though, for having the guts to, even with friends dead there, master teh guts to go to (possibly if you qualify) Afghanistan to FINALLY capture Usama Bin Laden and once and for all stop terrorism...


[insert emoticon of happy american cheerleader smiley]

And might i ask where was this Swedish deployment that you served in? I thought you were a ski instructor.

[Andres]

A one pointer for such a comment seems unduly harsh IMHO - though I do think you were merely trolling for responses.

I think some people need to realise that not only are such comments in poor taste but indeed so are threads of that type. Many of us, including myself, don't "support the troops" or the war and thus cannot logically support those that go to take part in such illegal conflicts. There are two sides to every war, in supporting/condoning such threads the .org is, perhaps unwittingly, taking sides (or at least appearing to do so)?

Personally I think somone needs to inject a negative comment into such threads, if only to show how hypocritical they appear. Without different perspectives on such issues, then what point is there in the backroom? In all cases I think staff should try to remain impartial rather than resorting to the "we have members who serve in the military" argument.

There is another post in the thread where the poster encourages the "killing of extremists". Personally I find this sentiment absolutely abhorrent.

:2cents:

Point taken :bow:

However, when posting on an internet forum, how you say something is as important as what you are saying.

Posting:



It saddens me to read that you're going to risk your life in Afghanistan when there are much better causes than that one, but that's just the pacifist in me.

That said, I hope you'll be doing something good over there and I sincerely hope you won't have to kill anyone.

Allthough I strongly disagree with this war (and with any other war), I insist on wishing you all the best. Good luck and please, do come back safe.

:bow:


Would have been perfectly acceptable...

At the .Org, we behave civilised and respectful.

[PanzerJaeger]

A one pointer for such a comment seems unduly harsh IMHO - though I do think you were merely trolling for responses.

I think some people need to realise that not only are such comments in poor taste but indeed so are threads of that type. Many of us, including myself, don't "support the troops" or the war and thus cannot logically support those that go to take part in such illegal conflicts. There are two sides to every war, in supporting/condoning such threads the .org is, perhaps unwittingly, taking sides (or at least appearing to do so)?

Personally I think somone needs to inject a negative comment into such threads, if only to show how hypocritical they appear. Without different perspectives on such issues, then what point is there in the backroom? In all cases I think staff should try to remain impartial rather than resorting to the "we have members who serve in the military" argument.

There is another post in the thread where the poster encourages the "killing of extremists". Personally I find this sentiment absolutely abhorrent.

:2cents:

I do not believe members are required to open topics that offend their sensibilities, or respond to them. "Injecting negative comments" into a thread where a member simply announces his departure - stating no opinion on the war either positive or negative - is just rude. If a member wants to state his or her opinion on the war, the "new topic" button is at the top of the page.

:2cents:

[caravel]

Point taken :bow:

However, when posting on an internet forum, how you say something is as important as what you are saying.
Which is why I said the post was a clear trolling attempt.

Perhaps the infraction should have been given for trolling the thread and the OP, not his voicing an opinion on those that participate in the war in Afghanistan?


At the .Org, we behave civilised and respectful.
There is a thin line between this and overcencorship - but yes "point taken".

:bow:

[Andres]

Perhaps the infraction should have been given for trolling the thread and the OP, not his voicing an opinion on those that participate in the war in Afghanistan?



The infraction was not given because he voiced an opinion on the war (did he?), but for the following reasons:


In the 'wish me luck in Afghanistan' thread you stated that, if MRD contributes to the killing of another whilst serving, you hope that he himself will be killed. This post is incredibly inappropriate and poorly timed, not to mention bordering on a threat to another member. Please think about what you post before you put it up and remember that wishing violence upon another human being is just plain wrong.

[gollum]

Originally posted by Ernest Hemingway:
Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.


Originally posted by Count Arach:
...and remember that wishing violence upon another human being is just plain wrong.


Originally posted by Josef Stalin:
Kill one and its a tragedy, kill millions and it is a statistic

PS can org posts/messages now be "too short"?!

[pevergreen]

Always could be. Need to be 3 non code characters.

[gollum]

thanks pever

[CountArach]

I gave you the warning point, so I guess you deserve a full and proper rationalisation for it. That is what you are about to receive...

If someone on the forum went out and said he would kill his next door neighbour… That responce would probably have been, well, understating things.

If someone went out on the forum and said that he wanted to kill a human being, that responce would probably have been ok, no?

But hey, if it’s a US army trooper off to have some people killed, then it’s NOT ok?
A complete strawman argument... the two threads you suggested would have been trolling for responses in the OP and would be locked on principle. In this case MRD was going out into a war zone, risking his life, and was just looking for a bit of support at what was a hard time. There was no commentary at all about him going out hoping to kill people, there was no mention of serving his country, there was nothing, just a notification that he was going. Hence your two hypothetical examples are wrong from the outset.

And please don’t argue the point that US army troopers don’t kill people… It’s kind of what the whole military is meant for, you know, killing beings.
Thank you, I, as a pretty hardline pacifist, was not at all aware of that.

But then some points strikes me…. Poorly timed? Seems like the perfect time to remind someone that what goes around comes around (and often harder), and wishing him that he does SOME GOOD.
You did not make a single reference to this in your post. Not a single one at all.

Then second point… me even bordering to a threat to another member… I have NO idea of what perspective you would need to even come close to reading that post as me threatening another member. No seriously, go back and re-read my post just for laughs.
Fair point, I mis-worded the infraction. What I was aiming at was more along the lines of proxy-wishing violence upon him. IE - wishing that, in a certain situation, death would come to those who caused death.

And third, and this is the most fun one (believe it or not): that a mod gives me a warning point cause… wait for it… wishing violence against another human being is just plain wrong… And my post was about…. Wishing violence against another human being is just plain wrong…
I'm really wondering about your policy on the death penalty right about now, but this truly isn't the place for it. Regardless, you were wishing injury upon a forum member, even if that injury was conditional upon the injury of another. We do not accept that a valid reason here.

There is another post in the thread where the poster encourages the "killing of extremists". Personally I find this sentiment absolutely abhorrent.

:2cents:
I had overlooked that in the thread and thus didn't notice it, but it is dealt with now. There is a report post button in the bottom left of every posts. If you hit that and fill it out quickly we get an Email warning and that makes it a hundred times easier to deal with.

I do not believe members are required to open topics that offend their sensibilities, or respond to them. "Injecting negative comments" into a thread where a member simply announces his departure - stating no opinion on the war either positive or negative - is just rude. If a member wants to state his or her opinion on the war, the "new topic" button is at the top of the page.

:2cents:
I'm not going to say this to PJ often, but spot on.

And now, for my more full explanation of my thought-process (at least, as I remember it given it was a couple of weeks ago). Tempers always flare in the Backroom and they can cause a thread to ignite at the drop of a hat. Your post had a truly incendiary potential given that it was a blatantly political comment in a thread that was not designed as such. MRD has been a regular fixture in the Backroom for a number of years and him posting there to tell us he was going was not an invitation to comment on the war or the military, it was supposed to be an 'I'm going away to Afghanistan, just letting you guys know' thread. Just because it is in the Backroom doesn't mean that it has to be political. Your comment would have sparked a flame war if it had not been reported by a member, thus allowing me to cool it while I could. That fits my definition of trolling and as such you received the ban. The 1 month ban from the Backroom came after further discussion amongst the staff relating to a previous case where someone said something similar and it was then agreed to give that person a temporary cooling off period from the Backroom, much as you are on now. You will be welcome back at the end of your month.

It is now 1am and I can't be bothered to type any more.

EDIT: Was I just quoted in reference to Hemingway? :inquisitive:

[pevergreen]

EDIT: Was I just quoted in reference to Hemingway? :inquisitive:

I think so. If you're going out to a forest with pine needles on the floor let me know...

I've only read For Whom the Bells Tolls...great book :beam:

[gollum]

Nope, you were quoted with Hemingway.

[CountArach]

Nope, you were quoted with Hemingway.
Yah that one. Doing essays at 1:30am has ruined my mind.

[The Wizard]

Boo-hoo. I think it's pretty obvious that in the Backroom, you don't wish for another poster's death. See you in a month, chum.

[gollum]

Sorry CA, didn't meant it personally in any case for you or the particular case. I'm just making a general point - that's all.
:bow:

[CountArach]

Sorry CA, didn't meant it personally in any case for you or the particular case. I'm just making a general point - that's all.
:bow:
Lol don't worry, I'm trying to make the connection between the posts, but my brain is not quite up to scratch at the moment. I'm just confused more than anything.

[Louis VI the Fat]

For consideration / making the life of the mods a little bit more complicated:

I am not opposed to the death penalty, nor am I a pacifist. I often do wish people who wantonly kill others receive a taste of their own.



However:

Presuming one accepts a 'mainstream / western' view of the war in Afghanistan, then there is no reason to assume that MRD is going to wantonly kill people. MRD is a respected forum member, not known for a spiteful, hateful character. One does not need to pre-emptively deplore him not to go about wantonly killing people.


If one does not accept a 'mainstream / western' view of the war in Afghanistan, then the issue at hand becomes altogether more complicated.
Suppose the following hypothetical examples:
A well-respected British, and a well respected Argentinean member of this board both go off to war over the Falklands. How does one bid them farewell?
When an Israeli member goes off to a war bombing Gaza?
A Palestinian member goes off to 'assymetrical' warfare?
A Pakistani jihadist announces he is off to the war in Afghanistan?

In this last example, how many members here would bid him goodbye with the words 'if you kill somebody, I hope the same fate befalls upon you'? Would they all get banned fotr a month? Would it be .org policy that the replies of other patrons are limited to wishing him good luck and a safe return?

[Andres]

For consideration / making the life of the mods a little bit more complicated:

I am not opposed to the death penalty, nor am I a pacifist. I often do wish people who wantonly kill others receive a taste of their own.



However:

Presuming one accepts a 'mainstream / western' view of the war in Afghanistan, then there is no reason to assume that MRD is going to wantonly kill people. MRD is a respected forum member, not known for a spiteful, hateful character. One does not need to pre-emptively deplore him not to go about wantonly killing people.


If one does not accept a 'mainstream / western' view of the war in Afghanistan, then the issue at hand becomes altogether more complicated.
Suppose the following hypothetical examples:
A well-respected British, and a well respected Argentinean member of this board both go off to war over the Falklands. How does one bid them farewell?
When an Israeli member goes off to a war bombing Gaza?
A Palestinian member goes off to 'assymetrical' warfare?
A Pakistani jihadist announces he is off to the war in Afghanistan?

In this last example, how many members here would bid him goodbye with the words 'if you kill somebody, I hope the same fate befalls upon you'? Would they all get banned fotr a month? Would it be .org policy that the replies of other patrons are limited to wishing him good luck and a safe return?

I think it should be pointed out that the reason for the ban is, as The Wizard said:


I think it's pretty obvious that in the Backroom, you don't wish for another poster's death.

You don't wish for the death of a fellow .Org member.

MRD just said: "hey guys, I'm going off to Afghanistan." He didn't make a political statement by that. He's a regular BR'er, he knows we care about him and he says bye. Some people wished him luck and hoped for his safe return.

In the BR, you can open a thread about how unjust the war in Afghanistan is, you can open a thread to explain your pacifist viewpoints, to attack the foreign US politics and what not.

But you cannot, under no circumstances, wish for the death of a fellow .Org member.

[Myrddraal]

I think the key point here is that you made a personal point, which including wishing a member of the forum would die. Personal attacks are against the forum rules. You can attack someone's arguments, but you can't attack them personally.

[CountArach]

In this last example, how many members here would bid him goodbye with the words 'if you kill somebody, I hope the same fate befalls upon you'? Would they all get banned fotr a month? Would it be .org policy that the replies of other patrons are limited to wishing him good luck and a safe return?
If he was widely known to hold strong anti-western sentiments (presumably this hypothetical person had made radical comments in the past in order to be defined as a jihadist) and knowingly wanted to kill people, then their thread would be locked and probably deleted. MRD's thread made no such allusions.

As for the action I would take against those who replied before the locking, I would dish out PM warnings to those people, and I did in fact have to send out at least one for a response to Kadagar in this thread.

[Louis VI the Fat]

But you cannot, under no circumstances, wish for the death of a fellow .Org member.



Hello my fellow orgahs.

I am off to fight British imperialist terrorism by bombing the London Underground. I hope you'll be stopped by any means necessary before the act.

Should you kill anybody, I hope the same fate will befall youWhat is .org policy here? Will there be a ban for orgah X?


Slightly more hypothetical:



Hello my fellow orgahs.

I am writing this from my Brussels hideout, which the Belgian asylum agency has provided me with. My real name is Osama Bin Laden.Bastard, I pray that you'll end up on the gallows.Does orgah Y get banned?


Just to be clear (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?126743-The-Official-wish-me-luck-in-Afghanistan-thread&p=2442204&viewfull=1#post2442204)

[Andres]

Silly examples.



But you cannot, under no circumstances, wish for the death of a fellow .Org member.

I think that's clear enough, no?

[caravel]

:laugh4:

[Louis VI the Fat]

Hello my fellow orgahs.

I am writing this from my Brussels hideout, which the Belgian asylum agency has provided me with. My real name is Osama Bin Laden.Silly examples.Silly? Really? :



Belgian joke to cry over : Belgian Offices of counter terror investigative agency burglarised

September 4, 2006
Translation by Beila Rabinowitz director of MIM:


Burglary at anti terror agency


The building which houses the Combined Anti Terrorism Group (AGG) on the night from Thursday to Friday was burglarised on the night of Thursday to Friday.
Weapons and other items were stolen. The AGG is the agency which collects and analyses all the information over terrorist groups.
"On the premises of the AGG several easily sold items,such as weapons, were taken. Preliminary assessments show that no information or containers with information were stolen", according to the anti terror agency.
According to Luc Verheyden,the director of the agency, it is most likely a case of petty crime and no important information dissappeared.


The thieves too the weapon of one of my colleagues and left with other easy to sell objects which they can easily fence on the black market: A motorcycle jacket, small amounts of money, and other things.
In the rest of the building the thieves took off with laptops and other items.
At present their is no sign of the thieves. Verheyden said there are likely to have been several perpetrators. The investigation is being handled by the Brussels public prosecutor.
Oh, choke on it, you meddlesome pest.Does hypothetical orgah Undres receive a ban? :balloon2:

[Banquo's Ghost]

Louis, you are arguing as if this is a court of law and you want to frame a precedent. You are not going to get an answer that satisfies however much you persist.

The only precedent pertaining here is that Kadagar_AV has form, and whilst he is trying to justify after the fact, his clear intention was to troll with maximum offense.

[Pannonian]

At TWC, I've forumbanned people before for not fitting into the ethos of the place. And in mod forums, even this much reasoning isn't necessary - the mod leader doesn't want you in his forum, so out you go.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I think some people need to realise that not only are such comments in poor taste but indeed so are threads of that type. Many of us, including myself, don't "support the troops" or the war and thus cannot logically support those that go to take part in such illegal conflicts. There are two sides to every war, in supporting/condoning such threads the .org is, perhaps unwittingly, taking sides (or at least appearing to do so)?

I don't think so. One can disagree with a war without condemning the people involved, unless you are very very strict in your judgement. But I think you have to be able to say "this action is wrong, but I can see why a good person would still do it". This hits on louis's point as well. Dare I say crushes it ;)

[gollum]

There are two issues; one is about political morality and the other is about morality.

The political morality issue is "what should armies do?" the morality issue is "why should armies exist?"

In that context its very difficult for men and women of service to say that "this action is wrong, but i can see why a good person would still do it" - because then the army would collapse in a flash. Armies have to be the instrument of state policy and by definition thus they are men and women eager to do so and believe in most cases in whatever the state and so army proposes as the moral context within it will operate.

It is in this bit that society at large can do criticism within a democratic system, because policies and political decisions that send the army out can be influenced (among other things) by the home front - ie public opinion.

It is inevitable that pacifists, leftists, socialists etc would always ask soldiers the "why" they would go to fight - this is their job and role within a pluralistic democratic system - as it is inevitable that soldiers would want to fight - as this is their job and role within the same system. Both are sacred and invaluable all the more because they do for the other what it can;t do by itself ie defend itself and think for itself.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I am off to create the Undres fan club.

[Strike For The South]

There are no issues here.

Kadgar knew what he was doing and he knew what he was doing was against the rules

Now he's posturing for effect

Color me unimpressed

[TosaInu]

Time to close this.