BR Reminder?

[Kadagar_AV]

The rules have not been 'Updated' there was a reminder they are there. If you read the rules, you will see the following to answer your question:


I hope this answers your question.

It does.

Sorry, I still have a hard time shaking off the last moderators impact.

MEH!! My bad, please lock or preferably delete thread.

[Hax]

How can one attack culture without attacking ethnicity

The two are not the same.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Actually, I thought it was ironic that Kadagar asked the question in the OP.

On some level, he has embodied the answer to his own question for months if not years.

He's taken shots at "USAnian" values, and ways of doing things -- in short, an attack on aspects of culture -- while using labels that make it clear that no particular US ethnicity is involved. The USA, being multi-ethnic, has a culture that superimposes (though never supplants) ethnic culture.

[Kadagar_AV]

Actually, I thought it was ironic that Kadagar asked the question in the OP.

On some level, he has embodied the answer to his own question for months if not years.

He's taken shots at "USAnian" values, and ways of doing things -- in short, an attack on aspects of culture -- while using labels that make it clear that no particular US ethnicity is involved. The USA, being multi-ethnic, has a culture that superimposes (though never supplants) ethnic culture.

I still find the rule problematic, as the line between ethnicity and culture at times are razor thin... Take gypsies as an example, or jews. Also, discussing racial traits would be.... problematic... no?

Would I be allowed to say that white guys sure seem to run worse than black guys? It's (kind of) an attack on ethnicity, but then a quick look at the olympics make it a fair point.

Is there a USAnian ethnicity? How many hundred years can you have a nation before you start talking ethnicity?

However, I think moderation works real well now, great even. Specially when you consider the 50 shades of grey that is the BR

[Beskar]

You want to know a secret, @Kadagar_AV ?

The way I do I moderation is like this. If you can make a thought-out logical and reasoned post, I will not give you an infraction. If you make a foolish error of judgement, you can usually catch yourself sometimes and edit it away, and I won't give you an infraction.

I would only give an infraction for foolishly-given statements that are obviously offensive and I will 'deduce' the nature of the spirit it is given. You are simply spiteful and hateful, trying to be as offensive as possible, I will point it out and give the infraction. If you simply badly worded something and it is clear you tried, I would/will message you pointing out where you went wrong and how to do it better next time and I may be lenient, perhaps just edit the post and/or give a warning, infraction still if really bad but I would attempt to assist you in my message.

I would avoid to be seen as being bias too, so I would never punish you for thinking red is the best colour, opposed to blue, for example. If a post is openly offensive to me myself. I would 'report' the post myself, then edit any major infringements, then I would have another moderator/admin review the post to cast any judgements upon it.

I would like/hope to think you are in safe-hands, if not, feel free to report me, even!

[Hax]

I still find the rule problematic, as the line between ethnicity and culture at times are razor thin... Take gypsies as an example, or jews. Also, discussing racial traits would be.... problematic... no?

I do not feel qualified to talk about the Roma, however...

Which Jews are you talking about?

It's funny to read stuff like this, partially because your reasoning seems to imply that globalisation and people mixing is a modern process, and that mixed marriages are a new phenomenon. However, a quick glance at the history of basically..anywhere reveals that through trade, or conquest, or for whatever other reason, people have been moving from one place to another for a very long time.

To use an example; when I was in Tallinn (Estonia) this summer, I was standing in the lobby of this hostel and I was talking to some random guy about how I'd been travelling through Estonia for some time, at which point he said that I wouldn't find any "true" Estonians in Tallinn. I asked him to specify what he meant exactly by saying that, especially when you look at Estonia's history, and especially when you consider that it was under German, Danish, Swedish, Polish-Lithuanian and Russian domination at different times in history.

Of course, this is just an example, but "even" nations that have never been dominated by any foreign power will have had ethnic mixing. It's been happening for a very long time and it will probably happen for a very long time as well. Cultural identification has nothing to do with "race" or "ethnicity" but with how people see themselves and others.

What is the difference between a Norwegian, Swede, a Dane, an Icelander and a Faroer?

[Kadagar_AV]

I do not feel qualified to talk about the Roma, however...

Which Jews are you talking about?

It's funny to read stuff like this, partially because your reasoning seems to imply that globalisation and people mixing is a modern process, and that mixed marriages are a new phenomenon. However, a quick glance at the history of basically..anywhere reveals that through trade, or conquest, or for whatever other reason, people have been moving from one place to another for a very long time.

To use an example; when I was in Tallinn (Estonia) this summer, I was standing in the lobby of this hostel and I was talking to some random guy about how I'd been travelling through Estonia for some time, at which point he said that I wouldn't find any "true" Estonians in Tallinn. I asked him to specify what he meant exactly by saying that, especially when you look at Estonia's history, and especially when you consider that it was under German, Danish, Swedish, Polish-Lithuanian and Russian domination at different times in history.

Of course, this is just an example, but "even" nations that have never been dominated by any foreign power will have had ethnic mixing. It's been happening for a very long time and it will probably happen for a very long time as well. Cultural identification has nothing to do with "race" or "ethnicity" but with how people see themselves and others.

What is the difference between a Norwegian, Swede, a Dane, an Icelander and a Faroer?

You seem to read a whole lot of stuff into what I said. Don't. Doesn't make you come off as very intellectual.

Oh, and if you claim there is no such thing as "Jews", giving them a state sure seems like a bad idea. Though they seemed all up for it, no?

Cultural identification has nothing to do with "race" or "ethnicity" but with how people see themselves and others.

Yeah, but how they see themselves and others are tied together with what race and ethnicity they are... So.... Yeah... Kind of a moot point.

[Sigurd]

What is the difference between a Norwegian, Swede, a Dane, an Icelander and a Faroer?

I feel this question has not been answered properly.

Outsiders might not see any obvious differences, but they exist.

Swedes might claim to be good at skiing, but reality shows they suck. Dane skiiers are non-existent. If a dane claims to be a skiier, its a lie. Iceland? ... HAHAHAHHA!!! Færøying.. what?
Danes are simple potato farmers - and seem to have one stuck in their throats (maybe they could try rice for a change?). Their laid-back farmer style made them snooze when the North Sea was divided between equal superiors.
Swedes on the seas? HAHAHA.. Their best effort capsized 2 meter from port. Danes on the seas is non-existent. If a dane claims to be a sailor, its a lie.
Icelanders are more or less the ancestors of Norwegian convicts, not unlike the relation between UK and Australia. There is a significant difference though - the mother land is superior in every aspect.
Færøyningene are the unholy union of Irish and Scottish settlers and Norwegian rejects.

Which can only lead to one conclusion: Norwegians are superior in every way.
Wait.. I am not done.
Within the borders of the blessed realm of superior beings, some are more exalted. The holy beings of the west coast outshine any of the other lesser beings.
But one group of the exalted and holy most perfect creation of the almighty, is more godly then the rest. Yes I am referring to the Bergenser. Oh Holy and most sacred of Gods creations, angels dwelling on sacred soil, barely able to stay material.
One more whiff of goodness will uproot this most sacred of cities and be places alongside the city of Enoch in the eternal realm of blessed exaltedness.

Which leads to the final conclusion - Norway, the blessed realm is surrounded by evil lesser beggar/liar nations. Any attempt by any of them to claim superiority over Gods people in the North are lies. You have been forewarned and will therefore clearly see it for what it is when materialized - as it will, in this thread.