Open Letter

[Stefan the Berserker]

Dear Forum Members,

You might have recognised that the Thread "Socialist International", which was dedicted to Socialdemocrathy, has been closed. The reason is as follows:

This is an open forum for open discussion - threads that try to exclude other patrons in an aggressive manner are not tolerated here.

I reacted very emotionally on the post of the User "Panzerjaeger" who does officially admit to be a Facist, as you can also confirm by following that link.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=50198

Benevolent fascist - which includes beliefs in a strong military, aggressive foriegn policy, traditionalism, nationalism, anti-communism/socialism, government-industry cooperation, a strong role for the military in the government and does not include beliefs in genocide, concentration camps, political assassinations and all those nasty habits that gave fascism such a bad name in the 30s.

The Reasons of my emotional Tensions are very deep. Two of my Grand-Grandfathers have been assasinated during the Dictatorship of the NSDAP, for beeing Members of democrathic Partys. Additionally their Memberships were also made reasons of further Punishment of my Family, absent from the losses caused by the second Worldwar.

The Forumrules protect free speech. But in the Case of Facism I must express that tolerance is a wrong treadment. It allows those people to survive and spread their murderus Ideas in a democrathic society. Facism and Nationalsocialism are beeing outlawed as Criminal and Anti-Constitutional in Germany, further the political parties "Nationaldemocrathic Party of Germany" and "German peoples Union" are beeing observed by the Statesecurity.

To keep the democrathic society save from Facism, there can not be tolerance for these "Viewpoints". However, the Rules force me to tolerate the Person and its Ideological View on the Forum. I do not.

To avoid further violation of the Forumrules I'll no longer answer to threads which contain posts of Panzerjaeger and put him on my Ignorelist. This is my personal freedom and the best Solution absent of beeing forced to deal with him.

Further I want to express that the Forumrules are beeing weak in this Case. I suppose to create the right to form political oriented Usergroups offically, as a further development of for example the "Conservative Club" which obtain their own stickyfied and, if possible, passwordprotected thread in the Backroom or protected subforums. Thus would enable Patrons of the same political Viewpoint to discuss internally and also allow common acitivity of those.

I suggest to create following stickiyfied threads or Subforums of the Backroom:

- Conservative Club (stickyfied)
- Liberal Forum
- Socialist International
- Nationalist Congress

With Socialist Regards,

St.Holz

[Ser Clegane]

Moved to Watchtower as this is mainly about forum policies.

I will post my take on this later, as I am currently busy with some RL work.

[Stefan the Berserker]

However, the possebility for Forum Members to either post in a subforum of the same Ideological Background or in the Backroom reduces direct confrontation of Patrons. It makes it more Confident to seperate Flaming-Candidates from each other.

[Al Khalifah]

But by seperating everyone into groups where they can only communicate with people who have the same belief system that they do, you will not get any serious debate. People will just agree with each other which will be pointless and will lead to group-think policy formations.
In short, such actions would only radicalise people, since they would never encounter an opposing point of view to their own.

[Redleg]

However, the possebility for Forum Members to either post in a subforum of the same Ideological Background or in the Backroom reduces direct confrontation of Patrons. It makes it more Confident to seperate Flaming-Candidates from each other.

If you want that - form your own internet based forum. What the board's admins have developed in this site works just fine. People share their idea's, and express themselves. Sometimes in doing so the conservation gets heated and a few harsh words are exchanged - the moderators for the most part do a decent job on keeping the Backroom fairily cleaned up.

There are some threads I read and never post in because I do not like the direction of the discussion or the content of the discussion - I have discovered that over the last several years its best for me to focus on only two-four politicial threads at anyone times so I don't make a mistake of intermixing the discussions of one thread into another.

I have so individuals that I am caustic to - because that is the way they post, some individuals while we have conflicting views - very rarely break down into "flame" discussion direct at each other.

I think personally - based upon my own experiences in the .Org - that most of the problem you are having can be resolved by moderating your own posting style and subject matter.

Write your response, read your response, edit your response, re-read your response, Post your response - read your response - and then edit again it it doesnt flow or make sense.

Personal attacks directed at an individual because you do not agree with their thought process or ideological views are against the forum rules - and to violate them is no-one fault but your own - since this is a message board - you have plently of time to write, think, and then edit your response before posting.

However by all means attack the idea, attack the subject, be harsh, be criticial, prepare to defend your ideas, defend your philisophy - all without attacking the individual.

Seperate forums with passwords is not the way to go. Just like the other little sub threads titled Clubs are useful for like minded discussion - its more useful to leave them open for everyone to read and post - because it stimulates the discussion and helps to insure people will actually think about what the different views might be on a subject.

Going around only reading views and reports that fit within your expectations and views happens to fall in line with the Thomas Jefferson quote that you see in my sig.

[Ser Clegane]

OK - some comments from my side.

1) First of all I consider it rather poor style to pillory another patron whose political views you disagree with in the way you did it in the closed Backroom thread and here.
PJ clearly stated that he does not believe in fascism that includes e.g., political assassinations - if you do not believe that statement that is conjecture from your side
If you choose not to engage in discussions with certain patrons, just quit doing so - no need to start a proclamation thread.
I am sure we also have patrons whose families suffered from dictatorial communist states - I do not think that gives them the right to make other patrons who support communist ideas accountable for that.

2) I am vehemently opposing the idea of creating password-protected subforums/threads for each political group that believes that it deserves one.
If you feel the urge to form a political forum for like-minded people - by all means do so, but I do not see why the org should be the place for it.
Most people enjoy the Backroom for its variety of opinions and nationalities - it's bad enough that we seem to have some "political camps" and label people as "liberals" or "conservatives" - I see no merit in cementing such a division into political camps.

[A.Saturnus]

Excluding people because of their views is so... fascist. We had several people here advocating communism. If that is allowed, fascism should be allowed too.
Generally, creating subdivisions for certain political views is a bad idea. This is a game forum in the end, the political discussions are just an extra bit. Back when the first clubs were created, the moderators announced that they remain open only under the condition that they don`t cause any problems and may be closed at any moment when the moderators see fit. I`d advise you to remember that and don`t abuse Ser`s plentyful patience.

[Stefan the Berserker]

OK - some comments from my side.

1) First of all I consider it rather poor style to pillory another patron whose political views you disagree with in the way you did it in the closed Backroom thread and here.
PJ clearly stated that he does not believe in fascism that includes e.g., political assassinations - if you do not believe that statement that is conjecture from your side
If you choose not to engage in discussions with certain patrons, just quit doing so - no need to start a proclamation thread.
I am sure we also have patrons whose families suffered from dictatorial communist states - I do not think that gives them the right to make other patrons who support communist ideas accountable for that.

The argumention is very poor. You defend the allowance of posting Extremist Viewpoints, irrelevant wheter they are Communist or Facist, and abolish makeing those people responsible for these Views.

Diffrently to you I prefer to act conseqently with a Sense of responsibility. I don't tolerate these outlawed Ideologies and their defense by you is very questionable.

Secondly I repeat that the Forumrules are weak and contain no abolishment of spreading Extremist Views, which is normally standard on Forums.

Excluding people because of their views is so... fascist.

Diesen Vergleich fasse ich als Beleidigung auf. Vielleicht solltest du vor derartig chauvinistischen Äußerungen einmal nachdenken.

[IliaDN]

Dear Forum Members,

You might have recognised that the Thread "Socialist International", which was dedicted to Socialdemocrathy, has been closed. The reason is as follows:



I reacted very emotionally on the post of the User "Panzerjaeger" who does officially admit to be a Facist, as you can also confirm by following that link.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=50198



The Reasons of my emotional Tensions are very deep. Two of my Grand-Grandfathers have been assasinated during the Dictatorship of the NSDAP, for beeing Members of democrathic Partys. Additionally their Memberships were also made reasons of further Punishment of my Family, absent from the losses caused by the second Worldwar.

The Forumrules protect free speech. But in the Case of Facism I must express that tolerance is a wrong treadment. It allows those people to survive and spread their murderus Ideas in a democrathic society. Facism and Nationalsocialism are beeing outlawed as Criminal and Anti-Constitutional in Germany, further the political parties "Nationaldemocrathic Party of Germany" and "German peoples Union" are beeing observed by the Statesecurity.

To keep the democrathic society save from Facism, there can not be tolerance for these "Viewpoints". However, the Rules force me to tolerate the Person and its Ideological View on the Forum. I do not.

To avoid further violation of the Forumrules I'll no longer answer to threads which contain posts of Panzerjaeger and put him on my Ignorelist. This is my personal freedom and the best Solution absent of beeing forced to deal with him.

Further I want to express that the Forumrules are beeing weak in this Case. I suppose to create the right to form political oriented Usergroups offically, as a further development of for example the "Conservative Club" which obtain their own stickyfied and, if possible, passwordprotected thread in the Backroom or protected subforums. Thus would enable Patrons of the same political Viewpoint to discuss internally and also allow common acitivity of those.

I suggest to create following stickiyfied threads or Subforums of the Backroom:

- Conservative Club (stickyfied)
- Liberal Forum
- Socialist International
- Nationalist Congress

With Socialist Regards,

St.Holz

Lefties are not socialists enough to be stickied?

[PanzerJaeger]

This is very disappointing on a number of levels.

First and foremost, a good thread was closed. JAG made some interesting counter points to my post about Socialism(which was tame, to say the least) and I was looking forward to having a discussion about those points. Unfortunately the thread had to be closed because the creator could not tolerate opposing viewpoints.

If a person cannot defend the merits of his ideology without having to resort to vicious personal attacks, why would they post that ideology in a forum with so many different political persuasions represented?

The hypocrisy and name-calling of some are easily recognized and ignored, but its a shame a thread with so much potential had to be closed.

[Mongoose]

I disagree with you. I am not going go any further with this because by now i am probably on your ignore list.


Joking aside, i think you might be acting a tad "touchy". People are allowed to express them selves on forum such as this. PJ's post was vary reasonable and a large part of the forum probably agrees with him.

In other words, i think you should get used to people with a differnt point of view...or your in for a very interesting life

[The Wizard]

This only shows that you have misconceptions about Fascism. It's not evil--just like communism isn't evil. What's evil are the men who have butchered both systems to create something that is evil.

I don't believe Panzer advocated the killing of jews, I just think he advocates the ideals originally expressed in Fascism, such as extreme Nationalism, and a Government run by the needs of Businesses. None of which is necesarrily criminal by itself.

Oh yes it is. Extremism is the blinding of one's own senses, in a pure sacrifice of one's own capability of thought to fear. Extremism therefore, can only lead to something bad. Be that left or right. Communism or fascism.



~Wiz

[Redleg]

The argumention is very poor. You defend the allowance of posting Extremist Viewpoints, irrelevant wheter they are Communist or Facist, and abolish makeing those people responsible for these Views.

Actually your postion on this is weak and untenable. Your asking the moderators to disallow one politicial viewpoint - while allowing yours. I find communism offensive because of the fact that more people have been killed under the rule of communism then facist. But you don't see me asking to have communist comments removed from the back room. I could futher go down the path of reason - that since communism also exspouses socialism - that all socialist thought should be removed from discussion in the backroom. (And I would be just as wrong in doing so - as you are in advocating what you are).

I also find it amusing that while wanting to express your opinion - you would like to curtail others from expressing thier opinion. People are held responsible for their behavior on the forum - ie forced edits by the moderators, sanctions and warnings, and the like.

Diffrently to you I prefer to act conseqently with a Sense of responsibility. I don't tolerate these outlawed Ideologies and their defense by you is very questionable.

Actually your behavior in the recently closed thread shows this to be untrue as it relates to an internet discussion.

Secondly I repeat that the Forumrules are weak and contain no abolishment of spreading Extremist Views, which is normally standard on Forums.

And your views on socialism are extreme my view and should not be tolerated on this forum. It is a slippery slope in which you are trying to pursue here.

Diesen Vergleich fasse ich als Beleidigung auf. Vielleicht solltest du vor derartig chauvinistischen Äußerungen einmal nachdenken.

Why because he is calling you on your narrow views and your desire to censor viewpoints that you don't agree with. I could state I find a lot of your views offensive in the way you present them.

Saturnus remark actually describes your position on this well - fascist is defined as

Fascist: NOUN:

1. often Fascist An advocate or adherent of fascism.
2. A reactionary or dictatorial person.

Notice the bolded part of the definition of fascist - your fitting the bill for that definition just fine. You are attempting to dictate to all what the policy should be, you are being a reactionary because you do not agree with someone's viewpoint. You are attempting to censor viewpoints that you do no agree with, you are attempting to have everyone conform to your belief and value system.

[scooter_the_shooter]

There is a large difference between panzer's fascism and hitler's. You seem to be a lefty what happened to all that tolerance you people preach

[Ser Clegane]

You defend the allowance of posting Extremist Viewpoints, irrelevant wheter they are Communist or Facist, and abolish makeing those people responsible for these Views.

Indeed - I absolutely defend the privilege to post even extreme political views on this forum, and I will continue to use my privilege as a patron of openly arguing against viewpoints I do not agree with.

As long as people here engage in a civilized discussion within the forum rules, there will be no warnings, bans or exclusions from specific threads.

[King Henry V]

To avoid further violation of the Forumrules I'll no longer answer to threads which contain posts of Panzerjaeger and put him on my Ignorelist. This is my personal freedom and the best Solution absent of beeing forced to deal with him.

If we all add the people whose political beliefs we disagree to the ignore list, then there won't be any debate at all.

[Louis VI the Fat]

*Somebody's got to be the devil's advocate:*

I don't agree with Stefan's handling of this situation, but I can see where he's coming from.

Imagine the outcry in the hypothetical case of a poster here using a name like 'Jihadist' and proudly announcing to be in favour of 'benevolent islamofascism'. With a picture in his sig of a burning and collapsing World Trade Centre. Then imagine him turning up in the Conservative Club saying that 10 million dead westerners is fair price to pay for an end to 'western imperialism'...

How much free speech advocates would this guy have here?

Now multiply the mindless carnage, atrocities and grief that Islamicist terrorism has caused in recent years by about 10,000 and you are close to what fascism did to Europe. Less than a human lifetime ago.

I didn't like the name-calling and the call for subforums or passwords but isn't Stephan morally somewhat entitled to an emotional outburst at the sight of someone named PanzerJager and with a sig like that praising fascism ideology?

I don't have an issue with you, PJ. You're neither unpolite nor narrow-minded. You don't preach hatred and I think your morbid fascination for fascism is more a matter of bad taste than anything else.
But calling yourself PanzerJager is considered no less than an obscenity by many in continental Europe. Now I know you're out to offend people, but my, reading your name was like a slap in my face 'till I got used to it...
I remember reading about a guy in Texas getting severly beaten just for dressing up as 'Osama' for a costumed party. That's probably a good comparison. Both are like poking in open wounds and can provoke some hefty emotions...


I do believe fascism is criminal by it's sheer definition. But then again, I'm not too fond of communism either. Nor of islamic extremism. But short of advocating violence, free speech must take precedence over personal preference. Here Stefan and I part.
To quote Voltaire: 'I disagree with what you say, but I will, to the end, defend your right to say it'.

[sharrukin]

Tolerance is not the suspension of judgement or of Conscience. Tolerance without judgement or Conscience is not a virtue.

I am not a big fan of tolerance myself, as there are some things that ought not be tolerated. Tolerance in and of itself is not a moral good, as it includes the acceptance of the Holocaust, and other evils, both great and small. We have no moral obligation to tolerate what we see as wrong, but we do have a moral obligation not to do wrong in expressing our intolerance. If it is in fact, your belief that homosexuality is immoral, then tolerance does not require that judgement to be changed.

For example if a person expresses hate for all members of a particular group without foundation or reason, we are not obligated to remain silent. We can, and should oppose it, but not with censorship or violence. If he chooses to act on his beliefs and proceeds to violence OR the threat of violence then we are further obligated in using whatever means needed to stop him. This does not mean than censorship is always a social evil, only that it must be used sparingly and with a great deal of thought for the possible consequences.

Often those accused of "intolerance" are in fact guilty of nothing more than the expression of an opinion contrary to the accusers. In such a situation "tolerance" becomes a tool to eliminate inconvenient opinions. They hope to guarantee that we will not oppose in any meaningful way those things we disagree with. If one side of an argument is uncompromising while the other is compliant, tolerance simply becomes a weapon used to coerce others.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean I must be tolerant of your views, only that I must allow you to express them. The opportunity to speak without harassment and the absence of legal, or institutional sanction if you say something I don't like. It does not mean you are free from criticism for what you say. There is no guarantee that you will not be challenged on what you say, only that you will not be punished.

Tolerance in essence is self-restraint and good manners, and on certain issues this can often be very difficult. There are occasions when you should not express your views for any number of reasons, just as there are times when you MUST. Judgement is the virtue needed to distinguish the proper response on such occasions.

[A.Saturnus]

Diesen Vergleich fasse ich als Beleidigung auf. Vielleicht solltest du vor derartig chauvinistischen Äußerungen einmal nachdenken.

Sorry if you felt insulted but what I said is definitely true. I could have said it with a quote: " For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason." Umberto Eco. Now, the implication that Eco is a chauvinist is mind-boggling!
Besides, that was no comparison.

Louis IV the Fat, I`m curious, why is it that the term "Panzerjäger" is considered some nazi-token? It refers o someone who hunts tanks.

[Proletariat]

Imagine the outcry in the hypothetical case of a poster here using a name like 'Jihadist' and proudly announcing to be in favour of 'benevolent islamofascism'. With a picture in his sig of a burning and collapsing World Trade Centre. Then imagine him turning up in the Conservative Club saying that 10 million dead westerners is fair price to pay for an end to 'western imperialism'...

There's been more than a few posts in my time here that have come pretty close to this joking exaggeration of yours.

[JAG]

This is very disappointing on a number of levels.

First and foremost, a good thread was closed. JAG made some interesting counter points to my post about Socialism(which was tame, to say the least) and I was looking forward to having a discussion about those points. Unfortunately the thread had to be closed because the creator could not tolerate opposing viewpoints.

If a person cannot defend the merits of his ideology without having to resort to vicious personal attacks, why would they post that ideology in a forum with so many different political persuasions represented?

The hypocrisy and name-calling of some are easily recognized and ignored, but its a shame a thread with so much potential had to be closed.

I too was looking forward to responses to my post from you and others, especially as I think people over there and some who post here, really don't understand what socialism really is about in the modern world. It is a huge shame that the thread was closed - I still don't know why it was and I don't particularly care - as I think all sides could have had a great discussion about it.

Ah well.

[JAG]

By the way Sat, Umberto Eco is one hell of a writer.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Louis IV the Fat, I`m curious, why is it that the term "Panzerjäger" is considered some nazi-token? It refers to someone who hunts tanks.

Because I associate it with nazi-warcraft:

I don't object to his using this name. PJ is probably a nice guy and a certainly a good patron. But the comparison to a name like 'plane hijacker' isn't that far-fetched, I think.

There's been more than a few posts in my time here that have come pretty close to this joking exaggeration of yours.

Not from me and I would've defended you being upset by it.

The comparison I made is not between what Panzer said about socialism in the thread - he only made some valid and to the point statements - it's about the effect that nazi-emblems (the name, picture and previous flirts with fascist ideology) can have on people.
My post is not directed at (against?) PJ. He's fine by me.
But when a guy who gets upset by fascist flirts ends up being called a fascist himself I'll stand up for him, even if I would've taken a more relaxed approach.

[Ser Clegane]

First and foremost, a good thread was closed. JAG made some interesting counter points to my post about Socialism(which was tame, to say the least) and I was looking forward to having a discussion about those points.

I too was looking forward to responses to my post from you and others, especially as I think people over there and some who post here, really don't understand what socialism really is about in the modern world. It is a huge shame that the thread was closed - I still don't know why it was and I don't particularly care - as I think all sides could have had a great discussion about it.

You both have a good and valid point.

I agree with you that the discussion on Socialism in general is a topic worthwhile to be continued and to be further explored.

I copied the posts that discussed Socialism in general from the closed thread and moved them into a new one that can be found here:
Socialism as form of government
So please feel free to continue your discussion in this thread

[Franconicus]

Facism and Nationalsocialism are beeing outlawed as Criminal and Anti-Constitutional in Germany, further the political parties "Nationaldemocrathic Party of Germany" and "German peoples Union" are beeing observed by the Statesecurity.

In fact they are not. In Germany people are free to say that they are fascists or Nazis as well as communists, stalinists or whatever. There are some limitaions, however. A party is forbidden if it is against the constitution. This is a rule to protect our democracy. From the experience of the 30ies this is necessary.
It is forbidden to deny the holocaust, to use fascistic symbols of the Nazis, sedition, insults or calls for criminal acts.
I think the forum rules cover all this. If not we may add this.

I agree that fascism is bad and has to be fought. I always thought that discussion is the best way to do this.
Panzer is not evil. I still hope he will join us some day!

no passeran

[King Henry V]

Because I associate it with nazi-warcraft:

I don't object to his using this name. PJ is probably a nice guy and a certainly a good patron. But the comparison to a name like 'plane hijacker' isn't that far-fetched, I think.



Not from me and I would've defended you being upset by it.

The comparison I made is not between what Panzer said about socialism in the thread - he only made some valid and to the point statements - it's about the effect that nazi-emblems (the name, picture and previous flirts with fascist ideology) can have on people.
My post is not directed at (against?) PJ. He's fine by me.
But when a guy who gets upset by fascist flirts ends up being called a fascist himself I'll stand up for him, even if I would've taken a more relaxed approach.

So because PJ admires the fighting skills and the tanks of the German army during WW2 (as I and quite a few other people do), you claim that to be an espousal to the Nazi doctrine?

[R'as al Ghul]

So because PJ admires the fighting skills and the tanks of the German army during WW2 (as I and quite a few other people do), you claim that to be an espousal to the Nazi doctrine?

As a German I'd like to add a few comments.
I can understand Stefan's feelings towards Panzerjäger, I've thought so myself
but came to the conclusion that PJ isn't always serious when flirting with fascism.

As for the sentiments towards militarists that are fascinated with German WW2 troops,
that's quite a difficult topic for Germans. You've to understand that Germany doesn't
officially mourn the deaths of its own people during the war. We don't have memorials
for our fallen soldiers. All our compassion goes out to our enemies of WW2.

Those people in Germany that publicly remember the Wehrmacht and SS soldiers
are most often the same who compare the bombing of Dresden with the holocaust
or, even worse, deny the holocaust. These people are also often members of DVU
or NPD (our extreme right wing parties, labelled neo-nazis).
Stefan and I are of a generation where you are educated as an anti-fascist.
I know exactly where he's coming from and I absolutely understand his feelings.
Any German who voices his enthusiasm for WW2 troops is seen as a fascist, because
his enthusiasm doesn't take into account that the elite troops like SS are responsible for
a very large part of the holocaust.
(It's a bit like saying Gen. Custer was a great general and not mentioning that he slaughtered
indians)
What I realized though, is that non-Germans have a more relaxed attitude towards this kind
of militarism. They are often fascinated by SS and others. It's like me saying "Those Janissaries were
tough troops". They aren't concerned with politics at that moment. It's merely militarism they are
intersted in and not fascism.
I'd say that this view is a bit one-sided but that's what we Germans
are there for, to insure that the holocaust isn't forgotten and to make sure, that when somebody
expresses his fascination for WW2 German troops anytime in the future, we will mention that they
were also responsible for atrocities and large parts of the holocaust, despite of being an "elite" troop.

I hope this helps others to understand a German point-of-view.

[English assassin]

I'm with Louis on this one. There are some pro-fascist views expressed on this board that I find truly incredible, and it seems to be getting worse. Some of the comments abopve on the importance of tolerance and open mindedness were, how shall I put this, remarkable. Now the Fascists preach tolerance do they? Well, they say the Devil can quote scripture.

Being as charitable as I can, I put a lot of this down to the same sort of silliness that has people suggesting "pit bull" in the thread in the front room when Simon Appleton asked for suggestions for an easily looked after pet dog to live in a city with a family. And, to speak my mind, I'm being polite in calling it silliness, because frankly I am NOT sure we don't have some out and out fascists here. But even if we don't, there is no more point reading silly posts than there is reading fascist ones.

To all of which I expect some smart alec will say, well you don't have to log on, and I must admit I am thinking along those lines myself.

[rasoforos]

This forum has some weird guidelines about what is acceptable...

...I got a warning for calling someone a nazi/fascist i think for being too supportive on WW II Germany and for getting agitated when I mentioned its losses , ...now its an acceptable term? You can be one?

...Its like there is a forum where there is a number of paidophiles, and somehow the middle line is drawn on ' you can have sex with kids but only 15 days a month' and if you somehow react on this you are considered offensive and radical.


...Go figure... I for once stoped trying...trying to see things in a more relaxed way lately

[Ser Clegane]

...I got a warning for calling someone a nazi/fascist i think for being too supportive on WW II Germany and for getting agitated when I mentioned its losses , ...now its an acceptable term? You can be one?

Actually there is a bit of a difference between considering yourself to be fascist and calling another person a nazi (especially if that person does not consider himself to be a nazi) - don't you think?

Just because one person says in a thread "I'm an idiot" you do not automatically receive the right to call any person on this board "idiot".