Infraction, multi-culture

**rasoforos** · 06-13-2009, 05:16

I am just surprised you only received an infraction to be honest...

I personally find the use of colourful language a minor problem

However, the amount of racial slur and stereotyping you used was rather shocking (the fact that you do not seem to get what you did wrong is even more shocking though).

Also, quoting figures and statistics out of nowhere, and using them to support action against foreigners, is inciting hatred in my book.

**KarlXII** · 06-13-2009, 06:59

Originally Posted by rasoforos

Also, quoting figures and statistics out of nowhere, and using them to support action against foreigners, is inciting hatred in my book.

Yeah Kadagar, remember that time where you said all immigrants should burn in hell after disrupting the perfect Aryan balance? I don't either.

**rasoforos** · 06-13-2009, 07:20

Originally Posted by KarlXII

Yeah Kadagar, remember that time where you said all immigrants should burn in hell after disrupting the perfect Aryan balance? I don't either.

What is your point? Is it that, If a wrongful statement is not taken to the extreme then it can be excused? I hardly think so...

**KarlXII** · 06-13-2009, 07:25

Originally Posted by rasoforos

What is your point? Is it that, If a wrongful statement is not taken to the extreme then it can be excused? I hardly think so...

I agree that the use of a swear word and exaggeration of an immigrant is deserving of an infraction, but it's a far stretch to say Kadagar is inciting violence against foreigners. The fact you don't think so worries me.

**Ser Clegane** · 06-13-2009, 12:16

Originally Posted by KarlXII

but it's a far stretch to say Kadagar is inciting violence against foreigners.

Just for the record - I agree with this point. I think there is still quite a difference between Kadagar's post and inciting violence - and at no point did the infraction imply that this is how the post was interpreted.

**KukriKhan** · 06-13-2009, 15:34

Were I the attending Moderator at the time, I'd have taken identical action as Banquo's Ghost, for the same reasons given.

Repeating the violation in subsequent posts (not here, where it's academic; rather in the backroom) would have gotten a 2-point Major infraction from me, and a 3-day time-out.

However, from his posts in this thread, it is clear that the OP is unclear on the nature of his violation, thus Banquo's Ghost's leniency in his second award - with which I agree.

**Kadagar_AV** · 06-13-2009, 22:51

NEW TOPIC but same topic: I would have prefered not to get a second infraction for calling bodily wastes a more common name for bodily wastes...

I mean, As soon as I got the first infraction I PMed the mod asking what the problem was. At the time I assumed he had gone on some anti-nazi spree...

When this thread clarified it was about the commonly used word for bodily wastes coming out of the wider body opening (not the mouth), I at once stopped using that word.

So, to get a second warning before I had the chance to edit seems a bit over-kill...

I mean, the mod in question could just have answered my first PM so I knew what the offense was...

Or, he could have PMed me and asked me to edit my posts afterwards...

However, to get 2 warnings before I knew what the fuss was about seems a bit like over kill.

just my two florins :)

**Furunculus** · 06-15-2009, 17:05

Originally Posted by rasoforos

I am just surprised you only received an infraction to be honest...

I personally find the use of colourful language a minor problem

However, the amount of racial slur and stereotyping you used was rather shocking (the fact that you do not seem to get what you did wrong is even more shocking though).

Also, quoting figures and statistics out of nowhere, and using them to support action against foreigners, is inciting hatred in my book.

i personally had no problem with the content of his post, it was a statement of fact that some non-western immigrants have no idea what a toilet for, and that local residents find the result of this ignorance very distressing. as long as it is clear that he is not referring to entire groups.

**rasoforos** · 06-15-2009, 17:55

Originally Posted by Furunculus

i personally had no problem with the content of his post, it was a statement of fact that some non-western immigrants have no idea what a toilet for, and that local residents find the result of this ignorance very distressing. as long as it is clear that he is not referring to entire groups.

No I was not talking about his description.

I was talking about supporting that a specific group is to blame for a crime rise, without actually providing any evidence that they are indeed the ones who should be blamed.

And while we all can (and will) support our opinions on limited or non-existent evidence, doing so to demonise immigrants of a certain religion is not something I would agree with.

**KarlXII** · 06-15-2009, 20:17

Originally Posted by rasoforos

No I was not talking about his description.

I was talking about supporting that a specific group is to blame for a crime rise, without actually providing any evidence that they are indeed the ones who should be blamed.

And while we all can (and will) support our opinions on limited or non-existent evidence, doing so to demonise immigrants of a certain religion is not something I would agree with.

Was that before or after he started inciting hatred against brown people?