Be respectful of other people's countries. No SPAM!

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Thu May 30, 2002 11:36 pm

If I was to call all of Israel, Bloodthristy Jews and put a smile face at the end would anyone care it was a joke?

How about Bloodythristy Germans? British?

I find when a serious topic "Bush and Europe: moving apart?" turns to bashing jokes about the country in question way off topic and very uncalled for.

Ode to a Grasshopper · Fri May 31, 2002 1:42 am

True. Let's keep debates here in SYM civil, please.

Although anyone is welcome to bash Australia, and I won't mind.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Fri May 31, 2002 3:21 am

There has to be some degree of humour in the serious threads, and sometimes it is entirely necessary and justified. I am not aware of what was posted and if someone wishes to PM me it i would be grateful.

What exactly is it you wish to discuss Weasel?

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Fri May 31, 2002 12:15 pm

Originally posted by Mr Sleep
There has to be some degree of humour in the serious threads, and sometimes it is entirely necessary and justified.

That answers my question. And No I will not use this as an excuse to do it myself.

@Ode to a Grasshopper, bashing Australia and calling all Australians Bloodthristy I find to be two different things, even with a smilie face.

Vivien · Post by **Vivien** » Fri May 31, 2002 1:18 pm

Never mind. *hug*

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Fri May 31, 2002 1:33 pm

Originally posted by Vivien
Weasel,
Now I wonder if I've done this?
*hug*

I tease people all the time specifying their country and making outrageous claims...like with Bloodstalker and his redneck roots...Sleep and all welsh men being afraid of the little people...Yshania and the secret English plot to take over the world...

*hug*

But I try to stay away from serious discussions and don't think I even entered into the one you're mentioning that way...

I highly doupt you have spammed a serious discussion.

As for teasing...I have to be the most guilty

And here you hit the main reason of my grip. A serious discussion. I see no reason to start a thread about Should Israel Have Peace Talks With Palestein (sp?) and have someone come along and make a joke calling Israel, Bloodthristy Israelites. I find it very offensive and uncalled for. If someone wants to make jokes there are plenty of other threads here.

Vivien · Post by **Vivien** » Fri May 31, 2002 1:41 pm

Originally posted by Weasel
I highly doupt you have spammed a serious discussion.

As for teasing...I have to be the most guilty

And here you hit the main reason of my grip. A serious discussion. I see no reason to start a thread about Should Israel Have Peace Talks With Palestein (sp?) and have someone come along and make a joke calling Israel, Bloodthristy Israelites. I find it very offensive and uncalled for. If someone wants to make jokes there are plenty of other threads here.

Now I understand!

Edit:
I see your point of view *hug* It's hard know (for me) how to even approach some topics...because of all the tensions happening right now. *hug*

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Fri May 31, 2002 1:59 pm

I think that some people find a sort of tension relief in attempts at levity. Unfortunately, many times people don't realise that not everything is a joke and if they don't have something constructive to say, then they should just shut the hell up and not try to be funny.

I've said before that I like SYM because I think the population here is generally one of the most civil on the internet. This is due in part to the moderators, but also because many of the members are intelligent, educated and articulate. While emotions sometimes get the best of us, I've seen other boards with all-out flame wars over little, stupid things. At least here at SYM, we let a discussion get to page 2 before the name calling starts.

There are some folks (like Vivien and Mr Sleep) who consciously avoid wading into the serious discussions, but there are others of us (like me) who relish them. In general, though, I think folks view SYM as a chance to not only express their views, but I believe that a lot of members are like me and enjoy hearing what other people have to say who do not share the same racial, ethnic or cultural background.

. . . And then there are the members who hijack every thread and turn it into a tavern or spamfest, but at least they don't flame and troll the serious threads.

Ode to a Grasshopper · Sat Jun 01, 2002 3:28 am

Originally posted by Weasel
That answers my question. And No I will not use this as an excuse to do it myself.

@Ode to a Grasshopper, bashing Australia and calling all Australians Bloodthristy I find to be two different things, even with a smilie face.

Hence the "Keep debates civil" comment. Which was made sans smiley face, to show it was serious.

Maharlika · Post by **Maharlika** » Sat Jun 01, 2002 7:42 am

Well said, HLD...

Originally posted by HighLordDave
I think that some people find a sort of tension relief in attempts at levity. Unfortunately, many times people don't realise that not everything is a joke and if they don't have something constructive to say, then they should just shut the hell up and not try to be funny.

I've said before that I like SYM because I think the population here is generally one of the most civil on the internet. This is due in part to the moderators, but also because many of the members are intelligent, educated and articulate. While emotions sometimes get the best of us, I've seen other boards with all-out flame wars over little, stupid things. At least here at SYM, we let a discussion get to page 2 before the name calling starts.

There are some folks (like Vivien and Mr Sleep) who consciously avoid wading into the serious discussions, but there are others of us (like me) who relish them. In general, though, I think folks view SYM as a chance to not only express their views, but I believe that a lot of members are like me and enjoy hearing what other people have to say who do not share the same racial, ethnic or cultural background.

. . . And then there are the members who hijack every thread and turn it into a tavern or spamfest, but at least they don't flame and troll the serious threads.

... I couldn't even delete any of your sentences in this quoted post of yours, thus emphasizing that I wholly agree with everything written

...SYM has become more than just a forum...

... a cornucopia of knowledge to say the least.

fable · Post by **fable** » Sat Jun 01, 2002 8:20 am

My father-in-law is a bore. There are far worse things to be, of course, but still--he sits glumly, annoyed, and waits for the slightest hook in any conversation nearby that presents itself. Then he pulls it sharply in the direction of two or three interests that reign supreme in his life. Discuss the decline of immigration over the past decade in Scandanavia and the voter surge from the right wing fringe in Denmark, for example, and he'd probably jump in with, "I hear the Danes have quite a nationalized computer system" or something of the kind. Amusing once or twice, imagine putting up with this as a spouse or child for a lifetime.

In a larger, more unpleasant fashion, some people feel it necessary to kidnap threads and twist them into platforms for their strident views about a particular issue. They have no interest in the give-and-take of conversation that reveals a wonderful diversity of opinion, and binds friendships. They are not amenable to discussion. The Internet is the toy of their dreams, since it allows them to get away with behavior that in reallife would have them tossed out of clubs, symposiums and bars where they didn't represent a majority. They also don't have to worry about watching the expressions of individuals they want so desperately to hurt, causing the nagging doubt in their minds that just possibly the demons they attack are simply people like themselves.

As a moderator, I try to give everybody the opportunity to both express an opinion, and then defend it in a rational, courteous fashion. We've had a few people here on GB who were courteous, if not terribly rational, which is fine by me.

(Can't say I always fit into the rational category, either.

) As long as no one feels legitimately libelled by their remarks and they remain within the bounds of Buck's rules and net decency, I just enjoy the interactions. After all, it's possible to hold very controversial views without setting out to hurt or offend others.

But when it becomes apparent that courtesy is rejected, and that a thread is viewed as nothing more than a soapbox for the expression of hatred for a nationality, race, etc, they get quickly warned; and in a way that makes it very clear that their real intentions are known, and that no amount of temporizing will let them get around the rules. Typically, they leave soon after. There's no fun for a child bully who's been told he or she must sit in the sandbox and cooperate with everybody else. And from experience working for years moderating large boards for a gaming company, I know there is usually no way to appease these people save to give them free reign.

As to what drives anybody to viewing significant portions of the human race (based on race, religion, gender, sexual preferences, etc) as demonic entities who must be humiliated and triumphed against--I haven't the slightest idea. Perhaps they're satisfied with the lazy logic that always identifies the Outsider with evil, and the stasis of their own group as good. Personally, I see states of consciousness as processes, at least when growth is allowed to proceed naturally. But then, that's just my opinion.

Ode to a Grasshopper · Sat Jun 01, 2002 8:26 am

Which is why, of course, it's so much fun watching you and CE tear them down from their pedestals with rational, well thought out arguments, @Fable.

As for kidnapping threads, well...

Morlock · Post by **Morlock** » Sat Jun 01, 2002 11:29 am

Originally posted by Weasel

And here you hit the main reason of my grip. A serious discussion. I see no reason to start a thread about Should Israel Have Peace Talks With Palestein (sp?) and have someone come along and make a joke calling Israel, Bloodthristy Israelites. I find it very offensive and uncalled for. If someone wants to make jokes there are plenty of other threads here.

I am still not sure how to reply, but I'm wondering why you stick to this specific example.

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Sat Jun 01, 2002 12:46 pm

Originally posted by Morlock

I am still not sure how to reply, but I'm wondering why you stick to this specific example.

At the time I posted this I was at a "News" site reading about the conflict in Israel.

But I can give you a different one.

How about the a topic called Should Indian Make Peace with Pakistan and have someone make a joke calling Indians Bloodthristy or Pakistan Bloodthristy.

Kayless · Post by **Kayless** » Sat Jun 01, 2002 1:41 pm

Originally posted by fable
As to what drives anybody to viewing significant portions of the human race (based on race, religion, gender, sexual preferences, etc) as demonic entities who must be humiliated and triumphed against--I haven't the slightest idea. Perhaps they're satisfied with the lazy logic that always identifies the Outsider with evil, and the stasis of their own group as good. Personally, I see states of consciousness as processes, at least when growth is allowed to proceed naturally. But then, that's just my opinion.

As a psychology student I’ve been wondering about this myself, and I’ve found that the souces of hatred are many and varied. Often it’s learned behavior, taught by a parent and passed on. Most times the origin of this hatred is spurious, though in some cases there are somewhat understandable origins. People who lost family members in the 9/11 attacks, or the family of Daniel Pearl have very legitimate reasons to feel nothing but loathing for those responsible for killing their loved ones. It takes a great deal of willpower not to embrace hatred and clump people of a certain religion or nationality into one big group to vent hatred at (especially since such blind hatred is what inspired the 9/11 attacks in the first place). Hatred is self-propagating, leading to decades or even centuries of vehemence between peoples who may eventually forget the original cause of their dislike for one another . Hatred is so easy, that denying it (and the pack mentality tribalism evokes) is often impossible for many people. If folks were to stop and put themselves in other people's shoes for a minute, I believe there wouldn’t be as much sorrow out there.

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Sat Jun 01, 2002 2:05 pm

Bloody war-mongering Aussies.

KidD01 · Post by **KidD01** » Sat Jun 01, 2002 2:33 pm

Originally posted by Weasel
If I was to call all of Israel, Bloodthristy Jews and put a smile face at the end would anyone care it was a joke?

How about Bloodythristy Germans? British?

I find when a serious topic "Bush and Europe: moving apart?" turns to bashing jokes about the country in question way off topic and very uncalled for.

Calm down, Weasel mate. I understand everyone have pride for their country. Some members might think I just some joker in this SYM. The truth is I mostly stay away from serious discussion since it might lead into uncomfortable discussion. I recall SS incident on the Christianity thread and some others which I encounter in other forums - which is I mostly just browse it than reply it

.

<EDIT>BTW I'm not proud with my country

It might be surprising for some SYMers. But I don't want to discuss the topic.

Kayless · Post by **Kayless** » Sat Jun 01, 2002 3:09 pm

Originally posted by KidD01
Some members might think I'm just some joker in this SYM. The truth is I mostly stay away from serious discussion since it might lead into uncomfortable discussion. I recall SS incident on the Christianity thread and some others which I encounter in other forums - which is I mostly just browse it than reply it .

I feel the same way. The cadre of posters who frequent serious topics often get quite vocal and upset in their debates (no one exempt), which is why I usually avoid such threads (Not to mention the fact that casual observers of politics tend to get bushwhacked in these discussions by those who make it their business to known the intimate details of foreign politics. The layman feels like an outcast).

prateek · Post by **prateek** » Sat Jun 01, 2002 5:23 pm

I'm assuming this is excluding France of course........(Bides time till the Germans invade France again for the 4th time after the post napoleonic era.....)

Ode to a Grasshopper · Sat Jun 01, 2002 11:38 pm

Originally posted by Gruntboy
Bloody war-mongering Aussies.

Inasmuch as it refers to the government, it's stance on blindly following the US government's lead on the War on Terror(Complaining all the while that Australia as a nation doesn't have a sufficiently large military force to defend itself) and most of those people who support it, hear! Hear!

@Kayless-I tend to take part in most debates at some point, and I don't think I've ever gotten vocal or upset in a debate. That said,,I'm never a major player in them, either.