I don't know what the big deal is. Paul said he chose to be banned. He could have just been suspended for a while. So are you guys upset with the decision to suspend him, then? Or if you are upset with the banning, why don't you just ask him why he chose to ban himself. Oh that's right, you can't .... because he chose to ban himself. LOL.
"Who can honestly say that EvilP was the worst right now, and so he should be the first to go right now?"
I'll say it. He's an ignorant, bigoted piece of shit who finally got what he had coming.
I've thrown some pretty vicious insults at him in response to things he's posted over the years, and I'd say the exact same things to his face. You don't reason with somebody who worships Ayn Rand and jerks off to the latest issue of Soldier of Fortune magazine.
I'm not afraid to use a sharp tongue when the situation arises, and I'm sure I've stepped over the line on occasion. Good luck finding somebody here who hasn't. The difference between me and EP, though, is that I don't get my kicks from bullying weaker people who never did anything to me first, and I challenge you to find one single instance in my 4000+ comments where I've ever made a derogatory comment or slur about somebody's disability, health condition, sexual orientation, race, or religion.
I've a few spats with EP, but I usually tried to turn his own comments against him (like those he made in the Venturi House #9 thread, which I quoted back to him verbatim when he tried to champion an obscure building in Chicago on a thread of his).
I didn't read the comments that got him "suspended", but the response comments to his words suggest he went a little farther than usual. There are differences between cursing at someone (I've written "fuck you" and "eat me" in more than a couple of threads, although I've tried to stop that kind of nonsense) and using racist and derogatory comments directed at a person's race, religion, sex, or physical and mental situation. Not sure about the permanent banning: a true suspension with a second chance to clean up one's act might be better.
I had a (purposely inflammatory) user name banned here when I tried a little experiment during the period when Archinect was inunandated by Obama threads (during the primaries, I think). I started threads that stated that Obama was a religion, or God himself, or was an alien, all sorts of absurd stuff: what got the user name banned, though, was starting a thread where the title "OBAMA, OBAMA, OBAMA..." went on endlessy across the screen pushing the limits of the page size and probably freaking out the base code of Archinect and duly pissing people off and getting me kicked out.....I love that story.
good lord, people, walk away from the keyboard, have a beer, go to bed, wake up in the morning, reread this thread and note how worked up over nothing you are getting.
Also I should point out that even though "fag" is a derogatory word... it does have about 4 different meanings. I find the word "faggot" to be particularly hateful-- but fag is to faggot as nigga is to nigger.
Also, a lot of you are so subversively racist and xenophobic anyways (in only a way 8 years of a liberal arts education can tell you) that it doesn't really matter anyways. (See: Toni Morrison).
Read a book, read a book, read a motherfuckin' book.
Good Lord what did He write that was so bad that has not been said elsewhere on this board? I found him / her particularly amusing. Some of the other foul mouthed posters on this board aren't funny at all. Does anyone have a transcript?
I started threads that stated that Obama was a religion, or God himself, or was an alien, all sorts of absurd stuff: what got the user name banned, though, was starting a thread where the title "OBAMA, OBAMA, OBAMA..." went on endlessy across the screen pushing the limits of the page size and probably freaking out the base code of Archinect and duly pissing people off and getting me kicked out.....I love that story.
that was you, you fuck!?
ha ha *headexplodes*
I dont have any pseudonyms anymore. sad. the worst was when I used to let other people post with my name.. that, was not so smart.
that certainly does not make me ignorant. you have qualms about your country's terminologies...don't direct them my way.
as for being a slut, i really don't see why the degree by which i might be sexually active is of any concern to you.
there is no need get personal with me, being that you're totally nugatory to me and thus making your petty brothel-indictment a waste of pretention, foremostly, on par with your message. now try saying that in a couple of other languages and we'll see who is less ignorant. but congrats, your lack of ignorance is evidenced by calling someone else an ignorant slut.
I think that was a reference to Dan Akroyd's calling out of Jane Curtain on Weekend Update on SNL in the 1970s. Yes, I am old enough to remember... ;-) But don't hold it against me!
Wait -- does this mean we lost the Louisville Spaghetti Junction thread?!?!?!
Dammit!
(On the other hand, I've stopped posting in at least 1 thread because I got tired of EP's idiotic provocations, so I'm ambivalent about him being gone. Won't say I miss him, but I will miss the redeeming times when he made me think critically about my own beliefs. That's more than I can say for most trolls around here...)
I think people, myself included, spend way too much time on these boards. And I think people behave better in person. And it's better for you to get out and meet people even if you don't agree with everything you say. I think it's healthy that we all don't think the same.
More face time, less online time.
I think a lot of the online nastiness would vanish.
to quibble, the grammar could also suggest that, by bracketing 'banned' apropos 'suspension', the suspension of ep's person is tantamount to his archinect's title being banned; this interpretation is perhaps encouraged given the citation of EP's lengthy list.
oe;
in a way, i agree with you. however, where do the moderators draw the line, should they draw a line at all?
if EP is allowed this, all I'm asking is, could it not form a precendent that could then qualify graver instances of prejudice based on race, sexuality, gender...etc?
i also see the moderator's side to this; their aim is to create a space where people are generally confortable discussing architecture amongst other things, and they rely on their common sense to suss the limits...going overboard with challenging themselves with what constitutes absolute neutrality (ie archinect as a neutral space to be charged by any poster as she might wish) might work against the basic intention of archinect.
i'm not arguing for banning but simply seeing both sides.
I've met EP once before, and I found him offensive then. He bought me a beer and I felt obligated to play nice with him here for a while, but there's only so much goodwill you can buy with a glass of PBR.
It was a joke in the manner of an Evil Platypus comment inspired by a skit from the original Saturday Night Live. In the future, please you your google search bar,,,
not everyone watches/ed saturday night live or is aware of your pop reference tendencies, please keep that in mind prior to informing me when to use google search.
even though i am not personally responsible nor have any powers to ban anybody, i am glad paul banned ep promptly.
as funny and spirited as ep might be, he often didn't miss an opportunity to disrespect thoughtlessly on an impulse and ruin otherwise and possibly interesting discussion. nobody in this board should think they are entitled to go in and destroy somebody's discussion just because they can post upon a simple registration process.
it took a lot of effort, sacrifice and time to develop this site and nobody should think they could just come in and do anything they can please.
no such a thing.
how would you feel if somebody comes and pees on your drawing for no reason other than they feel they can?
here is a first hand respect i recieved from ep a while back for news-posting an interesting article by a very respected journalist operating in the middle east.
ep sure didn't lose anytime to come in and spit his profonities with an all or nothing threat at the end.
what i did for it? nothing... i let him see it himself if he ever did. http://www.archinect.com/news/article.php?id=80201_0_24_0_C
i ask all of you who has been posting in this particular thread; have you ever been edited, cencored or warned with an editorial letter?
i believe not. and i know non of us are angels here but usually know the difference between a 'fuck you' and 'rimming' somebody.. latter is not archinect level and frankly, a little sick to bring into an architectural discussion... that was usedagainst emilio i believe. and similar profonity against denise scott brown during the transport of lieb house when that particular thread was somewhat linked to a new york times article...
this has not happened out of blue folks.
Holy shit, Orhan, what a fucking racist bullshit comment THAT ever was. I knew EvilP was a jerkwad but man, that just about takes my breath away. Way to advance your petty, scared little views, jerk. I commend you for being able to take the high road, Orhan!
Secondly, nobody banned EP for having contrarian political views. He's not the only right-winger on Archinect
EvilP always claimed to be a registered Democrat. Believe him or not, I did enjoy his critical views on politics. It's quite obvious that the majority on Archinect are politically left leaning and I see nothing wrong with some balance. However, I've noticed on many occasions in political threads veteran Archinect posters gang up on opposing viewpoints, to the point that I would call it intolerance.
First of all, that sours people on Archinect and drives them away just as an ignorant comment from EvilP.
Secondly, I could think of a few regular posters that should be removed for inflaming, distorting threads and posting personal attacks...if the standards were applied universally. It seems that only those people that Paul gets direct private complaints from get scrubbed.
I think the policing happens more often than people typically realize. On many other forums, admins often post in an "official" capacity to give warnings, delete threads, or ban users.
On other forums I frequent they don't even tolerate bad language. Throw in an F-bomb and your post will be scrubbed. Then again, I've never heard of entire accounts being deleted.
I actually enjoyed the old <your name> forum because it was such and open free flow of thought and information. Still enjoy Archinect because it is very open and free flowing.
This website is Paul's creating and ultimately it's his decision on who to boot. That said, I do get the feeling that there is no universal standard of conduct, i.e. someone can get cut simply because enough people are thin skinned enough to complain.
i don't think you're tackling the most indefensible item in EP's recent posts, so your point of view is really incomprehensible; you're using, to your convenience, an argument that has been used in this post a few times and this been rendered easy but flat.
Your a tool. No mention of the computer, the space shuttle the skyscraper.
I ask you this - why is it that the readership of al jezzera is a bunch of backward camel fucking rug merchants hell bent on destroying civilisation
\ban me cocksucker
- evilplatypus, Sep 21, 08 | 12:31 pm
Yeah, there's an example of the "balanced" political discourse we need more of around here, right? Show me one other person on Archinect who gets away with talking like that without being banned or suspended.
Spare me the whole "he's being persecuted for political speech" meme. If you're attending a seminar and somebody constantly interrupts the event by screaming racist profanities at the speaker, you don't pat that person on the back and politely thank them for their opinion. You call security and have them removed from the premises. The fact that other people in the seminar sometimes have heated disagreements doesn't make the heckler any less of an obnoxious prick or excuse his behavior.
LIG - I'm not trying to defend that quote from EvilP. Then again how is his stereotype of al jezzzera readers any different from some of the common posts calling conservatives/Republicans stereotypes like racist, xenophobe, homophobe, etc. Is that "balanced" discourse? Is that any less ignorant than EvilP's comment above?
LIG, if there's medication available for asberners or whatever you have, you should probably find it and take it and put-down the keyboard for a while.
Aqua - How is that the same? I agree calling any generic group, be it political or not, racist or xenophobe is a generalization and ignorant. But thats based on the general concept that no matter how much one group has a tendency towards something, you can't assume everyone belonging to that group follows that stereotype.
Calling a certain group of people have a tendency towards racism is different than BEING racist (or writing racist comments).
aquapara: Funny how you claim you're not trying to defend that quote, and then immediately go on to do exactly that.
First of all, being a conservative Republican is a choice and not something you're born into like your race or sexual orientation or certain disabilities. When conservatives/Republicans make the choice to openly support racist, xenophobic, homophobic, etc. policies and politicians, then yes, it's fair to call them racists, xenophobes, homophobes, etc. If the shoe fits, wear it.
If people find themselves uncomfortable being labeled that way, maybe they should re-examine their beliefs and actions that cause people to form that impression. I spent the first half of my life as a right-wing Republican, but changed my tune when I realized I could no longer morally justify being lumped in with that camp.
Your whole false equivalency argument is nothing more than a self-serving strawman. If 99 people in a room think the earth is round and one person thinks it's flat, that doesn't mean both viewpoints are equally valid and deserve equal airtime. Some people's opinions are just plain wrong and stupid, and they should be called out as such.
But there's a difference between calling out somebody's opinions as wrong and stupid, and acting like a schoolyard bully.
Pczatek: I could claim Social Security disability benefits if I wanted to, but I chose to work full-time and pay my taxes instead. I don't expect you to comprehend that idea, though. Unfortunately for you, being stupid doesn't qualify for SSI and there's no medication for it.
i don't really find anything objectionable in the comments related to the pentagon/darpa thing. the original post did have some bias in it...and that might actually be worse than vulgar name-calling (which is pretty easy to ignore and not nearly as insidious)
on the other hand, i wish i could resort to calling people names, but as an insult it always feels so hollow to me. like in that south park movie when the fat kid was singing something that went like "aaron's mom is bitch, bitch bitch...bitch, bitch, bitch...a bitch, bitch, bitch...etc.
"Why does the U.S. foster unfettered creativity only in the context of lethal technologies?" ...posted by Orhan.
So, EvilP's reaction to what Orhan posted is completely unacceptable?
I'd suggest that Orhan's posting of such a hyperbolic statement was much worse than EvilP's reaction to it. Orhan, what was your aim in posting a false statement about the United States? Are we to believe that you were fostering objective political dicsourse? As Clamfan has written, I think you were baiting.
Orhan, is that article representative of your views toward the United States? If those are your beliefs about the United States, then you need to get something straight, and that is that people will react to your random espousing of them.
Perhaps you might explain how your own broadbrush false stereotyping of an entire country is acceptable to you, but you condemn stereotyping from others.
LIG, I think you're the stupid one for not leaving architecture and collecting a check for your 'illness', that's all...
You would then be able to devote 100% of your time to Archinect, rather than 100% of your employer's time.
Oh, spare me the talking points that republican politicans are <insert stereotype here>. That drivel is just as stupid as believing the Democratic party is full of saints that are perfect. I think I've made my record clear that I think both political parties are 6 in one and half-dozen in the other. It's the constant beat down of any opposing view point that I take issue with.
I personally have been called a racist and xenophobe on this forum because I think immigration laws should be strongly enforced. For that people have posted accusations that "I hate brown people" etc. etc. It did not matter that I explained my spouse was an immigrant and we have opinions based on experiences of immigration through the legal path.
That's just one personal example, but I have seen several similar examples where someone is shouted down for having an opinion(s) that differ from the forum majority groupthink.
Clearly many people (including EvilP) don't treat members with civility and respect. There are way too many ad hominem attacks. It's fine to disagree, but often the response is an insult and not a refute of their statement.
What I'd like to see is a way to flag a comment. If someone posts something clearly disrespectful, flag it for removal by an admin. Seems a much better approach. Instead they banned EvilP, but kept a disrespectful comment active?!?
Evil-P is at a job site but will be back in the office at the end of the day. I will certainly let him know of the developments of this thread and see if He will issue a statement.
EvilP
ooooo snap... very good kurt
it is african american, not afro american you ignoranat slut.
I don't know what the big deal is. Paul said he chose to be banned. He could have just been suspended for a while. So are you guys upset with the decision to suspend him, then? Or if you are upset with the banning, why don't you just ask him why he chose to ban himself. Oh that's right, you can't .... because he chose to ban himself. LOL.
Same sh*t, different day....
I'll say it. He's an ignorant, bigoted piece of shit who finally got what he had coming.
I've thrown some pretty vicious insults at him in response to things he's posted over the years, and I'd say the exact same things to his face. You don't reason with somebody who worships Ayn Rand and jerks off to the latest issue of Soldier of Fortune magazine.
I'm not afraid to use a sharp tongue when the situation arises, and I'm sure I've stepped over the line on occasion. Good luck finding somebody here who hasn't. The difference between me and EP, though, is that I don't get my kicks from bullying weaker people who never did anything to me first, and I challenge you to find one single instance in my 4000+ comments where I've ever made a derogatory comment or slur about somebody's disability, health condition, sexual orientation, race, or religion.
Sure, Gin. As you say, all of your vicious personal attacks are categorically justified.
Ban me, I have access to 21,000 IP addresses.
I've a few spats with EP, but I usually tried to turn his own comments against him (like those he made in the Venturi House #9 thread, which I quoted back to him verbatim when he tried to champion an obscure building in Chicago on a thread of his).
I didn't read the comments that got him "suspended", but the response comments to his words suggest he went a little farther than usual. There are differences between cursing at someone (I've written "fuck you" and "eat me" in more than a couple of threads, although I've tried to stop that kind of nonsense) and using racist and derogatory comments directed at a person's race, religion, sex, or physical and mental situation. Not sure about the permanent banning: a true suspension with a second chance to clean up one's act might be better.
I had a (purposely inflammatory) user name banned here when I tried a little experiment during the period when Archinect was inunandated by Obama threads (during the primaries, I think). I started threads that stated that Obama was a religion, or God himself, or was an alien, all sorts of absurd stuff: what got the user name banned, though, was starting a thread where the title "OBAMA, OBAMA, OBAMA..." went on endlessy across the screen pushing the limits of the page size and probably freaking out the base code of Archinect and duly pissing people off and getting me kicked out.....I love that story.
good lord, people, walk away from the keyboard, have a beer, go to bed, wake up in the morning, reread this thread and note how worked up over nothing you are getting.
oh, just read WonderK's comment...didn't realize he chose the banning route.
Also I should point out that even though "fag" is a derogatory word... it does have about 4 different meanings. I find the word "faggot" to be particularly hateful-- but fag is to faggot as nigga is to nigger.
Also, a lot of you are so subversively racist and xenophobic anyways (in only a way 8 years of a liberal arts education can tell you) that it doesn't really matter anyways. (See: Toni Morrison).
Read a book, read a book, read a motherfuckin' book.
hm. my last (13:47) was half serious, but was also an attempt to be at least a little bit tongue-in-cheek. fail.
this thread is boring now.
Good Lord what did He write that was so bad that has not been said elsewhere on this board? I found him / her particularly amusing. Some of the other foul mouthed posters on this board aren't funny at all. Does anyone have a transcript?
yea, where's EP when you need him....
that was you, you fuck!?
ha ha *headexplodes*
I dont have any pseudonyms anymore. sad. the worst was when I used to let other people post with my name.. that, was not so smart.
varo retro it is african american, not afro american you ignoranat slut.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afro-American
http://www.aacc-charlotte.org/
http://www.afroam.org/history/OurWar/intro.html
etc
so, it is both actually.
that certainly does not make me ignorant. you have qualms about your country's terminologies...don't direct them my way.
as for being a slut, i really don't see why the degree by which i might be sexually active is of any concern to you.
there is no need get personal with me, being that you're totally nugatory to me and thus making your petty brothel-indictment a waste of pretention, foremostly, on par with your message. now try saying that in a couple of other languages and we'll see who is less ignorant. but congrats, your lack of ignorance is evidenced by calling someone else an ignorant slut.
Quibble,
I think that was a reference to Dan Akroyd's calling out of Jane Curtain on Weekend Update on SNL in the 1970s. Yes, I am old enough to remember... ;-) But don't hold it against me!
Just to clarify...
I believe this quote of Paul Petrunia's :
his suspension (the decision to be banned is ultimately his) is due to his history of offensive comments.
(as originally posted on Thread Central)
Actually means that EP has been only suspended, but will be banned if he chooses not to behave himself when the suspension is lifted.
Or the grammar suggests that reading, at least.
OK -- now carry on, back to the quibbling.
Wait -- does this mean we lost the Louisville Spaghetti Junction thread?!?!?!
Dammit!
(On the other hand, I've stopped posting in at least 1 thread because I got tired of EP's idiotic provocations, so I'm ambivalent about him being gone. Won't say I miss him, but I will miss the redeeming times when he made me think critically about my own beliefs. That's more than I can say for most trolls around here...)
The Louisville thread still exists; it just dropped to the second page.
I think people, myself included, spend way too much time on these boards. And I think people behave better in person. And it's better for you to get out and meet people even if you don't agree with everything you say. I think it's healthy that we all don't think the same.
More face time, less online time.
I think a lot of the online nastiness would vanish.
excuse me
I meant to say
even if you don't agree with everything they say."
to quibble, the grammar could also suggest that, by bracketing 'banned' apropos 'suspension', the suspension of ep's person is tantamount to his archinect's title being banned; this interpretation is perhaps encouraged given the citation of EP's lengthy list.
oe;
in a way, i agree with you. however, where do the moderators draw the line, should they draw a line at all?
if EP is allowed this, all I'm asking is, could it not form a precendent that could then qualify graver instances of prejudice based on race, sexuality, gender...etc?
i also see the moderator's side to this; their aim is to create a space where people are generally confortable discussing architecture amongst other things, and they rely on their common sense to suss the limits...going overboard with challenging themselves with what constitutes absolute neutrality (ie archinect as a neutral space to be charged by any poster as she might wish) might work against the basic intention of archinect.
i'm not arguing for banning but simply seeing both sides.
I've met EP once before, and I found him offensive then. He bought me a beer and I felt obligated to play nice with him here for a while, but there's only so much goodwill you can buy with a glass of PBR.
to be clear, they and themselves = moderators and moderatorselves
It was a joke in the manner of an Evil Platypus comment inspired by a skit from the original Saturday Night Live. In the future, please you your google search bar,,,
not everyone watches/ed saturday night live or is aware of your pop reference tendencies, please keep that in mind prior to informing me when to use google search.
even though i am not personally responsible nor have any powers to ban anybody, i am glad paul banned ep promptly.
as funny and spirited as ep might be, he often didn't miss an opportunity to disrespect thoughtlessly on an impulse and ruin otherwise and possibly interesting discussion. nobody in this board should think they are entitled to go in and destroy somebody's discussion just because they can post upon a simple registration process.
it took a lot of effort, sacrifice and time to develop this site and nobody should think they could just come in and do anything they can please.
no such a thing.
how would you feel if somebody comes and pees on your drawing for no reason other than they feel they can?
here is a first hand respect i recieved from ep a while back for news-posting an interesting article by a very respected journalist operating in the middle east.
ep sure didn't lose anytime to come in and spit his profonities with an all or nothing threat at the end.
what i did for it? nothing... i let him see it himself if he ever did.
http://www.archinect.com/news/article.php?id=80201_0_24_0_C
i ask all of you who has been posting in this particular thread; have you ever been edited, cencored or warned with an editorial letter?
i believe not. and i know non of us are angels here but usually know the difference between a 'fuck you' and 'rimming' somebody.. latter is not archinect level and frankly, a little sick to bring into an architectural discussion... that was usedagainst emilio i believe. and similar profonity against denise scott brown during the transport of lieb house when that particular thread was somewhat linked to a new york times article...
this has not happened out of blue folks.
Holy shit, Orhan, what a fucking racist bullshit comment THAT ever was. I knew EvilP was a jerkwad but man, that just about takes my breath away. Way to advance your petty, scared little views, jerk. I commend you for being able to take the high road, Orhan!
not everyone watches/ed saturday night live or is aware of your pop reference tendencies, ----this is when you should use google.
i say we initiate a eulogy competition?
EvilP always claimed to be a registered Democrat. Believe him or not, I did enjoy his critical views on politics. It's quite obvious that the majority on Archinect are politically left leaning and I see nothing wrong with some balance. However, I've noticed on many occasions in political threads veteran Archinect posters gang up on opposing viewpoints, to the point that I would call it intolerance.
First of all, that sours people on Archinect and drives them away just as an ignorant comment from EvilP.
Secondly, I could think of a few regular posters that should be removed for inflaming, distorting threads and posting personal attacks...if the standards were applied universally. It seems that only those people that Paul gets direct private complaints from get scrubbed.
I think the policing happens more often than people typically realize. On many other forums, admins often post in an "official" capacity to give warnings, delete threads, or ban users.
On other forums I frequent they don't even tolerate bad language. Throw in an F-bomb and your post will be scrubbed. Then again, I've never heard of entire accounts being deleted.
I actually enjoyed the old <your name> forum because it was such and open free flow of thought and information. Still enjoy Archinect because it is very open and free flowing.
This website is Paul's creating and ultimately it's his decision on who to boot. That said, I do get the feeling that there is no universal standard of conduct, i.e. someone can get cut simply because enough people are thin skinned enough to complain.
aquapura;
i don't think you're tackling the most indefensible item in EP's recent posts, so your point of view is really incomprehensible; you're using, to your convenience, an argument that has been used in this post a few times and this been rendered easy but flat.
that's your personal opinion and by no means a universal point-of-view. don't pretend to speak for the whole board
From Orhan's link above:
Your a tool. No mention of the computer, the space shuttle the skyscraper.
I ask you this - why is it that the readership of al jezzera is a bunch of backward camel fucking rug merchants hell bent on destroying civilisation
\ban me cocksucker
- evilplatypus, Sep 21, 08 | 12:31 pm
Yeah, there's an example of the "balanced" political discourse we need more of around here, right? Show me one other person on Archinect who gets away with talking like that without being banned or suspended.
Spare me the whole "he's being persecuted for political speech" meme. If you're attending a seminar and somebody constantly interrupts the event by screaming racist profanities at the speaker, you don't pat that person on the back and politely thank them for their opinion. You call security and have them removed from the premises. The fact that other people in the seminar sometimes have heated disagreements doesn't make the heckler any less of an obnoxious prick or excuse his behavior.
LIG - I'm not trying to defend that quote from EvilP. Then again how is his stereotype of al jezzzera readers any different from some of the common posts calling conservatives/Republicans stereotypes like racist, xenophobe, homophobe, etc. Is that "balanced" discourse? Is that any less ignorant than EvilP's comment above?
LIG, if there's medication available for asberners or whatever you have, you should probably find it and take it and put-down the keyboard for a while.
...or better yet, inquire with the new administration whether you qualify for some kind of disability compensation ;)
Aqua - How is that the same? I agree calling any generic group, be it political or not, racist or xenophobe is a generalization and ignorant. But thats based on the general concept that no matter how much one group has a tendency towards something, you can't assume everyone belonging to that group follows that stereotype.
Calling a certain group of people have a tendency towards racism is different than BEING racist (or writing racist comments).
aquapara: Funny how you claim you're not trying to defend that quote, and then immediately go on to do exactly that.
First of all, being a conservative Republican is a choice and not something you're born into like your race or sexual orientation or certain disabilities. When conservatives/Republicans make the choice to openly support racist, xenophobic, homophobic, etc. policies and politicians, then yes, it's fair to call them racists, xenophobes, homophobes, etc. If the shoe fits, wear it.
If people find themselves uncomfortable being labeled that way, maybe they should re-examine their beliefs and actions that cause people to form that impression. I spent the first half of my life as a right-wing Republican, but changed my tune when I realized I could no longer morally justify being lumped in with that camp.
Your whole false equivalency argument is nothing more than a self-serving strawman. If 99 people in a room think the earth is round and one person thinks it's flat, that doesn't mean both viewpoints are equally valid and deserve equal airtime. Some people's opinions are just plain wrong and stupid, and they should be called out as such.
But there's a difference between calling out somebody's opinions as wrong and stupid, and acting like a schoolyard bully.
Pczatek: I could claim Social Security disability benefits if I wanted to, but I chose to work full-time and pay my taxes instead. I don't expect you to comprehend that idea, though. Unfortunately for you, being stupid doesn't qualify for SSI and there's no medication for it.
i think this thread has pretty much run its course
somehow I think this what evilP would have wanted.
i don't really find anything objectionable in the comments related to the pentagon/darpa thing. the original post did have some bias in it...and that might actually be worse than vulgar name-calling (which is pretty easy to ignore and not nearly as insidious)
on the other hand, i wish i could resort to calling people names, but as an insult it always feels so hollow to me. like in that south park movie when the fat kid was singing something that went like "aaron's mom is bitch, bitch bitch...bitch, bitch, bitch...a bitch, bitch, bitch...etc.
"Why does the U.S. foster unfettered creativity only in the context of lethal technologies?" ...posted by Orhan.
So, EvilP's reaction to what Orhan posted is completely unacceptable?
I'd suggest that Orhan's posting of such a hyperbolic statement was much worse than EvilP's reaction to it. Orhan, what was your aim in posting a false statement about the United States? Are we to believe that you were fostering objective political dicsourse? As Clamfan has written, I think you were baiting.
Orhan, is that article representative of your views toward the United States? If those are your beliefs about the United States, then you need to get something straight, and that is that people will react to your random espousing of them.
Perhaps you might explain how your own broadbrush false stereotyping of an entire country is acceptable to you, but you condemn stereotyping from others.
LIG, I think you're the stupid one for not leaving architecture and collecting a check for your 'illness', that's all...
You would then be able to devote 100% of your time to Archinect, rather than 100% of your employer's time.
...and Orhan's Moderator responsibilities should be discontinued asap...this guy is a fascist.
i don't have moderator responsibilities.
Oh, spare me the talking points that republican politicans are <insert stereotype here>. That drivel is just as stupid as believing the Democratic party is full of saints that are perfect. I think I've made my record clear that I think both political parties are 6 in one and half-dozen in the other. It's the constant beat down of any opposing view point that I take issue with.
I personally have been called a racist and xenophobe on this forum because I think immigration laws should be strongly enforced. For that people have posted accusations that "I hate brown people" etc. etc. It did not matter that I explained my spouse was an immigrant and we have opinions based on experiences of immigration through the legal path.
That's just one personal example, but I have seen several similar examples where someone is shouted down for having an opinion(s) that differ from the forum majority groupthink.
Clearly many people (including EvilP) don't treat members with civility and respect. There are way too many ad hominem attacks. It's fine to disagree, but often the response is an insult and not a refute of their statement.
What I'd like to see is a way to flag a comment. If someone posts something clearly disrespectful, flag it for removal by an admin. Seems a much better approach. Instead they banned EvilP, but kept a disrespectful comment active?!?
EvilP has a press secretary?
;-)
Orhan posted this in :ATTENTION ARCHINECT POSTERS:
Orhan Ayyüce
Total Entries: 840
Total Comments: 4478
05/05/09 14:55
I personally had to delete a comment by 'a poster' in one of the treads for poorly associating 'swine flu' to 'Muslims.'
Then What on God's green earth do you call that? A lie?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.