[serious] Off Topic Moderation Input - Part 2

[Robert]

Asher: read an entire post before you respond to it.
You gave me a couple of links, I responded to them one by one. In the first one Ben did not accuse Drose of lying. In a later one he did, to which I responded as well.

If you're not able to debate this issue in a sane way then we're done.

Too many people in the OTF are getting overheated too easily. After 2 or 3 posts you guys already burst into flames about all the 'horror' said against you. But there's no self-reflection at all. One thing you should know about me, I have absolutely no respect for people without self-reflection, who say anything and everything about others, never being able to apply the same logic to themselves. Never being able to say sorry for their own faults, always giving excuses for their own behavior, never accepting explanations from others. Show self reflection, keep yourself in control of your emotions, and simply read my posts. That's all I ask from you.

You can rephrase your post above into something normal and sane. Then I'll debate the issue with you. You also get 4 hours to send me a PM in which you admit all your current Double Logins. If not, then I'll close them all myself and give you a ban. One of them is a princess. I know more, but I'm sure that I don't know all, thus tell me about all of them and you'll be pardonned.

[Wezil]

Don't be an idiot. I asked a question. I did not lay words into your mouth.

You implied.


Asher has already provided you an excellent analysis of why Ben should be gone. You just can't wrap your head around it.


Nikolai - You said I was intolerant of anyone that disagree with me. This is an outright lie.

[Nikolai]

Neither have I.

[Robert]

First Nikolai, then Plomp. Putting words in people's mouths.

I said a lie isn't an opinion Plomp. I said nothing about rules.

Don't be an idiot. I asked a question. I did not lay words into your mouth.

[Asher]

Ben fears that DROSe is unknown about a possible infection he has, and passes it on.
Ben does not say that DROSe does it on purpose.

Ben doesn't say that DROSe is a selfish liar, his exact words are: "DROSe, I'm sure you are a great person"

Are you really, really this dense?

YES, he did. He both called DRose a liar (it's in one of the posts I linked): claiming he lied to donate blood so he could feel good about himself. That's calling him a selfish liar.

The "fear" Ben has was unfounded. He assumed that, as a young high school student, DRose was engaging in high-risk sexual activity. A fear he based solely on the fact that DRose was gay -- nevermind that Ben has probably more sexual experience than DRose does. An offensive characterization Ben made solely based on DRose's sexual orientation. He then added on the selfish liar bit just to be a good Christian.

Ben doesn't name DROSe a liar either.
You're going way over the top here, Asher.

Yes, he did. Please learn to read. This is infuriating. I take MY time to read through a thread I ALREADY REPORTED because YOU couldn't be bothered to do your damn job. Then apparently you don't even read what I link. Unreal.

Is it wrong to refer to another individual of a group you belong to as "one of you"?
One of you (christians) murdered that abortion doctor.
One of you (dutch guys) introduced slavery in Suriname
One of you (heteros) raped a girl
One of you (gays) talked to me in the bar yesterday.

I see no problem.

That quote in and of itself is not bannable or wrong, per se. But it's a reflection of Ben's attitude. Homosexuals are not one of us. They are something else.

Drose was accused of lying. So what?
We can't even accuse each other of lying anymore.

Was he or was he not accused of lying? You keep flip-flopping inbetween a couple sentences here.

Ok, now I see that you're not serious.

What the ****?

You don't think I'm serious?

Now you're just being insulting. I'm very serious -- It's very insulting for people to think my relationship is any less real or less valid than theirs. Ben's comparison to long-term monogamous gay couples to that of unicorns has a very obvious implication. It would be an utter shame if Ben's "clever" use of words here is way over your head.

Best of all is that Ben in that post admits/agrees that monogame gays are as (un)likely to get HIV infected as monogame heteroes.

You clearly have the reading skills of Ben here. I can see why you don't see a problem.

Someone who says "Patatoe/patato" does not compare his subject to a patatoe and Ben does not compare a gay to an unicorn. He just uses it as an example.

Don't be silly Asher.

You're clearly not on a requisite level of intelligence to understand what's going on. This is embarrassing for you.

a. no link

IT IS IN THE ****ING THREAD THAT I HAVE ALREADY LINKED. Please learn to read.

b. so what? Is it bad to be gay? Does it matter if more blacks are gay? Does it offend anybody? Dutch people are more likely to be blonde then people from Kenya. So what?
Maybe it's not even true, then it's just nonsense.

Yes, so what?

Let's play more games.

Blacks are stupid.
Blacks are more likely to rape their children.
Blacks are more likely to be cannibals.
Blacks frequently eat the semen of their first born children because they don't get enough salt in their fried chicken diets.

Let's ****ing rock n' roll with this **** on the site. That's not against your terms of service at all, is it?

no link.

SAME ****ING THREAD. Come on, *******.

Anyway, so what? It's silly at most.

It would be silly to you. I've had one gay friend kill himself and my SO's gay friend killed himself in February(?) of this year. Silly to you, personal to others, insensitive and inappropriate to all.

And Asher, you provoke Ben all the time.
His response to me is always: "I get provoked and then I answer."
If you provoke him, then don't expect me to defend you when he hits you back with silly words.

It's interesting how the guy who waltzes around calling for my rights to be revoked and belittles my relationship is the one claiming he is being provoked.

Smarten then hell up, Plomp. Shape up or ship out. I've completely lost patience with your inability to run this site.

[Wezil]

You think that we should have a rule that says that it's not allowed to lie on Apolyton?

First Nikolai, then Plomp. Putting words in people's mouths.

I said a lie isn't an opinion Plomp. I said nothing about rules.

[Wezil]

His presence at this site, as it is now...unchecked...is undoubtedly a deterrent to new visitors. I tried to get one of my best friends posting here (woollyleanne), but she only posted a few times before encountering Ben in one of the hockey threads and was aghast that such dishonesty and bigotry was allowed here. She hasn't returned since.

I lost a Dead Pool player over it (Omni). A long time member of the site that got tired of the ****. He hasn't been here in over a year although we still associate in RL.

[Robert]

A lie isn't an opinion Sloww, it's just a lie.

You think that we should have a rule that says that it's not allowed to lie on Apolyton?

[Robert]

The key word is implication. Like I said, it wasn't Islam that flew those planes into the WTC.

What's your point?

Besides, I reread the part where MOBIUS was banned, how does it differ from what BK is doing all the time? Where does he say that he is going to abort BK? Or was he banned because what he said implied that BK should be dead?

He was banned because he stated that BK should be dead.

[Wezil]

One may not agree with Ben, but were he to be banned, he certainly shouldn't be the only one. His opinions may run counter to yours, but they're his opinions.
There are other logins here that make no pretext of stating an opinion, and merely flame.

A lie isn't an opinion Sloww, it's just a lie.

[dannubis]

The key word is implication. Like I said, it wasn't Islam that flew those planes into the WTC.

Besides, I reread the part where MOBIUS was banned, how does it differ from what BK is doing all the time? Where does he say that he is going to abort BK? Or was he banned because what he said implied that BK should be dead?

[Robert]

Islam is a religion, an ideology.
One can say everything about a religion or an ideology.

There's a difference between saying "Islam is a cruel bloodthirsty wrong evil religion" and saying "all muslims are cruel bloodthirsty wrong evil people"
The latter would be a bannable offense.

[dannubis]

Is this close enough for you ?

http://apolyton.net/forums/showpost.php?p=5822663&postcount=249

It was not islam that flew those plains into the towers. So only a blind man can't see the implication there.

[Robert]

If you have jurispedence that any of those Ben quotes are hate speech, then we can talk.

I don't believe they are because they're not about people being wrong b/c of what they are, but for what they do.

Saying: "Islam is wrong" is something completely different then saying: "All muslims are criminals"
The latter would be a bannable offense.

Saying: "Gay sex is unhealthy" is something completely different then saying: "All gays are immoral"
The latter one would be a bannable offense.

[Zanzozz]

2. Hate speech based on sex, sexual orientation, race, religion, age, disability will not be tolerated.

http://apolyton.net/forums/faq.php?faq=faqid_4#faq_faqid_4_43

Hate speech is, outside the law, any communication which disparages a person or a group on the basis of some characteristic such as race or sexual orientation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech

to depreciate by indirect means (as invidious comparison) : speak slightingly about

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disparage

There's a difference between judging actions (ie, homosexuality)

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?t=191845&page=22

Having sex with guys is also bad for you.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?t=191845&page=19

About homosexuality? What is extravagant about the claim that homosexuality is bad for your mental and physical health? Why does it matter if a claim is ludicrious if true?

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?t=191845&page=20

Islam is wrong
Homosexuality is wrong
Killing people and harvesting their organs is wrong,

are all objectively true.

So, are all of the above simply not disparaging towards homosexuality because it is based on facts that Ben claims to be true?