"If I want to be a complete freak and harass people all across the forum whenever they post and derail topics talking about them in a tremendously creepy and annoying fashion then by god who are you to stop me?"
you are aware of a few things.
A) There is no 'freedom of speech' on the internet, the internet is not a country.
B) The united states bill of rights says the government has to respect freedom of speech. literally "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of [...] or abridging the freedom of speech[...]." a business/person/group can force upon you whatever rules they wish with regards to speech, so long as it is not illegal in some other way, ie racist, child porn etc.
C) The ability to say whatever you please is important, but you should not infringe on another persons right to not be hurt by what you say. And no, there is no was you can possibly not offend everyone. but there is a difference between posting random trolls and posting things that are crafted to make people feel uncomfortable, especially when you go into their thread and do it. Your response will probably be 'its the internet, grow a thicker skin' but why must they? I can see no reason why they should have to, especially when you do not start the trolling etc.
D) It is important for all of us to maintain an atmosphere that is welcoming and inviting to promote friendship and camaraderie here at the RIA. This forum is how most of our CN friends gets to know us better.
No freedom is absolute.
I'm completely against any form of moderation unless there's illegal content involved. This has it's problems, but I do think it's better than letting mods run around all willy nilly deleting or locking what they please.
I think whatever CZom tells me to think.
Post for attention.WHAT DO YOU WANT?! :3
Your two white babies.I promised no such thing, rumplestiltskin!
Like you promised.
You can keep the purple one.
Perhaps you should quote that rather than try to present it as your own thought.No freedom is absolute.
But if you exchange freedom for safety, you will soon find you have neither.
Imagine turning that narcissistic hurt into something useful for the community by fighting for your side instead of trying to suppress the other.Imaging people not having to?
"If I want to be a complete freak and harass people all across the forum whenever they post and derail topics talking about them in a tremendously creepy and annoying fashion then by god who are you to stop me?"Invoking the name of god into a discussion about free speech is laughable. God did not give man the right to free speech. Man gave that to themselves. In fact, god explicitly denies the right to unabated free speech.
Imaging people not having to?
The internet shouldn't be a place to become hostile or harass others. People have enough oxshit to deal with IRL without someone like you throwing stinkbombs into their place of relaxation.
And the RIA shouldn't be a place for women to fear because some grilled slug might try to harass them. It's gross enough having to deal with live slugs in the fucking garden, with their slimey trails left all over.. If you weren't already grilled, I'd throw salt on you.
This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward. This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward. This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward. This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward. This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward. This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward. This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward. This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward. This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward. This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward. This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward. This thread is a glorified rationalization for why you shouldn't have to make compromises everyone else makes. The RIA does not require everyone have the same sense of humor or fun, least of all that they all have your sense of humor. The RIA does not require that everyone be capable of complete detachment from the implications of written text directed at them. The RIA does not require that all females subject themselves to ritualistic hazing by people who pretend they are just trolling. These are not written into law because the RIA does not require laws to dictate every spectrum of social interaction: the members moderate themselves to a large degree, as you can see both gangs and leo acted differently when people talked to them about it. This is the reason freedoms exist, when they do exist: because people do not abuse them and they enact laws within themselves so that someone outside of them is not required to. They consider others' point of view and put themselves in their position, using a sort of logical empathy which may be completely unknown to you. It is not always possible to find common ground and often one party is less logical than the other; as was the case with Holy Ruler. I tried to defuse the situation with him but he was unwilling and unable (will and ability are the same in this context) to imagine people using the term Mohammedan in a different way than he assumed. He chose instead to twist the entire situation to fit his paradigm of interpretation, and to slander and wrongly accuse first you and then the entire alliance in order to accommodate his idiocy. Irony of Ironies, you are now doing the same thing to Mia, except it is worse because the majority of human society would perceive your conduct as unacceptable. The world in general cannot and will not ever detach itself completely from the face value of words and expressions. Giving up freedom for safety is bad, yes, so is giving up safety for freedom; people instinctively try to balance the two. Your instincts are broken. The RIA has instinctively avoided behavior as extreme as yours and based on the overwhelming negative response you're getting, it is not likely to change for you. We don't need an amendment, we don't need to be afraid of mods, we don't need to refute your numerous logical fallacies, we're under no obligation to accept your trolling or justify our intolerance of your intolerance. You think people who can't detach meaning from expression are weak; are you afraid of being weak? Everyone is weak; but not everyone is a coward.
You shouldn't have to have a law to tell you not to be a dick.EXACTLY! SCREW THE LAW!
Jenne, you are such an optimist.Wow, I don't think I have ever been called that before. I guess I should clarify. While you should not need a law, most people are too fucking stupid to know the difference.
You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, adult material, or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. Spam, flooding, advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are also forbidden on this forum.
YEAH! SCREW THE LAW! WOOHOO!Jenne, you are such an optimist.Wow, I don't think I have ever been called that before. I guess I should clarify. While you should not need a law, most people are too fucking stupid to know the difference.
Even if there was a law, you would bitch about where the line was drawn. Even if those lines are drawn, the enforcement of those lines is subjective. There will never be a black and white definition who right and wrong unless every possible words and phrase in every possible context were individually addressed.
You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, adult material, or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. Spam, flooding, advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are also forbidden on this forum.
The discussion is over from this point. I am closing this thread. Instead of informing about Islam and what it isn't, it has become misinforming people who don't know about Islam, thanks to GS and Cashflow. It will also help in saving GS face because he claimed he was a history major and did not even know who Genghis Khan was.
I personally don't think any topic is sacred, and offer anyone who gets their panties in a knot a chance to grow, and get over their sensitivity...
... people get emotional over a few pixels on the screen before them .... Imagine turning that narcissistic hurt into something useful ... It's like a bully in the schoolyard who can't come up with a good comeback so resort to screaming "shut up" and goes out swinging. Fucking retards.... We should do something to help the dimmer members ...
Logic is a precious word, you should use it sparingly until you understand it.
Llamavore, you are logic. Which is strange. But that doesn't change it.
GrilledSlug* (henceforth known as GS) is no longer allowed to respond in any but the most civil** of manner to any member of the Random Insanity Alliance's forums***. This includes-but is not limited to- any new topics started by GS whether they are in response to another member or not.
*GrilledSlug also refers to any future accounts his real life self may hold on our forums.
** The civility of a post is determined by members of government with Tri outweighing gov if the post in question is in debate.
*** This includes any past, present, or future forums the Random Insanity Alliance may use.
As for abusive, hateful, harassing, and threatening, I think that Mia and HR had these pegged better than I ever could. And I could not give a flying fuck. That said, if I had a flying fuck, I don't think I would part with it easily.
I suppose now's as good a time as ever to come out about the mystery religion of Isllamacism, a blend of spirituality, theology and political ideology based on the interpretation of its 4 holy texts (the Torah, the Injeel, the Qur'an, and the Random Insanity Alliance boards or 'Riab'). We combine our pseudo-satirical amalgamation of whatever logically salvageable truth we find in these Scriptures with spiritual disciplines we glean from internet culture which are revealed to us by means we will not disclose as being the path to enlightenment in the age of information. Our numbers are few, but growing, along with our discontent. Up to this point we've been forced to marginalize ourselves to obscurity and secrecy due to society's perception that our ritualistic behaviors are derivative, low-brow attempts at simple humor, spiritually insincere, and irrelevant. Add to this perception our utter commitment to values which fundamentally oppose the operating philosophy of the existing power structure and it's clear to see the world is not ready for us; but ready or not, here we come.
First I'd like to open by saying that There Is No God But Allamah, and Muhammallama is his prophet, and Llamavore is Muhammallama's alt.
As the Alt of Muhammallama I'd like first to address the spiritual truth so blissfully demonstrated by HR; what others call 'trolling' is one of the core spiritual disciplines of our faith and as keepers of the divine revelation it is my prerogative to define it; provocative mockery of any sort done purely in the pursuit of lulz, when done to those outside the faith or between those inside; but when done to those within the faith by an outsider, it is always considered to be done with the intent to cause emotional harm and the deepest familiarity with what will offend the victim-believer. Offense at trolling can also be taken even if the trolling occurs between nonbelievers; for example I may take offense to HR's trolling of millions of muslims which he engages in by attempting to identify his personal antisocial qualities with a defense of their religion.
To RIAers, both the secret believers and the uninitiated: I know that this announcement comes as a surprise, but allow me to reassure you that Muhammallama extends a special grace to the denizens of our holy site, a period of 5 minutes within the reading of this post to choose the true faith, so that they need not be our enemies and suffer our divine bigotry and shens of wrath. discriminate wisely.
dicks and stuff
Here, let me mimick your last paragraph the way my 3 year old does it: "lalalalaimnotlisteninglalalayourestupidlalala". At least he's cute, and manages to not shit in his pants 9 times out of 10.
If you want to start talking about freedom of speech or how you think your rights are oppressed, go right ahead. But I can almost gurantee this:"First they came for the communists,
Almost none of you know ANYTHING about rights or general freedom being oppressed.
You might sit here and bitch that your getting moderated on an internet forum, but at the same time, halfway across the world, people are being executed for standing up to true oppression, not just complaining that someone stepped in and stopped their cyber-oxying.
Maybe everyone but me is posting from an alternate dimension where this isn't a troll topic.I'm really not even sure how I keep getting mentioned in this discussion even after being gone for 3 weeks. It baffles me to the point of wanting to trademark my name, I tell you.
Leo, that makes absolutely no sense in reguard to the issue.I was more saying that just because we're not being oppressed like people in the Middle East, it doesn't mean that we're safe.
I left this topic, and Only glanced though when leo posted, but seriously. That makes NO SENSE.
The whole reason this topic exists, is because GS is complaining that mods took a stand and stopped the harassment of members who felt they were getting harassed, and now your saying that because we did that, we are stifling your freedom of speech and prosecuting you by protecting others?
If anything your quote says we should take more action.
What the fuck??????
"First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me."
By the way, this is total oxshit, you guys don't break out into mass argument when I make a topic about my poop.
By the way, this is total oxshit, you guys don't break out into mass argument when I make a topic about my poop.That is because we are all in agreement of how much we enjoy seeing your shit.
remember that thing you were talking about doing, to fix all this, which I asked you not to do because it would set a bad precedent and irreparably harm RIA culture forever?
It may be our only chance.
Leo's almost black
I meant blah people
Basically:
Yes, freedom of speech is a right we need to respect, and moderate as little as possible. HOWEVER, freedom of speech, should not take precedence or infringe on the basic human rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Let me ask you this:
At what point, should someone step in to help someone who is getting oppressed or harassed?
Let me just steal Leo's quote, because it applies to my side of the arguement (thanks for the quote :D):Quote"First they came for the communists,If something is going too far and there are complaints, should we just standby and let it happen because it doesn't effect us?
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me."
Because they claim freedom of speech?
Where is the line?
remember that thing
Are you talking about the black thing
remember that thing
Are you talking about the black thing
I'm talking about the Omega Filter. remember the script shadow slayer was working on that allows user specific filters? he said he could set it up so that people could give negative ratings on a post or a thread and set permanent filters for the user that effected all their posts until they got positive ratings again. when people voiced concerns it would eventually turn the forums into a factionalized elitist warzone littered with defamatory spam and low brow gender/sex insults, he said he could insert control measures like, requiring you pay llamas to dislike a post, or setting a countdown timer from the time of activation (a few days maybe) and then a cooldown timer of several weeks before the feature could be switched on again. at the time I thought the feature was too powerful not to be abused, but it seems RIA will be abused either way.
edit: bruthas
The reason there isn't exactly a clarification on where the line is, is mainly because most people understand what "goes too far".
Anyway, determining that line is something on the agenda for gov to talk about, but above it on that list, is the rebuilding, and a number of other things.
I'm talking about the Omega Filter. remember the script shadow slayer was working on that allows user specific filters? he said he could set it up so that people could give negative ratings on a post or a thread and set permanent filters for the user that effected all their posts until they got positive ratings again. when people voiced concerns it would eventually turn the forums into a factionalized elitist warzone littered with defamatory spam and low brow gender/sex insults, he said he could insert control measures like, requiring you pay llamas to dislike a post, or setting a countdown timer from the time of activation (a few days maybe) and then a cooldown timer of several weeks before the feature could be switched on again. at the time I thought the feature was too powerful not to be abused, but it seems RIA will be abused either way.remember that thing
Are you talking about the black thing
edit: bruthas
i am going to excersize my freedom of speech and use it to say...
you are teh gay atonic. go kill some more innocent bystanders in some 3rd world country we invaded for purely economic reasons because the rich need to be richer.
The reason there isn't exactly a clarification on where the line is, is mainly because most people understand what "goes too far".
Anyway, determining that line is something on the agenda for gov to talk about, but above it on that list, is the rebuilding, and a number of other things.
Perhaps, but does everyone understand what doesn't "go too far enough"? If everyone understands it, then it should be easy to spell out.
I'm talking about the Omega Filter.remember that thingAre you talking about the black thing
That's one of the stupidest idea I have ever heard, unless you are actually shooting for factionalisation of the alliance. There will inevitably be competition to see who can get the lowest score, and those people will help boost each other's scores, and create the most entertaining threads around just to counterblock their blockers. Andy BTW it is simply a form of censorship.
Better to have a clear law, and re-educate the sensitive ones so they understand that they have the choice to ignore what they don't like. And then enforce the law with the recidivists.
i am going to excersize my freedom of speech and use it to say...
you are teh gay atonic. go kill some more innocent bystanders in some 3rd world country we invaded for purely economic reasons because the rich need to be richer.
Good thing Amsterdam is in the north... My mind is going to go north too.Woops, I just skimmed the article. Looks like you're safe for another year.
The measures will come into force in the rest of the country - including Amsterdam - in January 2013.
the ways in which it has already been spelled out for you:
when someone tells you seriously to stop
when several people tell you seriously and politely to stop
when moderators tell you to stop
when you make a thread about why you shouldn't have to stop and most of the people in the thread disagree with you
Too bad everyone else hasn't evolved to your level of rationalizing their own selfishness.
The reason I oppose making such a law is because, if you refuse to listen to us on this, who knows what you will next decide is not spelled out clearly enough, and what lengths you will go to trying to agitate people and create the perception of injustice so that you can fabricate more legislation.
first off, you are already factionalizing the alliance, don't pretend you care about unity, you only care about the faction that agrees with you. second, there was a time when the alliance was chill enough to handle this kind of thing without taking it too far, and probably would have used it in a leadup to another fake civil war. third, I agree the control measures he suggested weren't strong enough, at least for where we are now.
right, because the internet is an emotional gladiatorial arena where only the strong survive, and the kids who kill themselves due to cyberbullying are doing us all a favor because if they don't have the wherewithal to Choose not to feel pain, they Deserve to die. And the RIA should be exactly like the rest of the internet in that regard. remember, this is not an 18+ alliance.
I've already stated that some people cannot choose to ignore things, and that everyone has a limit somewhere in their psyche on what they can ignore. You obviously cannot ignore your sensitivity about being asked to censor yourself. I sympathize with your sensitivity, but not with your hypocritical denial of it.
this is probably a bad thread to joke around in, and as a member of gov that should be obvious to you, not to mention you are doing it to another gov member while his authority is being questioned, in front of the guy questioning him. professionalism.
You know, I think it's about time we bring back the Chillaxin PartyWhat do you mean, bring back? It never left my sig.
I don't think I've expressed this yet, but this topic is fucking stupid and you should legitimately feel bad for yourself.