MMMMMM Advocates Violence Against Americans

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How is deporting someone a violent act?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you serious? It's a violation of self-determination by use of force.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am totally serious. Deportation screams non-citizen. Don't forget that IMPORTANT little bit of information.

[/ QUOTE ]

We were talking about violence, not citizenship status. Forced relocation is violent. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but I am just not following you. I asked how deporting someone is violent. You responded, but failed to do so fully. I think in this case the citizenship status certainly IS important because we are talking about a deportation. Not a "forced relocation". At least those were the words used. If you wanted to talk about something else, perhaps clarifying would have been prudent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Explain how an act can be "violent" when the victim has some arbitrary status decided by the state and magically NOT violent when that victim has some other status decided by the state.

Deporting citizens might be more reprehensible than deporting non-citizens, but I don't see how one is violent and one is not.

Deportation is a forced relocation. The FORCE part of that is what makes it a violent act.

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't advocate violence against Americans.

[/ QUOTE ]

What you advocate is clear. Whether it is "violence against Americans" or not is a matter of opinion.

[ QUOTE ]
In jokerswild's case however I believe he deliberately and maliciously misrepresented the views of another poster which is a different matter altogether.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I believe I have shown, what jokerswild said is a matter of opinion. It is not defamatory. Indeed, in the original thread you have admitted as much, and have said that the difference is in interpretations of the meaning of firing a shot into the air.

If what jokerswild said was not defamatory, he should not have been banned. I shall change my avatar and location in protest of your actions.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are protesting actions that you clearly lack a solid understanding of. Had you seen the messages MMMMMM has given to posters, not limited to jokerswild, you would know that M6, as moderator, has made it known that personal attacks of any kind are not to be tolerated. Jokerswild was given fair warning and continued. If this particular part of 2+2 is to ever be even partially civilized, the need for a concept of what is acceptable and unacceptable is obvious.

In another thread, I was warned for posting insulting remarks toward either Cyrus or Chris Alger (I don't remember which)...I'm certain that had I continued on the same path, my fate would have been the same as jokerswild's, and rightfully so.

But, as I said in the thread jw got banned over, its clear that the only people who disagree with M6 are those who disagree with him politically anyways, so I shouldn't be surprised.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
Deportation is a forced relocation. The FORCE part of that is what makes it a violent act.


[/ QUOTE ]

The same could be said for any law enforcement activity.

I suggest changing some immigration laws: that is not a violent suggestion.

If you are arguing that things like, say, putting certain criminals in jail is a violent act, well, I think you should start another thread--because what I have suggested is no more violent than any other act of state which ultimately relies on force to accomplish its objective. If you want to argue about the right of the state to do certain things, or whether the state and our legal system are inherently violent, please start a separate thread.

[Broken Glass Can]

MMMMMM,

My advice is to stop arguing. You have made your points. These guys are like the backers of Cindy Sheehan and anti-war kooks in the media, as long as they keep this as the top topic of discussion, they think they are winning. The endless OOT moderation threads make it clear that you (as a moderator) can not win by continuing to debate. The fact that they don't even accurately represent the facts (about what constitutes violence or about jokerswild) makes this plain.

Liberals only attack when they can't defend their irrational positions, and jokerswild has never been exactly rational IMO. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
IIn jokerswild's case however I believe he deliberately and maliciously misrepresented the views of another poster which is a different matter altogether.

[/ QUOTE ]

...and this is where I believe the crux of this issue lies.

It was not 'another poster' that he spoke about...it was YOU.

Given that you hold a position of power in this forum as a moderator, I believe the appropriate action in this case would have been for you to respond to his post, state the specifics of your difference of opinion with him, and then (as I suggested in another post) let the readers decide.

In legal language, because of your position, you should have recused yourself.

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
IIn jokerswild's case however I believe he deliberately and maliciously misrepresented the views of another poster which is a different matter altogether.

[/ QUOTE ]

...and this is where I believe the crux of this issue lies.

It was not 'another poster' that he spoke about...it was YOU.

Given that you hold a position of power in this forum as a moderator, I believe the appropriate action in this case would have been for you to respond to his post, state the specifics of your difference of opinion with him, and then (as I suggested in another post) let the readers decide.

In legal language, because of your position, you should have recused yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is precisely why he shouldn't have "recused himself". There should be no difference in what would have happened if it were any other poster or the moderator, who in fact was just "another poster" until 2+2 decided to allow user mods. JW was given fair warning. I really am failing to see the logic in the people who are defending him. There needs to be some semblance of civility and order here in order to make this forum something more than an verbal Ultimate Fighting event.

Still think Torii Hunter is better than Barry Bonds?

Please post a link for the politics forum that is overflowing with manners and civility. I have yet to find it.

[MMMMMM]

Hi Myrtle,

I see your point regarding recusement. Here are the reasons I don't feel I really should have needed to do that in this instance.

I did not let the fact that he directed the remarks at me influence my decision in the slightest. I can honestly say that my decision would have been the same had he directed the remarks at any other poster. So, why should I have recused myself, except to unduly worry about shallow impressions? The posters who have been here for years pretty much know what is going on.

At any rate, let's suppose I had deferred the decision to any of the most civil, long-term and respected posters on the board. Say Andy Fox, John Cole, sam h., HDPM and adios. Do you really suppose their decisions regarding the banning of jokerswild would have been much different? (I would doubt it but of course I can't speak for them).

If I were to put it to a vote on the forum, I don't think the views of those who frequently name-call and engage in other childish and destructive behaviors on the forum should even count towards a vote on such a banning. I wouldn't really mind putting it up for a vote, except that many of the voters should be disqualified because they engage in the same forbidden practices (albeit to a lesser extent, of course). It's not like everyone on the forum has nearly the same level of maturity as yourself, you know. Many of them seem to view partisanship at any cost almost as being their raison d'etre on this board, and don't hesitate to act churlishly or worse whenever the impulse may strike them or when they feel their views are being challenged.

While I try to be lenient and to exercise my best judgment, posters can be banned at the moderator's discretion. Especially after they receive a direct warning and then promptly go ahead and do the exact same thing again.

[LaggyLou]

[ QUOTE ]

While I try to be lenient and to exercise my best judgment, posters can be banned at the moderator's discretion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed, this is at the heart of it. You abused your discretion. And if you can't see why you should consult with others -- if not recuse yourself entirely -- when you are considering banning a poster by whom you feel attacked, then 2+2 indeed erred in giving you moderator status, regardless of your political ideology.