Seeing as you've called me a Facist for my beliefs (i do hope you comprehend the irony here,) by all means, let's continue the discussion.
No, please explain the irony in me "calling you a fascist" (actually I said "like a fascist" and that the actions taken against that user was "fascism") and the fascist acts taken against that user by banning them for speaking their mind.
I clearly see the difference, but it does not appear that you do. I did not call for you to be banned for acting like a fascist.
Speak and act like a fascist all you want and I may point it out when you do it, but I won't call for you to be banned, I'll put you on ignore.
I will say that i'm not interested in proving anybody wrong.
So far you are succeeding.
I'm interested to analyze my own view and wanted to acknowledge that others (at least you and Toast) had a different opinion.
Thank you, although our opinions went completely ignored, like that user should have been. Why wasn't the same judgement used on him?
So far i've not heard anything that dissuades me from my belief that the censorship of repeat personal attackers is appropriate.
I accept that Stan has not asked for anyone's help or support and he may be completely comfortable with lzr1900's comments. But do you know that for a fact?
Nope. But you just opened up another can of worms that I don't feel like getting into at 8AM.
Do you know that everyone who may ever come under personal attack is comfortable with it in the future?
Nope. And it's none of my business.
No one assigned me as "feeling protector" (and I would turn down the job if they did) and no one asked me to defend them from any perceived "personal attacks" ... in this case words, just words.
Words from a person few here respect the opinion of apparently, so why would anyone bother? You and fav can answer that question best I guess.
I don't think Stan said anything because he is a grown ass man and he can defend himself on his own if he felt the need. Apparently he didn't feel the need and neither would I.
Stan also has the ability to ban anyone he wants (my assumption), yet he didn't. Or maybe fav just beat him to the punch, but I doubt it.
My offense comes from the principal that everyone is entitled to civility and that disagreements can be handled with respect.
O RLY?
Many disagreements are the result of miscommunication after all......and let's face it, once personal attacks begin, disagreements can become infinitely harder to resolve.
Not really, just put them on ignore ... resolved!
If you can provide a well reasoned argument for why a culture of respect should not come to the defense of someone under personal attack (who may not be as easily able to shrug them off as you say Stan is,) then you'll definitely increase the chance of changing my opinion.
I thought I did in my last post, so I'm going to give up after this one.
You may very well be impossible to insult, offend or otherwise verbally harm tuck, for that i commend you, but not everyone is as robust as you and possibly Stan.
kk
You have not yet explained how you would deal with 100 lzr1900's......I guess just keep ignoring until you're reading 1 in every 100 posts?
Actually I did and you just outlined it in this comment, except you apparently don't understand what putting someone on "ignore" means.
It means you'll never have to read what they say again, much like what will happen with you and I after I finish this post.
If you were in a meeting with a group of people (in person) and one of your colleagues kept shouting 'Liar fucker!' every time you were attempting to make a point, what would you or the others present do?
That's not what's happening here Ben and has nothing to do with what happened. This is a forum with an ignore function.
It's 8AM and I've grown tired of picking your arguments apart, so right now as far as I'm concerned you're being the guy you describe above ... look how I'm handling it.
I think I know how you would handle it though. You'd call someone else, probably a cop, to come beat the shit out of them and put them in a cage, amirite?
The point is that there are a billion examples where individuals self limit their freedom in order to fit social norms that are partly in place to enable large groups of people to live together in relative harmony. For the most part, those social norms like non aggression towards others are desirable. Just because communities now exist online and people are physically removed from the traditional consequences of breaking social norms, it does not mean they have any less value when observed or cause any less harm when flouted.
And here's where I put you on ignore and never have to see you act in a fascist manner again ... problem solved and no harm done to you!
You are free to continue speaking your mind, I just don't have to read it any longer and if 100 of you pop up, I don't have to read them either.