Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tonight Matthew)
    I would class ST's "opinions" as both malicious and offensive. I would also identify "malice".
    Malice - "A desire to harm others or to see others suffer; extreme ill will or spite". I dont see how ST's comments display any intent to intentionally offend people posting on this forum. If youre offended by his/her opinion that is entirely different and something im not willing to have ST's posts removed, warned and bullied off the forum for.

    At least the "moron"-labelling is actually only commenting on one person.
    Its a direct insult, intended to hurt.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vienna)
    Malice - "A desire to harm others or to see others suffer; extreme ill will or spite". I dont see how ST's comments display any intent to intentionally offend people posting on this forum.
    (Original post by Straight Talker)
    fool?
    (Original post by Straight Talker)
    making you look further foolish.
    (Original post by Straight Talker)
    you can all follow eachother like little sheeP
    I am aware they were not in her original opinions, but you making her out to be totally innocent is fairly ridiculous. However -

    "It's not their country nor never will be."

    "British born muslim are just muslims who were lucky enough to get parents who came to this country and take carppy jobs for a few years."

    You genuinely see no spite in any of the above? Hmmmm...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tonight Matthew)
    I am aware they were not in her original opinions, but you making her out to be totally innocent is fairly ridiculous.
    Hang on, youve moved the goalposts. I never said that ST was innocent, I said that insults werent being dealt with. Youve just offered more examples.

    However -

    "It's not their country nor never will be."

    "British born muslim are just muslims who were lucky enough to get parents who came to this country and take carppy jobs for a few years."

    You genuinely see no spite in any of the above? Hmmmm...
    They deliberately posted that with the aim of upsetting people? Or because thats their opinion, they genuinely believe it, and they disagreed with what everyone else had to say?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vienna)

    They deliberately posted that with the aim of upsetting people?
    Seems that way to me.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Vienna, in the aim of preserving 'good debate', you have completely derailed the thread, thanks.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Peter Hitchens the Mail columnist, who you may have seen on Question Time (with Jane Fonda) a few weeks ago - very conservative, very good at debating and very good at debunking the far left. He is the brother of Christopher Hitchens who you might have assumed I meant.
    I was making the point that the hitchen neocons have some signs of intellect. Littlejohn doesn't. Again, when did Galloway refuse to debate with any of them?

    Pretty much spot on. Id simply describe her as the Rights answer to Micheal Moore
    I don't get how people can say this. MM is not rude, he is not far left and he tries to convince people gently as he knows he is out of step with US opinion. Coulter is neo-con/far right rude and bolshy.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speleo)
    Vienna, in the aim of preserving 'good debate', you have completely derailed the thread, thanks.
    Off topic? Yes. Pertinent? Very. Derailed? Hardly.

    I wouldnt really call this a classic D+D topic, more GD in my opinion.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    PM a mod or the offending forumer if you have a problem with moderation, don't derail the thread - and yes, causing a whole page of off-topic posting qualifies as derailment/borderline-trolling in my eyes.

    With the controversial opinions you so highly regard threads are bound to turn into insult matches, it's human nature for most people to be angry with near-racism and demagoguery.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speleo)
    PM a mod or the offending forumer if you have a problem with moderation, don't derail the thread - and yes, causing a whole page of off-topic posting qualifies as derailment/borderline-trolling in my eyes.
    The discussion was regarding offensive views and whether they can be taken as serious commentary. I engaged in a discussion with TonightMatthew on a very obvious example. We havent prevented a discussion from continuing.

    With the controversial opinions you so highly regard
    I regard all genuine opinion highly. I dont believe it should be shut down. That goes for Ann Coulter as much as Straight Talker.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    You value all opinions?
    "I love the holocaust."
    "We should murder as many Asians as we can."
    ?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Vienna said:
    You dont speak for me. While I disagree with the views of Straight Talker, his/her posts are neither personal or malicious. Ive had to report several counts of insults, yours included, that in my opinion are far more of a threat to this forum and good debate, than anyone one persons personal opinion. I dont wish to have to read you and Alexdel telling people they are morons when in fact, ignorance could be most easily defeated with simple, clean argument.
    I believe that Straight Talker's posts are malicious. It is this sort of ignorance that leads to racial and religious prejudice. I have no problem with people criticising any religion but to tar all Muslims as extremists based on the actions of a few is something completely different. To claim that all Muslims should be deported is quite a malicious statement. Vienna if you are more insulted by the word moron then by the derogatory and consistent bigoted posts by Straight Talker then I suggest you have your priorities in the wrong place.
    Someone called Pig seems to have deleted my initial post. The name suits you quite well. Surely the word 'moron' is not that much of an insult that you have to delete an entire post. She is a moron and unless she explains the logic behind her statements I believe it is no crime to call her/him one.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Funny how some people are ready to condem certain islamic extremists at every opportunity but defend opinions of extremists of a different nature.

    Vienna I'm pretty sure you are more intersted to be seen or voted as the most 'controversial' member of the forum rather than giving a sensible and intelligence reply to people.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    Vienna I'm pretty sure you are more intersted to be seen or voted as the most 'controversial' member of the forum rather than giving a sensible and intelligence reply to people.
    Not entirely sure personal attacks of this nature are 100% necessary here. Whether Vienna is attempting to be controversial or not, I feel that she does provide certainly provide good debate, largely because I disagree with most of what she says.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    Vienna I'm pretty sure you are more intersted to be seen or voted as the most 'controversial' member of the forum rather than giving a sensible and intelligence reply to people.
    Seriously, I've read this through a few times now and can't see how she's being controversial in the slightest..?!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speleo)
    You value all opinions?
    "I love the holocaust."
    "We should murder as many Asians as we can."
    ?
    If they are genuine they should not be prevented. Free speech allows us to marginalise and discredit undesirable opinion through transparent, open argument. Preventing this only aids extremism.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tonight Matthew)
    Not entirely sure personal attacks of this nature are 100% necessary here. Whether Vienna is attempting to be controversial or not, I feel that she does provide certainly provide good debate, largely because I disagree with most of what she says.
    How does this classify as a personal attack? I think you are going a bit overboard now..
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    If they are genuine they should not be prevented.
    I'd argue that acceptance of intolerance is intolerance.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vienna)
    If they are genuine they should not be prevented.
    What if one's opinion is, "ST, you're a moron"?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MMA)
    Vienna said:
    I believe that Straight Talker's posts are malicious. It is this sort of ignorance that leads to racial and religious prejudice. I have no problem with people criticising any religion but to tar all Muslims as extremists based on the actions of a few is something completely different. To claim that all Muslims should be deported is quite a malicious statement.
    If you think so demonstrate that to be the case. We dont need argument to sink to such a derogatory level, no matter what its quarter.

    Vienna if you are more insulted by the word moron then by the derogatory and consistent bigoted posts by Straight Talker then I suggest you have your priorities in the wrong place.
    Im offended by neither. The latter shows no deliberate malice. The former clearly does. If you feel strongly about ST's comments, im sure you would get much greater support, more own included, if you discredited them with good argument.

    Someone called Pig seems to have deleted my initial post. The name suits you quite well. Surely the word 'moron' is not that much of an insult that you have to delete an entire post. She is a moron and unless she explains the logic behind her statements I believe it is no crime to call her/him one.
    If however, this is an example of your intended contribution, then I wish you the best of luck.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speleo)
    I'd argue that acceptance of intolerance is intolerance.
    How does that work? If we disagree strongly about something we demonstrate it to be what we claim it to be. Its not hard to demonstrate intolerance, ignorance and racism, just as it isnt difficult to spot an insult.
 
 
 

2,615

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.