Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE

Proposed Ban on Hateful Diatribes

Kris Ritter
paradoxical embolism
Join date: 31 Oct 2003
Posts: 6,627
09-26-2005 02:41
Bah. I had to go to the effort of taking Ulrika off ignore just to read this thread, so I'm damned well posting.

I agree with Jonquille, Ingrid and Weedy.

And now I have to put her back on ignore. Pfft.

Oh, and for what it's worth, I thought Cienna's "hateful diatribe" was right on the money. And that's another first, because I've never agreed with her on anything either :p
Vixen Valkyrie
Registered User
Join date: 2 Jan 2004
Posts: 123
09-26-2005 02:46
Originally posted by Alexin Bismark

From: someone
To me, the technique of visual imagry (in this particular case seemingly animal traits), is just another means some people use to make emotional appeal in laying out their opinions. Not unlike ascribing Nazi-like propaganda machinations and equivalency to anti-semitism to people who have not expressed sympathy or ideology even close to that of Nazis or anti-semites. Ascribing animal traits has LONG been a technique of visual imagery used in political parody, satire and critique. Revolutionary America, Revolutionary France, criticisms of the Catholic Church, even back to Republican and Imperial Rome. Perhaps you've heard Animal Farm?? The technique is NOT Nazi specific or even anti-semitic specific.
Of the two, I personally think dragging Nazis and anti-semitism into a discussion as a means of painting a negative image on your opponent is personally the more hateful and offensive than animal imagery. Several million people died on the spearpoint of Nazism and anti-semitism. Personally I think you should show them a little more respect IMO than to trivialize the monsterous horrors of the Nazis and anti-semitism by even drawing the HINT of any equivalence or similarity to something someone said in the forum


Absolute agreement.
_____________________
Robin Linden: "it isn't our intention to make governing a 'game' or requirement of Second Life."
Cienna Samiam
Bah.
Join date: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,316
09-26-2005 06:01
From: Saben Mondrian
Convoluted sentence structures, sesquepedalian proclivities, and hatefulness don't add up to entertainment for most people. Their writings aren't worth the toilet paper to wipe them off with.

I'd say it's sad to see such minds go to waste, but it would be more accurate to say that it's sad to see such minds. Period.


It is amusing to me to point out the Flesch-Kincaid score of the quoted paragraph is 8.4, for those paying attention, that would be classified as 'barely literate'. What is interesting is how this individual attempts to make up for their literacy issues by using (misusing, I might add) terms.

I suspect the poster unable to read well enough to understand what was written, hence doomed to cling to what they were told about what was written, which explains quite neatly why they end with this particular opinion.

Someone tell this sour grape to squeeze himself... he needs a fresher whine.
_____________________
Just remember, they only care about you when you're buying sims.
Alondria LeFay
Registered User
Join date: 2 May 2003
Posts: 725
09-26-2005 06:50
From: Ulrika Zugzwang
Yes I am. I am very serious. :(

After taking a break from the forums and thinking about things, I realize the primary reason I feel so disturbed by that post is that it is so similar to Nazi-era anti-Semitic diatribes. It's a giant rhetorical piece that serves no other purpose than to dehumanize a group of people that the author agrees with. It has absolutely no merit. It exists only to hurt a group of people. Philosophically speaking, it is the definition of where free speech should stop, where it exists as a serious threat to the autonomy of other individuals.

While I don't worry about the rhetorical rubber bands we snap each other with, I see this post as the rhetorical equivalent of a shot gun.

~Ulrika~


Are you sure this, like many other theads/posts, have nothing to do with this post?

I would rather be compared to a dog, a cat, a pig, or a giant pile a rank cow dung than compared to Nazi's. These posts are far more offensive than Cienna's.

Furthermore, it is highly hippocritical (SIC) that one should find offense by the illustrative language that Cienna used while the same one urges on ridiculing pictures being posted of, guess what, often animals which imply the same metaphor, just in a thousand words worth of a picture.
Alexin Bismark
Annoying Bastard
Join date: 7 May 2004
Posts: 208
*scratch* *scratch* Tooo early.
09-26-2005 07:05
From: Snowcrash Hoffman
It is also very difficult to decide what is hateful diatribe what is not. This particular case of Cienna's post is very interesting because for example when I first read it I thought it was fantastically written and praised it. I didn't pay attention to the details pointed out by Ulrika. When I read her post, it completely changed my perspective and agreed on Ulrika's analysis. The reverse could have happenned too. That is why freedom of speech is such a great thing.


Trust your first impressions, friend. :)


From: Snowcrash Hoffman
As such, I would oppose to any kind of ban on any ideology. Bans should be reserved to individuals not to ideas, however despicable they may seem.


Hmmm well I don't know.... If freedom of speech doesn't protect the Despicable Bastards(tm), to borrow on your reference for sake of discussion, it doesn't really protect anyone, right? :) That being said I know the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution doesn't REALLY and legally apply to these privately owned forums, but I think it embodies a worth principle that is worth emulating to the degree it's owners feel comfortable. Afterall, I think its important to let Despicable Bastards(tm) speak because how else would you know who they are? :D

Alexin
Alexin Bismark
Annoying Bastard
Join date: 7 May 2004
Posts: 208
09-26-2005 07:17
From: Vixen Valkyrie
Originally posted by Alexin Bismark



Absolute agreement.


Thankee *hat tip*
Dianne Mechanique
Back from the Dead
Join date: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 2,648
09-26-2005 08:23
From: DogSpot Boxer
From what I've seen you're a likely contender for that which you so easily accuse Ulrika of being.

Signed,

Dogspot
Charter Member SL Social Inept Club

Our Motto:

We may be socially inept, but at least we're social.
I dont like or agree with most of the things you have said so far, but I dont think you qualify as socially inept in the sense the poster meant. You seem to have adequate social skills in terms of responding to people and understanding other folks, empathy etc. Your just mad cause of your unfortunate first experience here.

There are others on the forum with strong pathologies that seem incapabale of appreciating that other humans exist and that thesehumans might have actual feelings and that those feelings count. *Those* are the folks that I think the poster was referring to when they said "socialy inept." (I think)
_____________________
.
black
art furniture & classic clothing
===================
Black in Neufreistadt
Black @ ONE
Black @ www.SLBoutique.com


.
Fushichou Mfume
Registered User
Join date: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 182
09-26-2005 09:29
No ban needed. The reasons are simple:

1. You don't have to read a hateful diatribe. You can stop as soon as you realize what you're reading.

2. SL is an American-produced game by an American company. It is considered an *inalienable* right of all American citizens to have freedom of speech. Many Americans, even, have trouble understanding the concept of an *inalienable* right. The term means that it is not a right granted by goverment, nor allowed by government, but rather that it is a native right of every human being by sheer dint of being a human being. The term *inalienable* means that the government has NO AUTHORITY to ever take that right away.

Far too many people in modern America are laboring under the assumption that if the majority of the country were to vote to take away some of these *inalienable* rights, they should have the power to do so.

Sorry, our constitution isn't written like that, and any lawmaker or federal judge who understands his/her job would never allow it to happen.

So please, don't call for a "ban" on any expression of free speech. It's very un-american to do so.
DogSpot Boxer
vortex thruster
Join date: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 671
09-26-2005 09:42
From: Dianne Mechanique
I dont like or agree with most of the things you have said so far, but I dont think you qualify as socially inept in the sense the poster meant. You seem to have adequate social skills in terms of responding to people and understanding other folks, empathy etc. Your just mad cause of your unfortunate first experience here.


I got over being "mad" days ago. I still object to the socially inept post. Not on the basis of being upset over any flamage I got, but because I think that post is just wrong. I'm not suggesting it or any similar posts be banned, btw.

From: someone
There are others on the forum with strong pathologies that seem incapabale of appreciating that other humans exist and that thesehumans might have actual feelings and that those feelings count. *Those* are the folks that I think the poster was referring to when they said "socialy inept." (I think)


The entire "socially inept" post seems to me to be a classic case of someone not appeciating that people have actual feelings and not really giving a damn about it.

It's quite ironic when someone blasts people for being socially inept while at the same time exhibiting those same characteristics in the very same post.

I gotta say that this forum is broken in one very obvious way. I'm so tired of wordsmithing my posts to avoid even the _appearance_ of making a negative comment about someone.
_____________________
Dogspot Boxer
Charter Member Of The Socially Inept Club

Our Motto:

We may be inept, but at least we're social
Emma Soyinka
Got moo? o_o
Join date: 13 Sep 2005
Posts: 218
09-26-2005 09:46
From: Fushichou Mfume
2. SL is an American-produced game by an American company. It is considered an *inalienable* right of all American citizens to have freedom of speech. Many Americans, even, have trouble understanding the concept of an *inalienable* right. The term means that it is not a right granted by goverment, nor allowed by government, but rather that it is a native right of every human being by sheer dint of being a human being. The term *inalienable* means that the government has NO AUTHORITY to ever take that right away.

Just because I like being a smartass, if LL has enough revenue coming from other countries, it becomes an international service and as far as I know falls under law as well of the countries it has a significant income from.

So SL is maybe an american produced game by an american company, but at this point its probably safe to say its an international service with it's home office in the states.

Also, while the US governments or some european governments can't censor anything, if a company provides a service, provides terms for that service, and accepts no government funding it can censor whatever it wants on that service, and free speech won't do anything against it.
DogSpot Boxer
vortex thruster
Join date: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 671
09-26-2005 09:52
From: Fushichou Mfume

2. SL is an American-produced game by an American company. It is considered an *inalienable* right of all American citizens to have freedom of speech. Many Americans, even, have trouble understanding the concept of an *inalienable* right. The term means that it is not a right granted by goverment, nor allowed by government, but rather that it is a native right of every human being by sheer dint of being a human being. The term *inalienable* means that the government has NO AUTHORITY to ever take that right away.


This argument is broken.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The first amendment refers to _government_ impingement on free speech. Specifically the U.S. Gov't. The key word is government. And while certain schools of thought liken LL to a government, in reality it is a business who can place any limits on speech they choose (more or less).

The only rights to "free speech" people have here are those granted by Linden Labs. In fact, there are already limits on "free speech" in place in the TOS.
_____________________
Dogspot Boxer
Charter Member Of The Socially Inept Club

Our Motto:

We may be inept, but at least we're social
DogSpot Boxer
vortex thruster
Join date: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 671
09-26-2005 09:53
From: Emma Soyinka
Just because I like being a smartass, if LL has enough revenue coming from other countries, it becomes an international service and as far as I know falls under law as well of the countries it has a significant income from.

So SL is maybe an american produced game by an american company, but at this point its probably safe to say its an international service with it's home office in the states.

Also, while the US governments or some european governments can't censor anything, if a company provides a service, provides terms for that service, and accepts no government funding it can censor whatever it wants on that service, and free speech won't do anything against it.


Emma, the first amendment/free speech argument is irrelevant when it concerns message boards.
_____________________
Dogspot Boxer
Charter Member Of The Socially Inept Club

Our Motto:

We may be inept, but at least we're social
Ulrika Zugzwang
Magnanimous in Victory
Join date: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 6,382
09-26-2005 10:21
From: Selador Cellardoor
But Ulrika, an anti-Semitic diatribe is directed at a specific group of people who are readily identified. If an unpleasant and offensive diatribe was directed against people who had - what - shoplifted in the past, that would be a self-defining group. Only those who had been shoplifters would know that it was directed at them.
Before I reply, let me say that among the dozens of posts in this thread (aside from an adorable one by Seth) that contain false assumptions, ad hominem tu quoque logical fallacies, and appeal to popularity logical fallacies, your post is actually logically sound and compelling. It succeeded in changing my mind and I thank you for writing it. :)

From: someone
The language was extreme, I will grant you. Had the comments been directed at a named individual, or a group of named individuals, I would be as indignant as you. But if you attack, say, miserable old bastards as a whole, only those who know themselves to be miserable old bastards will feel themselves attacked. And perhaps they might then be inspired to improve their disposition.
I agree, that the language was really quite extreme, and also agree, that because the target of the attack is vague, that it mitigates the severity of the crime. As a matter of fact, while reading the diatribe again, I realized that the target of the attack is so ill defined that it could actually be read to include the author himself. :D

In short, I now share your opinion. Hateful diatribes and subhuman comparatives, provided they're poorly directed, are simply something we must live with. (Speech should be unrestricted unless it damages another group or individual. Because there is no clear victim, it should be protected.)

I do have one point of disagreement though, specifically where you state that the post has utility in that it might inspire someone to change. I would suggest that the ends do not justify the means and that there are significantly better way to affect change than through forceful and bitter verbal attacks. Your post is an excellent example of an alternative method. :)

~Ulrika~
_____________________
Chik-chik-chika-ahh
Emma Soyinka
Got moo? o_o
Join date: 13 Sep 2005
Posts: 218
09-26-2005 10:29
From: DogSpot Boxer
Emma, the first amendment/free speech argument is irrelevant when it concerns message boards.

That's what I was saying, actually. :p
Selador Cellardoor
Registered User
Join date: 16 Nov 2003
Posts: 3,082
09-26-2005 10:31
From: Ulrika Zugzwang
Before I reply, let me say that among the dozens of posts in this thread (aside from an adorable one by Seth) that contain false assumptions, ad hominem tu quoque logical fallacies, and appeal to popularity logical fallacies, your post is actually logically sound and compelling. It succeeded in changing my mind and I thank you for writing it. :)

I agree, that the language was really quite extreme, and also agree, that because the target of the attack is vague, that it mitigates the severity of the crime. As a matter of fact, while reading the diatribe again, I realized that the target of the attack is so ill defined that it could actually be read to include the author himself. :D

In short, I now share your opinion. Hateful diatribes and subhuman comparatives, provided they're poorly directed, are simply something we must live with. (Speech should be unrestricted unless it damages another group or individual. Because there is no clear victim, it should be protected.)

I do have one point of disagreement though, specifically where you state that the post has utility in that it might inspire someone to change. I would suggest that the ends do not justify the means and that there are significantly better way to affect change than through forceful and bitter verbal attacks. Your post is an excellent example of an alternative method. :)

~Ulrika~


Ulrika,

You are being too nice to me - I'm scared! *looks over shoulder*

Actually the examples of ad hominem tu quoque that you posted remind me of an interview I saw on British TV with Ken Livingstone, the man who is now mayor of London. The interviewer asked his opinion of an issue, and Livingstone gave it.

The interviewer gave a little smile, as though something precious had dropped in his lap, and then leaned forwards aggressively. "Ah," he snarled, "but Mr Livingstone, when you were asked this question last year you expressed a contrary opinion. In fact you said completely the opposite!"

Livingstone looked at the interviewer quizzically, and then said in a mild tone:-

"I know. I've changed my mind."

Best answer I've ever heard a politician make. :)
_____________________
Cienna Samiam
Bah.
Join date: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,316
09-26-2005 10:34
From: Ulrika Zugzwang
Before I reply, let me say that among the dozens of posts in this thread (aside from an adorable one by Seth) that contain false assumptions, ad hominem tu quoque logical fallacies, and appeal to popularity logical fallacies, your post is actually logically sound and compelling. It succeeded in changing my mind and I thank you for writing it. :)

I agree, that the language was really quite extreme, and also agree, that because the target of the attack is vague, that it mitigates the severity of the crime. As a matter of fact, while reading the diatribe again, I realized that the target of the attack is so ill defined that it could actually be read to include the author himself. :D

In short, I now share your opinion. Hateful diatribes and subhuman comparatives, provided they're poorly directed, are simply something we must live with. (Speech should be unrestricted unless it damages another group or individual. Because there is no clear victim, it should be protected.)

I do have one point of disagreement though, specifically where you state that the post has utility in that it might inspire someone to change. I would suggest that the ends do not justify the means and that there are significantly better way to affect change than through forceful and bitter verbal attacks. Your post is an excellent example of an alternative method. :)

~Ulrika~


Actually, its utility lies in the degree to which it becomes self-compulsory on the part of some readers to identify by attempting to discredit it. (grin)

A fact that you likely missed, all things considered, but once which has garnered a request to submit for review from a behavioral psychologist who happens to be a member here (and who, for obvious reasons, will remain anonymous until they decide otherwise).

Thanks for playing. :)

-------------------------

Edit to add three small clarifications:

1) 'She', not 'he'.

2) When attempting to craft an item that will result in self-identification, it is best to frame the content in such a way as will best permit a reader to self-identify.

3) Consistantly, the most rapid respondants upon the scene of any possible acrimony are those who seek/need acrimony, followed closely by the paranoiacs who are afraid you might be talking about them, followed by the various other motivations I'm too lazy to describe. You get the point.
_____________________
Just remember, they only care about you when you're buying sims.
Jake Reitveld
Emperor of Second Life
Join date: 9 Mar 2005
Posts: 2,690
09-26-2005 10:40
hehehe. thank god I am bitter and all this is so beneath me. :)
_____________________
ALCHEMY -clothes for men.

Lebeda 208,209
Euterpe Roo
The millionth monkey
Join date: 24 Jan 2005
Posts: 1,395
09-26-2005 11:17
From: Saben Mondrian
Convoluted sentence structures, sesquepedalian proclivities, and hatefulness don't add up to entertainment for most people. Their writings aren't worth the toilet paper to wipe them off with.


Late to the party. . . again.

I have now read this entire thread and have managed to get this far without pulling a King Lear.

Saben, these two sentences are lovely, just lovely. They are so well-wrought, so scatalogical. :D
_____________________
"Of course, you'd also have to mention . . . furries, Sith Lords, cyberpunks, glowing balls of gaseous neon fumes, and walking foodstuffs" --Cory Edo

“One man developed a romantic attachment to a tractor, even giving it a name and writing poetry in its honor." MSN

";(next week: the .5m torus of "I ate a yummy sandwich and I'm sleepy now";)" Desmond Shang
DogSpot Boxer
vortex thruster
Join date: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 671
09-26-2005 11:17
From: Emma Soyinka
That's what I was saying, actually. :p


Dammit, Girl. Stop dancing around the topic! :D
_____________________
Dogspot Boxer
Charter Member Of The Socially Inept Club

Our Motto:

We may be inept, but at least we're social
Cienna Samiam
Bah.
Join date: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,316
09-26-2005 11:20
From: Euterpe Roo
Late to the party. . . again.

I have now read this entire thread and have managed to get this far without pulling a King Lear.

Saben, these two sentences are lovely, just lovely. They are so well-wrought, so scatalogical. :D


Ouch. I wasn't going to point out the latency. Dang.
_____________________
Just remember, they only care about you when you're buying sims.
Satchmo Prototype
eSheep
Join date: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 1,323
09-26-2005 13:32
From: StoneSelf Karuna
i don't read posts longer than...


ROFLMAO....

From: Ingrid Ingersoll
I give this thread 10 stars for hypocrisy! And another 10 stars go to me for having spelled hypocrisy correctly!


From: Surreal Farber
1. Ulrika this thread is pure hypocrisy.. Practice what you preach.


From: Cienna Samiam

More amusing than bothersome, especially when one reviews history and sees Ulrika is very likely the most deliberate hateful person on the forums now that Madame Neva is banned. At least with the social inepts, it's a case of malice through ignorance. With Ulrika, it is almost always bitterness or spite.



Ulrika, I think you have a PR problem... I don't think this is the kind of fame you were looking for...
_____________________

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Electric Sheep Company
Satchmo Blogs: The Daily Graze
Satchmo del.icio.us
Saben Mondrian
Registered User
Join date: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 11
09-26-2005 13:56
From: Euterpe Roo
Late to the party. . . again.

I have now read this entire thread and have managed to get this far without pulling a King Lear.

Saben, these two sentences are lovely, just lovely. They are so well-wrought, so scatalogical. :D

Thanks, I thought they were rather nice. I like the juxtaposition of the big word sentence with the teeny word sentence, and I have always found the word sesquepedalian to be a hoot. A word that means "given to the use of big obscure words" which would only be known to someone who is "given to the use of big obscure words". It's deliciously recursive.

****************************************************************************

Cienna Samiam's misuse of the Flesch-Kincaid to justify saying that I am barely literate comes as little surprise. The test indicates nothing about the writers skill or knowledge; it is a simpleminded calculation using the average sentence length and the syllables per word to calculate the grade level the reader needs to be to understand the sample being tested. The entire post I made earlier is readable, according to its Flesch-Kincaid score, by an eighth grader.

Different implimentations of the concept will give different results because the computer has to determine the beginning and ending of sentences without being able to understand the words, and different programs might reach difference conclusions. Bulleted lists, headers, footnotes, etc. might give rise to variation in different program's results.

The sentence "Convoluted sentence structures, sesquipedalian proclivities, and hatefulness don't add up to entertainment for most people.", in my version of the Flesch-Kincaid grade level and reading ease software, gets a score of 17.8, indicating that iit is readable by someone near the end of two years of graduate school.

My opinion of the test is that since it makes no attempt to deal with the meaning of words its results are largely meaningless.

The fact that its conclusions are largely meaningless is what makes me find Cienna Samiam's use of it unsurprising.

**********************************************************************

From the help info for the Flesch-Kincaid software "Flesh.exe"

From: someone
The Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level is an index that gives the years of education required to comprehend a document. For example, a document with a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level score of 10 would require a reader have about 10 years (or a 10th grade level) of education to comprehend the document.

The index is calculated using the number of words, sentences and syllables in a document. It can be calculated using the following equation:

(0.39 * Average Sentence Length) + (11.8 * Average Syllables per Word) - 15.59.

Like all other readability indices, the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level provides an estimation, and is only meant to be used as such.
_____________________
What does the first name that Jarod Godel mentioned in his thread about new names mean anyway? The name is "Bukkake". Does that have something to do with how Jarod Godel described how to use GLintercept to acquire textures created by other people in Second Life?
Cienna Samiam
Bah.
Join date: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,316
09-26-2005 15:22
From: Saben Mondrian
The test indicates nothing about the writers skill or knowledge; it is a simpleminded calculation using the average sentence length and the syllables per word to calculate the grade level the reader needs to be to understand the sample being tested. The entire post I made earlier is readable, according to its Flesch-Kincaid score, by an eighth grader.


Of course, all eight graders are literate on college level, hence their reading and writing on that level, and not the eight grade level. (chuckle)

Don't strain yourself, dahhhhhhlink... I don't mind that you dislike my post. Just thought it relevant to point out people generally don't like things they can't understand.

Cheers! :)
_____________________
Just remember, they only care about you when you're buying sims.
Nolan Nash
Frischer Frosch
Join date: 15 May 2003
Posts: 7,141
09-26-2005 15:46
I am not one to be a grammar or spelling freak, however, if someone is going to pat themself on the back for using a "big word", the least they could do is spell it right.
_____________________
“Time's fun when you're having flies.” ~Kermit
DogSpot Boxer
vortex thruster
Join date: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 671
09-26-2005 15:56
From: Cienna Samiam
Of course, all eight graders are literate on college level, hence their reading and writing on that level, and not the eight grade level. (chuckle)

Don't strain yourself, dahhhhhhlink... I don't mind that you dislike my post. Just thought it relevant to point out people generally don't like things they can't understand.

Cheers! :)


Yeah, yeah.

Because we all so stoopoopid and you so smaaaart.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA. Comedy GOLD!
_____________________
Dogspot Boxer
Charter Member Of The Socially Inept Club

Our Motto:

We may be inept, but at least we're social
1 2 3 4 5 6 7