"Second Life does not allow Nazi iconography as it broadly offensive."

I disagree, it is pretty much impossble to insult humanity! Humanity's ability to do mansty things to itself it incredible and this was not about Pro Nazi Icon's it was about any use of "Nazi" icons.


i agree whole heartedly


Problem with this is when discussing "idea's" and not phyiscal acts, is who determins what sensible is?



Ohh I agree with this sooooo much! thank you what a wonderful point!


Here i disagree just on princip[le that any time we talk away teh "right" to have a idea, be it a god idea or evil idea we tread on veryt scary grounds, to prohibit acting on those idea's is fine, but concepts..no, we need to be able to discuss them, if fo no other reason so we know who to keep a eye on!

Well...it would be pretty hard to play concentration camps in a historically accurate way without some very offensive things being promulgated - not least that it is acceptable in any way to exterminate those parts of the population who do not fit in with the ideas of a masterrace...in terms of the Nazis that would include a long list headed by Jews, gay people, the physically and mentally challenged, gypsies, and any East European who took their fancy.

I think that Nazi beliefs and the acts which were carried out by them during world war two mean that there is a qualitative difference between "playing" world wars and being "ally" or "enemy", English soldier or German soldier, and choosing to portray someone who committed terrible crimes. The question is, does anything really go in SL if it can be said to be historically based, no matter how offensive? I think not.
Cali

LOL. I hear that. What I'm discussing however, is not presenting ideas and discussing them to see if they're plausible. I'm speaking more in the area of concepts that are generally known and considered to be an offense to humankind.

For example, the "neo Nazi" movements, the Ku Klux Clan, etc. The US has recently passed laws against "hate crimes"-- including crimes of word as well as deed. Why? Because these things are generally recognized by society as having no benefit. Just as it is against the law to come up to a person and slap him-- people are starting to recognize that a certain degree of verbal civility is to also be expected.

The problem-- as you mentioned-- is that of "who decides where to draw the line?". In this, alas, mankind has failed miserably. When does "reasonable censorship" cross the line and become dictatorship? When does preserving true freedom through restriction fall over into undue restriction?

Unfortunately, the answer to that falls into areas of philosophy that are far too complex for any single person-- or even nation-- to answer easily. So the best we can do as a stop-gap measure is to insure those freedoms that are easily recognized as basic rights: freedom of religion, freedom from personal harm, freedom to pursue goals, freedom of speech. All of these freedoms must be exercised in a moderate manner, a manner which does not impose upon the freedoms of others (for example, freedom of religion does not allow one to perform animal sacrifices on your neighbor's lawn).

If all men were sane and wise and truly respectful of their neighbors, then these things would not be difficult. But since mankind in general has throughout history proven to be selfish and arrogant, all we can do is within the scope of our influence, exercise reasonable and moderate precautions to insure the reasonable freedom of society as a whole.

In Elf Clan, in order to maintain the stability of our society we have a "Charter" by which all members in the group are expected to abide. PG sim: no nudity, no offensive language, no weapons. In addition to this, since this is an ELVEN fantasy-theme society, we also prohibit exercise of religious concepts. politics, technology and "drama" (ie all members must treat one another with honor and respect).

ALL members, including the founder and officers of the group, abide by these rules. Not everyone agrees with our Charter; such people are welcome to entertain themselves elsewhere on Second Life. But within our lands, where we have dominion, we will enforce what safeguards we feel necessary to keep the sims operational, safe, and grant reasonable freedoms to our members so that they may enjoy the theme of their environment. As a result, we have over 500 members, four sims and a very enthusiastic group comprised of folks who know that within reasonable boundaries and restrictions-- they have the freedom to pursue their chosen roles free of a lot of problems experienced elsewhere.

In specific regard to the subject at hand: insofar as we as individuals and organizations may decree what is acceptable and what is not according to reasonable concepts of right and wrong, we have some ability and right to enforce concepts of propriety. In my home, I can state what is allowed and not allowed by guests. I surely will not tolerate a guest in my home waving a Nazi flag or promoting racist hate-sentiment (I have and will require someone bearing such attitudes to leave). Here, under the directorship of Linden Lab, that may rightfully mean banning pro-nazi concepts on Second Life.

Freedom of speech is a wonderful right if used as a positive force. Perhaps that does not include freedom to preach hatred based on one's race, heritage or personal beliefs.

Good points Cali. Sometimes when I'm trying to examine the correctness of an issue, it helps me to push it to a logical extreme. It is amazing how often that will help one to understand the underlying principle which governs an issue.

For example, in the concept of re-creating a realistic German Concentration Camp in order to make the point of how horrid this time was:

* Shall we present a historically accurate rendition of a KKK mob lynching a black man in order to show how incorrect that was?

* Shall we build a graphic and detailed display of a man raping a child to make known the horrors of pedophelia?

The answers should be obvious to anyone with a reasonable sense of judgement. Some things are by their very nature known to be wrong. They do not need to be presented in graphic depiction in order to remind us that these are attrocities.

We do not need to eat spoiled food in order to understand that such is harmful.

Of course Second Life should ban Nazi iconography. Calling it "offensive" is a bit of an understatement as it means much more that that to Jewish people. It is much more than offensive. It reminds us of all of the ancestors and relatives we will never have. It reminds us that one group tried to exterminate us. It reminds us what could have been but will never be. It represents mechanized death of innocent people.

To call it merely offensive shows a lack of understanding for us Jews who will carry the pain of what happened for the rest of our lives. We don't need reminders in Second Life.

No, I don't find encyclopedia entries offensive. Yes I find the public display of Nazi iconography offensive.



On the internet or in public should be, and in the US is, legal.



Yes, they should be banned completely and absolutely. It is not an infringement of freedom of expression for the owners (Linden Labs) of a medium (Second Life) to control what is expressed. If you don't like it you can go create a website bitching about it. But Linden Labs has no obligation to allow unregulated expression if it is not in their interest. Because freedom applies to Linden Labs also.



1) The Nazis didn't just murder Jews.
2) Portugal is a free country and member of the EU today because of the sacrifices of others who fought to save Europe from totalitarianism.
3) Since something doesn't affect you directly, it's okay? Since the Asian tsunami didn't hit Lisbon, it's not a big deal if thousands of Asians died?



You claim the right to freedom of expression, but will deny the same right to Linden Labs? Freedom of expression also means freedom from coerced expression. Linden Labs has the right to choose not to express certain things through their media. You don't get to force them to do so. It's like telling me that since you have the right to freedom of expression you should get to spray paint a swastika on my house.



That's nice that you believe that. Start your own company and do it. But Linden Labs shouldn't be coerced into hosting your expression if they choose not to. That also is freedom.

its amusing the "windshield brush" movement of opinion in this forum, sometimes you see peoples scream for freedom of speech and some other time peoples that range themselve behind the "sure LL is a company they are here for bizness and cant allow stuffs bad for bizness" at the moment they personally disagree with an idea ^^

that the real world freedom ^_^, aka "you are free to talk/show about anything i agree with"

First off, this thread is really old, and taken out of context. I do not advocate nazism. I do not have any political affiliation but could best be described as strong libertarian and moderate leftist.
This thread was started because of some private island where people were roleplaying with nazi uniforms as part of a sexual fetish of sorts. I am completely unrelated to these people and dont even know who they were anymore.


Portugal was a fascist dictatorship until 1974. We never got one bit of help from Jews, Axis or Allies. The revolution began and ended with the people. As for the EU, I would probably be better off without it and often consider moving to a non-EU country


As someone once said, a man's death is a tragedy, but the death of millions is statistics.
I do honestly believe that people are emotionally unstable if they start crying or feel anything too strong when confronted with news from the other side of the world. Sue me *shrug*


If you take this thread in its original context you would see that its thesis was more about LL misunderstanding the actions of certain users and overreacting. I fully expect private islands to be able to opt out of the whole main grid and its ToS in the near future. My thesis is that nazi iconography per se is not offensive, and in the original context it was not meant as offensive, and should not have been deemed offensive by LL. I want to be able to make a ww2-themed game or documentary in the future. People should be judged on the intent of their actions.
Also, LL is a corporation, not a person, and if we buy private servers off of them we should damn well be able to do what we want and not answer to anyone or any corporation. The only people who can tell me what to do are cops and lawyers, and that's merely because of a sad accident of history that has so far favored tight centralized control of everything.

You're not buying them though, you're renting them - and thus they can impose any rules on what they'll host for you that they want.

I've only read the first post in this thread so this is what I'm responding too. There is a massive difference between an encyclopidia displaying nazi symbols to provide visual context for educational purposes, and running around playing you Third Reich fantasies in SL.

Secondly, when your on SL servers, you are on SL's turf. LL can decide what they allow and disallow on the servers they buy, maintain and run, you have no freedom of expression beyond what they say you can express. Don't like it too bad fork over a few mill and buy the company, then you can cram full off as much nazi propaganda as your heart desires, otherwise get over it.

Thirdly, LL must be responsible for maintaining a decent community, controversial object like swashtikas would not only cause controversy with many current players, it could also dissuade potential customers for paying for accounts. Giving up money for the sake of a few fringe nazi wannabes? That's almost a business sin.

Finnally for an example of why the Free speech argument doesn't work. Let's say you ran a respectible club in the US. Things are going along just fine, until you start getting a customer who wears swashitkas and spews nazi propaganda. He's offending many long time patrons and you find many people are leaving the bar in disgust. Your loosing money. Does his freedom of speech keep you from getting him bounced? No, it doesn't. It's your club, your rules, he can't say whatever he wants and as the owner can tell him to get out and forcibly remove him if he fails too.

That's why you can't have swashtikas.

I've seen this sort of debate spring up elsewhere.

I agree with the notion that the intent should be what is judged. If Nazi references are made with the intent to offend, by all means they should be removed. However, if the intent is to educate or give people pause to reflect, then I would say it should be permitted.

We see this sort of thing frequently in modern times. Schindler's List is of course the classic example. There have been a number of fiction pieces (Both of art and literature) that deal with the Nazi regime and its actions. These are not banned, and should not be.

Of course, LL has the final say in everything, and that can't be disputed. They need not justify their actions -- If they deem content as inappropriate for their servers, then it is so. The same rule applies to conversation at an outing. If your host tells you to avoid a topic, you are required to do so. He need not give an explanation.


Edit: As a bit of a 'barbed comment' -- I do think that if nazi iconography is removed, then certainly LL should bring down the Impeach Bush signs. Those signs offend far more people than I've heard offended by nazi symbology.

And for emphasis since I know no one actually reads these things.

5.1 Participant Conduct. In addition to abiding at all times by the Community Standards, you agree that you shall not:............................... (iv)take any action or upload, post, e-mail or otherwise transmit Content as determined by Linden at its sole discretion that is harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, causes tort, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;}

(Terms of Service) https://secondlife.com/corporate/tos.php

Seeing as you are able to post on these forums it is implicit that you have indeed agreed to these terms of service and as such signed away your freedom of speech rights in cases LL deems appropriate. You agreed to it, you abide by it, don't like it? Why did you sign it? Didn't read it? tsk, tsk shame on you. That's your constitution here not the US one. So no, the Freedom of speech arguement does not hold here.

Amen brother
If you put together all the europeans and muslims with the 50% of americans who hate bush, you would probably come up with more people than those who hate hitler. But this is an american game, and so the rules have to be biased towards americans

Whenever some one says "I understand....but," it shows he doesn't understand.



I can't believe I have to point this out. What you are missing is the simple fact that the symbol of the cross has been used for good also. Think of the Red Cross. Think of the Salvation Army feeding the homeless. Think of Caritas, the Christian Children's Fund, think of the Christians who put their lives at risk to save Jews in Nazi occupied countries. Think of the simple fact that it was monasteries that saved Western Civilization in the Dark Ages. The Cross has been used as a symbol by many, many people and organizations working for the betterment of society.



I think time does play a role here. Something that happened 6 to 7 centuries ago doesn't have the same impact today. The chances of the Catholic Church calling for another crusade aren't very good. I haven't seen any priests marching in the streets calling for a new crusade against the infidels, but there are Neo-Nazi demonstrations happening all the time from Russia across Europe, South Africa, South America and the good old US of A.



The cross is the defining symbol of an entire, 2000 year old religion. The Nazi swastika was the symbol of a political party that was in control of Germany for little more than a decade. Nothing good came from Naziism. Much good has come from Christianity.

And before you pigeon-hole me as some Christian apologist, I'm a Buddhist.

And, um, exactly why should the Jews have helped the Portuguese? I believe it was the Portuguese who invented the term "auto da fe" and expelled the Portuguese Jews in the 15th century. And it was funding from foreign sources that helped stabilize democracy in Portugal after the 1974 revolution and the chaos that followed. Portraying WWII as a Nazi-Jewish conflict is just absurd. Tell the French, the Belgians, the English, the Poles et al. that it was between the Nazis and the Jews.




I honestly believe that some one who doesn't have an emotional response to the news of human suffering is emotionally deficient. Compassion is an essential part of a healthy emotional life. Even if the people you feel compassion for live on the other side of the world.



How could I possibly not have taken this thread in its original context???? I was responding to your very first post. That was the original context.

BS

Then you should know the Nazi cross is simply a mirrored version of a Buddhist symbol.

There's more, but that's all I can be bothered to say really.

Eggy, the "Impeach Bush" signs are anti-Bush, so how does that make the rules biased towards Americans? If the signs calling for the removal of the American President are allowed and Nazi Iconography is banned, how on earth does that make the game biased towards Americans?

And for the person you were responding to, if you can't see that calling for the legal removal of a head of state is very different than advocating support for a regime that murdered millions, I don't think you should be surfing the net. Too many confusing sites out there for people like you.

bush regime murdered a lot, and we will prolly never have the exact numbers

No it's not. The Nazi swastika is the Nazi swastika. It's similarity to other symbols is entirely irrelevant. If LL banned portraits of Hitler in SL would you say, "but you allow pics of Goethe or Schiller!"? They were German men too! Hitler was Hitler. The Nazi swastika is the Nazi swastika.

The hand gesture "V" for victory is very similar to an offensive hand gesture. One could say it's the mirrored version. That doesn't in any way change its meaning, or make the offensive gesture less offensive.

Well... you did say about the red cross in your post, which isn't the same as the Christian cross...

The founder of the Red Cross was impressed by Swiss neutrals helping the wounded on a battlefield. He inverted the Swiss flag and invented the red cross symbol. The white cross on the Swiss flag is a representation of the Christian cross, so...

Christian Cross ---> Swiss Flag ----> Red Cross Symbol

The Nazis did not take the swastika from the Buddhists and invert it. But if they had, it still wouldn't change a thing, the Nazi swastika is a symbol of one of the most evil regimes in modern history. That makes it offensive to many of us. And if LL choses to ban it, I say good for them.

in order to allow freedom we must sensor some ... i heard everything today -_-

the example of the graffiti is totally lame, i dont wanna spray a swastika on your house, but what if i wanted to do it on mine?

I always consider that what happend on my land is nobody's buziness
Why is it such a pleasure to have control on what other's do (that isnt concerning you) or decide to show?
It's like my neightbor being critical on the way i cut the grass

It's time for peoples to understand that everything that fall under their sight isnt subject to their self centered dictatorship.

Like I said: This thread was created in response to a series of threads and events that took place a YEAR ago and are no longer easily available for consultation.
As for compassion, too much of a good thing will kill you. I am an extremely compassionate and sympathetic person. In fact, I've given away pretty much every L$ I ever made to people with RL needs, even though I'm not exactly wealthy IRL and could definitely have used that money for myself. I am always available to help a friend, and proactively involve myself in their lives.
But, like the man said, a million people dying on the other side of the world is something abstract, a statistic. What happened in indonesia was certainly shocking and impressive but not the kind of thing that would likely make me sad. Natural disasters happen all the time and people get killed. I find it hard to believe someone would burst into tears about something so detached from them unless they were emotionally unstable or depressed. Life sucks, shit happens, and you need to develop a tough skin to put up with all the crap that goes on and still be a productive member of society. I call it emotional maturity, and it's a continuous process - babies cry all the time, children often burst into tears for the silliest reasons, teenagers are very easily angered... and then you grow up.

I don't agree that this topic should be closed, but it has seriously gone off from just an SL topic. So I'm going to move this to Off-Topic for further discussion.

Actually, I just checked and I was mistaken. The swastika is used by several religions, not just Buddhism.

...

Are you contradicting yourself for any particular reason?