by Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum » Sun May 26, 2019 9:39 am
by Frisbeeteria » Sun May 26, 2019 11:30 am
by Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum » Sun May 26, 2019 12:18 pm
Just how many people thinks like me I wonder survey should be not removed freedom of discussion should beFrisbeeteria wrote:This is in response to multiple Getting Help reports about various flags that the OP thought ought to be illegal. Their English is not great, so please be clear in your response. Also, this is not something we enact via popular vote, so I've removed the poll.
by Twin Moons » Sun May 26, 2019 12:26 pm
by Highever » Sun May 26, 2019 12:37 pm
Jolthig wrote:Use Soresu and not Juyo.
Charlie Chaplin wrote:Nothing is permanent in this wicked world, not even our troubles.
by Jebslund » Sun May 26, 2019 3:38 pm
Highever wrote:Where exactly do we draw the line on this? The swastika has validity due to the similar laws of several nations regarding its display. Do we ban the flags of Taiwan because the mainland considers them somewhat akin to an unrecognized terror group? Ban the flags of groups considered terrorists only by one or a few countries? Seems incredibly vague here.
by Highever » Sun May 26, 2019 3:58 pm
Jebslund wrote:Highever wrote:Where exactly do we draw the line on this? The swastika has validity due to the similar laws of several nations regarding its display. Do we ban the flags of Taiwan because the mainland considers them somewhat akin to an unrecognized terror group? Ban the flags of groups considered terrorists only by one or a few countries? Seems incredibly vague here.
The swastika isn't even banned.
Jolthig wrote:Use Soresu and not Juyo.
Charlie Chaplin wrote:Nothing is permanent in this wicked world, not even our troubles.
by Luna Amore » Sun May 26, 2019 3:59 pm
by Imbalistan » Sun May 26, 2019 4:00 pm
Chan Island wrote:And I'm expecting this thread to devolve into a
racist and/or religious and/or politics shitshow within 3 pages.
by Jebslund » Sun May 26, 2019 4:03 pm
An example is the use of a swastika as a national flag. The swastika isn't specifically banned on NationStates, because we don't ban particular references or arrangements of pixels. But since it is widely seen to symbolize specific real-life events--in particular, the Holocaust--it is usually unacceptable, as an endorsement of violence against real-life people. (This is regardless of how it's intended: We don't try to peer into minds to judge intent, only how it appears.)
Similarly, there is no ban on mentioning Nazis, or Hitler, or espousing ideological beliefs. However, a nation made up as a cookie-cutter Nazi Germany in its name, region, and custom fields (e.g. motto, currency), with no contrary context or redeeming content, is hard to interpret as anything other than an endorsement of that real-life nation's most well-known acts. So this is unacceptable, too. This is the kind of content that has been getting through lately, and shouldn't have.
I'm using Nazi examples because that's what we've seen recently, but it applies equally to any theme or organization that's primarily known for violence for against real-life people. And conversely, it's perfectly fine for a nation to reference Nazis, if that's done in a way that isn't likely to make reasonable people think it's endorsing the Holocaust.
A common question is why we don't ban nations that mimic the Soviet Union, or the USA, or some other real-life nation/entity with a violent history. Certainly, you can total up the body count of various real-world countries and arrive at awful totals: the Soviet Union under Stalin, for example. The question we ask is whether a mini-Soviet Union nation appears to celebrate violence against RL people. And the answer is probably no: assuming no specific references to the contrary, most people wouldn't make that association, because the Soviet Union is widely known for much more than butchery.
by Krasny-Volny » Sun May 26, 2019 4:04 pm
Highever wrote:Where exactly do we draw the line on this? The swastika has validity due to the similar laws of several nations regarding its display.
by USS Monitor » Sun May 26, 2019 4:05 pm
by LiberNovusAmericae » Sun May 26, 2019 4:06 pm
by Highever » Sun May 26, 2019 4:08 pm
Jolthig wrote:Use Soresu and not Juyo.
Charlie Chaplin wrote:Nothing is permanent in this wicked world, not even our troubles.
by Nilrahrarfan » Sun May 26, 2019 5:22 pm
by Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum » Mon May 27, 2019 1:02 am
by Greater vakolicci haven » Mon May 27, 2019 4:15 am
by Caracasus » Mon May 27, 2019 4:30 am
by Phydios » Mon May 27, 2019 7:31 am
Greater vakolicci haven wrote:The moderators will never agree with me on this, but no flags or opinions should be banned. Every opinion is valid, as someone holds it, however disgusting it might be.
If you claim to be religious but don’t control your tongue, you are fooling yourself, and your religion is worthless. Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you. | Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter. On judgment day many will say to me, ‘Lord! Lord! We prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.’ But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’James 1:26-27, Matthew 7:21-23
by Greater vakolicci haven » Mon May 27, 2019 8:06 am
Phydios wrote:Greater vakolicci haven wrote:The moderators will never agree with me on this, but no flags or opinions should be banned. Every opinion is valid, as someone holds it, however disgusting it might be.
...Isn't this literally Moderation policy? The rules outright say that they don't ban specific flags or designs- only rule-breaking use of them. (There's already been examples of acceptable swastikas given in this thread.) And the rules do treat every opinion is valid, no matter how offensive some people might find it, as long as it is not stated in a rule-breaking way. A very recent ruling shows that Moderation doesn't ban opinions just because some people find them disgusting.
by Jebslund » Mon May 27, 2019 8:42 am
Greater vakolicci haven wrote:Phydios wrote:...Isn't this literally Moderation policy? The rules outright say that they don't ban specific flags or designs- only rule-breaking use of them. (There's already been examples of acceptable swastikas given in this thread.) And the rules do treat every opinion is valid, no matter how offensive some people might find it, as long as it is not stated in a rule-breaking way. A very recent ruling shows that Moderation doesn't ban opinions just because some people find them disgusting.
Some opinions are treated very differently too others.
by Nilrahrarfan » Thu May 30, 2019 10:20 am
by USS Monitor » Thu May 30, 2019 10:46 am
Greater vakolicci haven wrote:The moderators will never agree with me on this, but no flags or opinions should be banned. Every opinion is valid, as someone holds it, however disgusting it might be.
by Nilrahrarfan » Thu May 30, 2019 10:49 am
USS Monitor wrote:Greater vakolicci haven wrote:The moderators will never agree with me on this, but no flags or opinions should be banned. Every opinion is valid, as someone holds it, however disgusting it might be.
Max and Google disagree with you even before us mods have our say.
We don't care about money in the sense of maximizing profits, but we do want the site to support itself, so that it will be here for years to come. If Google dumps us for being a "hate site" or some such, that doesn't work.
by Drop Your Pants » Thu May 30, 2019 11:02 am
Nilrahrarfan wrote:You should be more relaxed, with a few Nazi Symbols allowed. However, there should be a disclaimer stating how the website doesn't support Nazi ideologies. What could possibly go wrong?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement