Civility rules

Megadeath

Well-known member
Hi,

So recently I reported a post on the grounds that it was uncivil, since it was effectively a prejudiced insult aimed at half the population.

The rejection notice I received seems to suggest that as long as an insult doesn't single out a specific user it's not considered a violation of the civility rules. Whilst the particular post doesn't violate any specific subsection of the rules, it would seem to go against the spirit of the preamble of section 2, which states "The purpose of this website and forum is to promote the exchange of ideas in a civil manner" and "material very likely to provoke (exchanges between users which are unproductive) may not be posted on the boards."

I for one find it very hard to imagine the statement "Most women I have talked to are overly emotional and suicidally empathic" could be considered to fit the dictionary definition of civility, given as "courteous and polite". and it also seems likely to promote unproductive and uncivil exchanges in the case of a female audience.

Now, of course I don't mean to argue your interpretation of the rules. They are what you say they are. I'm simply looking for clarification on the staff position on this issue. If it's considered civil discourse to insult large swathes of people for their personality, opinion or identity so long as no particular target is singled out then of course I am fine with that and happy to work within that framework. Due to some recent misunderstanding with exact interpretation of the rules I just thought it best to ask.
 

Battlegrinder

Someday we will win, no matter what it takes.
Moderator
Staff Member
Founder
Obozny
That's not what I said in the rejection notice, my exact words were "Rule 2 is mostly for things said to other users, general statements, even ugly ones, are usually not infractable under Rule 2", emphasis on the usually.

For the most part, rule 2 is focused on comments made to and about other users because those cases are clear cut and relatively easy to judge, and because comments targeted at other users are far more deleterious to overall discourse than more general ones. There are exceptions for that, however it's very, very hard to draw a clear line between comments that are inflammatory and provocative, and those that are merely disagreeable and contentious.

That is not the same as the rules allowing you to say whatever you want so long as you don't name any specific person, merely that it's much fuzzier. Had the comment you reported been something more like, say "I don't think those dumb c**** should be allowed to tell us men how we should run the countries we built, because they're too f****** stupid and will just vote whatever their stupid fee fees push them to do in the moment", then it almost certainly would have been infracted, because that's past the line between merely saying something other users will likely disagree with (which is allowed, and indeed something the forum was founded to allow), and saying something that invites an openly hostile response. The comment you reported, while disagreeable, didn't rise to that level of insult.

I would also note that this is also not to say that you're free to tip toe right up to the line of what's considered acceptable and be as aggressive and inflammatory as you can get away with. These rules are interpreted this way to give people some benefit of the doubt during an otherwise productive exchange, not to set up a "you are allowed to be this rude without getting in trouble" policy.
 

The Immortal Watch Dog

Well-known member
Hetman
This is a lot of whining about a general statement.

One presumes that civility rules are in place to prevent as @Battlegrinder pointed out, the kind of vicious personal attacks that can cause a spat online to escalate into crazy town and RL recriminations.

Generalized statements are statements an adult should have the emotional maturity to ignore.
 

Megadeath

Well-known member
24 hour Threadban - Rule 2 being racist to a fellow poster is clearly extreme incivility.
This is a lot of whining about a general statement.

One presumes that civility rules are in place to prevent as @Battlegrinder pointed out, the kind of vicious personal attacks that can cause a spat online to escalate into crazy town and RL recriminations.

Generalized statements are statements an adult should have the emotional maturity to ignore.
I mean, I'm not surprised you'd think that. I've never met a South American with better intellectual or emotional maturity than the average 5 year old.
 

The Immortal Watch Dog

Well-known member
Hetman
Being racist to a poster is a clear civility violation, and thus hits rule 2. Don't.

I'm sad...I was hoping for an "I've never met a nice South American!" retort. Instead I got something boring...

Never the less, OP raises an interesting question though not in the way he meant too. I'm going to assume generalities are fine..But I'm also going to assume Generalities like "Lel Blacks have smooth brains and no ridges" are where your ass would get infracted into a coma?

I'm also assuming no one who posts here would be retarded enough to say that and mean it. But you never know.

So yeah....For clarificationsake "Generalities up until the point of obvious malice"?
 

Brickman van Catalhoyuk

Permanently Banned
Permanently Banned
"The purpose of this website and forum is to promote the exchange of ideas in a civil manner" and "material very likely to provoke (exchanges between users which are unproductive) may not be posted on the boards."

I for one find it very hard to imagine the statement "Most women I have talked to are overly emotional and suicidally empathic" could be considered to fit the dictionary definition of civility, given as "courteous and polite". and it also seems likely to promote unproductive and uncivil exchanges in the case of a female audience.
So to be civil, we must be dishonest?

No, if people are offended by the truth, it's because they're scum, and appeasing their kind is what has allowed are society to be destroyed.

But I'm also going to assume Generalities like "Lel Blacks have smooth brains and no ridges" are where your ass would get infracted into a coma?
So are you saying race realism isn't allowed and denying biological differences between races and nations is the rule here?

You can't have individuals if you reject distinctions between groups.
If all groups are the same, then all individuals are the same... and therefore there are no individuals.
 
Last edited:

The Immortal Watch Dog

Well-known member
Hetman
So are you saying race realism isn't allowed and denying biological differences between races and nations is the rule here?

There is a difference between noting the cultural and aesthetic differences between various ethnic and racial groups and implying one branch of Genus Homo Sapien has evolved along the same lines as Koala while another hasn't.

I'm curious, why necro an old thread?
 

Brickman van Catalhoyuk

Permanently Banned
Permanently Banned
There is a difference between noting the cultural and aesthetic differences between various ethnic and racial groups
Are you trying to claim that race is merely differences in skin color and other superficial traits and characteristics?

That's insane.

Would you make the same insane claim when talking about breeds of dogs or "sub-species" of animals?

The difference between a great dane and a poodle aren't merely superfical differences in coat, or even skeletons, different breeds have different traits, skills, temperments, instincts, etc. that is what makes them different breeds, reliable and repeatable differences, that can be produced generation after generation.

No matter how many generations of Irish couples you have they will never produce a Chinese infant.

People groups are different, denying that is so beyond insane, delusional, and removed from nature, I don't even know how to communicate with you, it's like you're an alien.

I'm curious, why necro an old thread?
I went through all the threads on the 1st page that interested me, didn't consider it would be necroing, just assumed things were slow here and it was still active, didn't see a message saying it was too old like on SB.
 

The Immortal Watch Dog

Well-known member
Hetman
Are you trying to claim that race is merely differences in skin color and other superficial traits and characteristics?

That's insane.]

No, there are metabolic differences as well, which is why treating everyone equally medically is an absurdity. An obese black man comes in with stomach trouble and shortness of breath and clubbed fingers, you recommend amlodipine and a pacemaker.

a white guy? A liver transplant.

But you're not talking about minor variations of the same species, you're talking about a kind of anatomical difference that would require Africans being an entirely distinct species.
Would you make the same insane claim when talking about breeds of dogs or "sub-species" of animals?

While a dog's brain is smaller than a wolf, it's not an entirely radically different brain structure belonging to an entirely different group of species.

The difference between a great dane and a poodle aren't merely superfical differences in coat, or even skeletons, different breeds have different traits, skills, temperments, instincts, etc. that is what makes them different breeds, reliable and repeatable differences, that can be produced generation after generation.

You're not talking about different temperaments, skills, or instincts; you're talking about radically different anatomy...to the point that it would necessitate a radically different set of genetics and arguably a radically different evolution.


No matter how many generations of Irish couples you have they will never produce a Chinese infant.

A half-Sino potato enthusiast isn't born sterile...however.

Incidentally, you're bioluminescent.
 
Last edited:

Brickman van Catalhoyuk

Permanently Banned
Permanently Banned
But you're not talking about minor variations of the same species, you're talking about a kind of anatomical difference that would require Africans being an entirely distinct species.
Well then either races are actually species, or you're wrong.

Because there are obvious and demonstrable patterns of behavior, intelligence, time preference, impulse control, criminality, compassion, empathy, guilt, humiliation, shame, etc. between races and nations within races.

Cultures are a reflection of biological reality.

While a Dog's brain is smaller than a wolf, it's not an entirely, radically different brain structure belonging to an entirely different group of species.
And yet we see differences in behavior, communication, etc. between different sub-species of wolf, as well as other canines like dingo, coyote, etc.

You can't ignore biological reality.

You're not talking about different temperaments, skills, or instincts; you're talking about radically different anatomy...to the point that it would necessitate a radically different set of genetics and arguably a radically different evolution.
Are you saying there aren't radically different anatomies between races?

If you put skeletons from an African, Asian, and European on a table, it would be immediately obvious which belonged to which. Especially looking at the skull, including the cranium and the jaw.

A half-Sino potato enthusiast isn't born sterile...however.
Offspring of interracial pairings have many physical and mental health problems at higher rates, including infertility, and the pregnancies have higher rates of complications, including miscarriages, and often the offspring can't even receive donations from their own parents because their miscegenated DNA is too different.

Incidentally, you're bioluminescent.
Are you calling me a Mossad/FBI/ADL/SPLC agent?
 

ShadowArxxy

Well-known member
Comrade
Are you trying to claim that race is merely differences in skin color and other superficial traits and characteristics?

That is precisely the case as a matter of scientific fact, yes.

Would you make the same insane claim when talking about breeds of dogs or "sub-species" of animals?

The difference between a great dane and a poodle aren't merely superfical differences in coat, or even skeletons, different breeds have different traits, skills, temperments, instincts, etc. that is what makes them different breeds, reliable and repeatable differences, that can be produced generation after generation.

The differences between dog breeds absolutely are superficial, but in the scientific definition of that term rather than the colloquial. Absolutely none of the differences between a Great Dane and a poodle even begin to actually make them different species; rather, they are artificially selected differences which can be bred out as easily as they are bred in.
 

Brickman van Catalhoyuk

Permanently Banned
Permanently Banned
That is precisely the case as a matter of scientific fact, yes.
That's completely false.

Race is real, no amount of insane NWO fake science is going to change that.

You're brainwashed.

I was told this site was based, but I see it's just another insane, shitlib, circlejerk... this is like Reddit, Tumblr, or YT comments on a Destiny video... complete leftist slaves. NWO puppets, next you'll say vaccines are safe and effective, there's infinite genders, and we should all eat bugs and sterilize ourselves to save the planet.
 

The Immortal Watch Dog

Well-known member
Hetman
Well then either races are actually species, or you're wrong.

Or you're just massively incorrect and using the eugenics science of the gilded age, science that was created by a breed of severely autistic mongrels (By my standards for how dysgenic and unhealthy Social Darwinists were on average, yours because they were often Anglo-Slavic or Anglo-Dutch or Anglo-Irish or Sino-Scottish crossbreeds.) who were attempting to create a swingers club where midwits were duped into giving their daughters over to them.

And that's not even delving into the religion of half the people behind both that movement and Mensa....

Parroting a "zionist" talking point without realizing it ain't the own you think it is chief.

Because there are obvious and demonstrable patterns of behavior, intelligence, time preference, impulse control, criminality, compassion, empathy, guilt, humiliation, shame, etc. between races and nations within races.

Most of which can be ascribed to culture, inbreeding due to the absence of fathers and the destruction of their communities, poor food intake etc.

None of that is a matter of evolutionary biology.


Cultures are a reflection of biological reality.

Fascinating, because Black American culture is basically just Ulster culture, but with less disemboweling and more narcotics.

Then again, we all know what the Romans said about Germanic peoples, so maybe that fits your narrative. Albeit not in the way you think.

And yet we see differences in behavior, communication, etc. between different sub-species of wolf, as well as other canines like dingo, coyote, etc.

Dingos, Wolves and Coyotes are distinct species; their differences and disparities are more than just behavioral, behavior and genetic drift that arose from having to evolve to meet the demands of their enviornment.

You aren't arguing differences in traits, you're saying Black People have the kind of brains that preclude sentience.

That is demonstrably false.

You can't ignore biological reality.

I am not ignoring biological reality, I even did your work for you and cited examples you could use if you actually wanted to make an argument that wasn't the regurgitated propaganda of a bunch of speculators from an ethnic block I'm willing to bet you see as anathema.

Are you saying there aren't radically different anatomies between races?

Do black people have a type of brain only existant in monotremes and the most primitive marsupials? Are you contending that they're cerebrally analogous to a group of mammals so primitive that half of them even lack stomachs?

If you put skeletons from an African, Asian, and European on a table, it would be immediately obvious which belonged to which. Especially looking at the skull, including the cranium and the jaw.

Different diets, require different types of musculature in the mouth, bone density (To go acquire said food.) and different environments and cultures require different types of strength.

This isn't a evidence that Black People would have wildly different and incredibly primitive brain structures.

]Offspring of interracial pairings have many physical and mental health problems at higher rates, including infertility, and the pregnancies have higher rates of complications, including miscarriages, and often the offspring can't even receive donations from their own parents because their miscegenated DNA is too different.

That's bullshit, the two highest groups for suicide outside of Troons and Schizos and disciples of the Snackbar who yeet themselves are Japanese people and Nords.

Two distinctly unique peoples from two ethnostates.

As far as genetic damage is concerned, yeah, when you pump people with MRNA vaccines...you create an organ donor crisis. That isn't ethnobiology...that's bioterrorism via negligence.


Are you calling me a Mossad/FBI/ADL/SPLC agent?

😂 😂
 
That's completely false.

Race is real, no amount of insane NWO fake science is going to change that.

You're brainwashed.

I was told this site was based, but I see it's just another insane, shitlib, circlejerk... this is like Reddit, Tumblr, or YT comments on a Destiny video... complete leftist slaves. NWO puppets.

wow less than 24 hours and you've already rage quit. Look if you're just here looking for a place to evangelize "The Gospel of Whiteness" you'll find very little fruitful ground here. most of us don't accept it any more than we accept the whole "Reparations for slavery." Narrative

next you'll say vaccines are safe and effective, there's infinite genders, and we should all eat bugs and sterilize ourselves to save the planet.

ROFL!!!!

Allow me to introduce this thread, this thread, and this thread.

the fact that you didn't even bother to look went straight to the race question and then proceeded to rage quit when you didn't get the answer you wanted tells me you came here for a primary goal of recruiting for stormfront or whatever white power blog, or (and the more likely answer) you are simply finding a echo chamber you could circlejerk to and feed your rage. Now I don't think you are a glowie but If I am correct in either of my guesses for why you are here, then I'll just say you are wasting your time.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top