Tango01 | 08 Oct 2015 9:26 p.m. PST |
Come on!… "However, the DAESHbags aren't quite the world threat Hitler and the Nazis were during WWII just yet." Five days for CHEERLEADING???!! Cheerleading what?. Daesh?…Hitler?… Nazis? I don't get it!. Amicalement Armand |
RavenscraftCybernetics | 09 Oct 2015 8:16 a.m. PST |
|
Tango01 | 09 Oct 2015 10:26 a.m. PST |
Still don't understand the crime… Amicalement Armand |
Robert Kennedy | 09 Oct 2015 1:07 p.m. PST |
Though I hate these "Free" So and so threads. I'm wondering too. Robert. |
Earl of the North | 10 Oct 2015 8:07 a.m. PST |
I dislike 'free someone' threads, but I also dislike random dawghousing in the Ultramodern topics where almost everybody is breaking the no politics rule. In this case I just don't get the crime here, its not breaking the no politics rule, its not a personal attack and its not even cheerleading (which in of itself seems a made up reason to dawghouse someone) anybody, seems like its just another random dawghousing in Ultramodern and in this case no actual breaking of the rules seems to have actually happened. |
etotheipi | 10 Oct 2015 11:01 a.m. PST |
Perhaps you should read the actual rule that is written in the FAQ about cheerleading before you say it is a made up charge. I don't think it applies to the quote. The quote is an example of the Group Attack Rule. Elsewhere there was cheerleading. |
Earl of the North | 10 Oct 2015 1:10 p.m. PST |
I scrolled through the FAQ Are there any special rules on the Ultramodern Board? The Ultramodern Board includes discussion of contemporary military events. Politics should be avoided. Advocating for particular sides or factions is not allowed. [NO CHEERLEADING RULE] Which part of of 28mm Fanatik's quoted post breaks that rule, which side is 28mm Fanatik advocating for? Meh, back to important stuff (paying with my toys ).
|
Tango01 | 10 Oct 2015 10:59 p.m. PST |
"Advocating for particular sides or factions is not allowed…" Even if that side is ISIS??????????… If this is true… 200 people have to be on dawnhouse!! (smile). Amicalement Armand |
etotheipi | 11 Oct 2015 4:30 a.m. PST |
Yes, they probably should. |
Legion 4 | 11 Oct 2015 7:09 a.m. PST |
Don't get me started on this topic … or I'll be back in the DH with 28mm ! |
etotheipi | 11 Oct 2015 9:50 a.m. PST |
Why would discussing this put you in the DH? |
Legion 4 | 11 Oct 2015 2:41 p.m. PST |
My opinion of what is DH worthy is not always the same as the Eds. |
Tango01 | 11 Oct 2015 3:07 p.m. PST |
I was hopping for a Bill thread here… (smile) Amicalement Armand |
Editor in Chief Bill | 12 Oct 2015 3:25 a.m. PST |
Calling ISIS silly names is not appropriate for the forum. The purpose of the Ultramodern board is to discuss wargaming. If you want to express your opinion of ISIS, please adjourn to our sister site, The Blue Fez. |
etotheipi | 12 Oct 2015 4:35 a.m. PST |
My opinion of what is DH worthy is not always the same as the Eds. What does that have to do with you being thrown in the DH? Do you believe you are not capable of discussing the topic without resorting to name calling, threats, or massive profanity?
|
Earl of the North | 12 Oct 2015 6:11 a.m. PST |
So it was a group attack, rather than cheerleading then….since the FAQ for cheerleading doesn't seem to apply. Seems a little strange to me, I guess it goes along with the whole 'nuke them from orbit' quote being classed as suggesting the use of WMD, rather than a movie quote often used in a joking fashion. Kind of weird that ISIS is being given the same status as religious and political groups but I will add it to the reasons to stay away from the Ultramodern Board. |
Tango01 | 12 Oct 2015 11:53 a.m. PST |
"Calling ISIS silly names is not appropriate for the forum…" What about calling them as they deserve?? (smile) Not agree this time Bill. Amicalement Armand |
Legion 4 | 05 Nov 2015 7:34 a.m. PST |
"My opinion of what is DH worthy is not always the same as the Eds. " What does that have to do with you being thrown in the DH? Do you believe you are not capable of discussing the topic without resorting to name calling, threats, or massive profanity?
Sorry I didn't reply sooner. I think this is a case of "Necro-posting" … I am very capable discussing any topic without resorting to 1) Name Calling … if I do it's in jest. Like calling a Canuck a "Moose eater" … or Brits "Red Coats" … 2) Again if I make any threats they are all in jest … Some may not get that. Which I find odd ? We're on the internet … how am I going to hurt you ? Tell your Mom ? Say you dress funny ? Try remembering that old school yard song about "Sticks & Stones", etc. ! I guess my sense of humor is an acquired taste ? Unless it's something about Daesh, AQ, the Taliban types, etc. … Then all bets are off. I can't say too many negative things about them. Or wish them too much ill will, etc. … 3) I never use any, let alone massive profanity … And I learned from the "Best". Some of my NCOs could say things that would make Satan blush ! |
etotheipi | 06 Nov 2015 4:36 p.m. PST |
So, your answer is no you can't discuss a topic without resorting to name calling. And you can't see a difference between an archaic historical reference and equating people to feminine hygiene products. If everything is in jest, do you consider that there is no such thing as a derogatory term? Whether or not you can hurt someone physically is not the point. The point is that name calling is against the agreed upon rule of behaviour. Not sure why profanity is an issue, but to profane something is to abase it, which you seem to think is acceptable when directed at certain groups. |
Legion 4 | 08 Nov 2015 2:20 a.m. PST |
|