|
Alex is verbose, and you owe it to yourself (and the rest of us) to read the statement in its entirety. Remember, when making comments/claims to provide proper evidence, facts etc. Arguments based on incorrect assumptions, facts and straw men, will be dealt with swiftly. If in doubt, PM a mod or ask IRC. Do NOT spread misinformation, when in doubt, check your sources. In short, be smart. Alex comments on Idra: Orbs Statement: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=319038Personal attacks against other posters in this thread will be met with a ban -- 14:20 KST |
On March 10 2012 08:29 iloveAthene wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:24 slipperhat wrote:
So...I was just watching EG.DeMoN's dota2 stream, and he said "n-----fucker" live over the air. What happens to him? you serious bro? tweet that shit
As much as I want to see EGs reaction, it'd feel bad to potentially ruin Demons career too just for that rofl...
|
On March 10 2012 08:30 threshy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:24 Shiori wrote:On March 10 2012 08:22 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:16 FiWiFaKi wrote:On March 10 2012 08:12 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 08:11 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 08:07 Klondikebar wrote:On March 10 2012 07:57 SeraKuDA wrote:On March 10 2012 07:16 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 07:10 SeraKuDA wrote:
Oh what the hell... I don't even like orb's casting, but I feel sympathetic for him here. Who gives a shit about random words like that? It's not like we live in the 1950s. Times have changed. People are oversensitive sometimes, and they need to grow up. If you can't even say the word, let alone spell it I think you have a problem. If times have changed, why do so many people persist in using racist language? It's not as though times changing makes the language less racist (if you think it does, please explain your reasoning). Edit: note that I agree that times have changed in some ways--I just don't see how that's relevant here. Times have changed in the sense that the words don't have the same connotation to them. None of us grew up during slavery, and only our parents, and grandparents have a real understanding of what it was like to live in a very racist era. This is a new time, new generation, and our culture is diversified. The words don't carry the same weight they once did, and thus when spoken people generally aren't offended. It's the select few, the sensitive ones, that cry out over the use of them. Those people are the problem-starters. You know what? Fuck you and people like you who willfully remain grossly ignorant of the world in which we live. Try growing up as a minority. We have a very real understanding of what it's like to grow up in a very racist era. Would you like an example? When my family went to a restaurant during pride week in my city my father would not go to the bathroom by himself because "he didn't want the faggots doing anything to him in there." I am not being overly sensitive. I am reacting to a word that is regularly thrown in my face with hatred and vitriol. If you legitimately believe that nigger means the same thing today that it did 20 years ago you're completely lost. It doesn't have to mean the same thing in order to still be off limits. It's a word. Some people make a big deal out of it... Me making a noise with my mouth doesn't give you the right to attack me or something. It may bug you, but learn to deal with it because it's just a word that isn't harming you. There's a difference in calling someone a nigger and actually treating them differently because of skin color. People "deal with it" by labeling those who use racist language as racists and drawing reasonable assumptions about their character. Could you elaborate on the distinction you draw in your last sentence? What is that difference, and how does it ever matter? I think context is hugely important if you're going to make sweeping character judgments. Is a comedian telling a racist joke on par with a Klan member? Probably not. Is a person swearing a fit of rage a homophobe like the Westboro Baptists? Probably not. I get what you're saying, but I don't think it's fair to judge people on the basis of what they say when they're angry. Well, sure. But that's a red herring of an argument, because I haven't compared Orb to a klan member or anything like that. But I find this argument unavailing anyway, because, as I pointed out many pages ago in this thread, it is not particularly hard to refrain from saying racist stuff when you aren't harboring latent racial animus. When I get mad, I don't suddenly start to use racial slurs. I don't even struggle to hold them back. In fact, I don't wrestle with the issue at all. Do you?
I don't think about what I'm saying when I get angry. I simply fling out words from an arbitrary list of words that society has deemed "insulting." Faggot, nigger, and all manner of words are on that list. Some specialized racist terms (kyke, gook, etc) are very rarely used as generic insults and as such never even begin to figure into my list. It's not like I have latent racial prejudice that just bubbles up when I'm angry (though, I can't remember the last time I've used the word nigger; I don't like the way it sounds). But I definitely call people 'faggots' occasionally when I'm angry, and as far as I can tell it has nothing to do with my opinions of homosexuals, which are universally positive.
I'm not trying to be contrarian here: I have a lot of respect for the thought you put into these posts. I just don't think, from a perspective of morality, that insulting someone using racial terms in a generic sense is any worse than insulting them period, though both are definitely bad.
|
On March 10 2012 08:32 sereniity wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:29 iloveAthene wrote:On March 10 2012 08:24 slipperhat wrote:
So...I was just watching EG.DeMoN's dota2 stream, and he said "n-----fucker" live over the air. What happens to him? you serious bro? tweet that shit As much as I want to see EGs reaction, it'd feel bad to potentially ruin Demons career too just for that rofl...
Pretty much everyone on EG.Dota has used the word nigger on some occasion. It's a notoriously BM sport.
|
On March 10 2012 08:32 Shiori wrote:
I don't think about what I'm saying when I get angry. .
You should.
|
On March 10 2012 08:25 threshy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:20 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 08:16 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:09 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 08:05 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:01 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 07:57 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 07:52 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 07:33 Zaros wrote:On March 10 2012 07:30 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
It really boggles my mine how heterosexual people think their in a position to say whether or not faggot is an offensive word.
agreed lol It's because they've made some preliminary philosophical discoveries about how signifiers are not externally motivated and apply in arbitrary fashion to their signifieds, don't examine this discovery in any rigorous fashion and conclude "words mean whatever man" and use this as an excuse not to examine their own actions and/or the social power of language. It's pathetic. You're giving a transparently post-hoc rationalization borne directly out of cognitive dissonance far too much credit. (Though I don't blame you for wanting to believe these people are capable of more.) What? I'm not giving these people any credit, I'm calling them fools. They explicitly make the arbitrariness of signifiers argument in their blatherings, although they don't know enough to call it that. Sorry if I seemed combative. I disagree with you only to the extent that you think these people are thinking this through at all. I don't think there's any kernel of an idea under their arguments except "I can't be accountable for this." Otherwise I've generally enjoyed your posts in this thread, so, again, sorry! NP I was just confused :D There's generally two camps of apologists. The first are the basements dwellers and the second are the people who try to pursue the "if you are offended you give the word power" line, which is total bs. I'm referring to the second camp here. Yeah. Those in the second group strike me as simply disingenuous. The argument can't survive even cursory disinterested scrutiny. They're just offering up the nonsense that cognitive dissonance flushes into their heads when confronted with their irreconcilable positions that (1) there is a good reason to be using racist language, but (2) they are not racist. But maybe we're saying the same thing at this point? The pretentious condescension in this post is literally awe-inspiring. The constant assumptions you make about the people who disagree with you make me think you have some severe hypocritical prejudices against people on the internet who may not have the same paradigm as you. So, show how my "assumptions" are wrong. Present a coherent argument. I'm not ashamed of condescending to those who won't do their homework. What's "pretentious" about my posts anyway? What am I pretending to be, in your opinion?
Well, you're pretentious because of how unnecessarily verbose you are. The fact that everyone other than you is arguing in layman's terms so that everyone can be involved in the debate can somewhat attest to that.
The assumptions I'm referring to are the instances of calling people basement dwellers and social rejects and what not.
Edit: Well, turns out I fucked up. You're only crime is being somewhat pretentious and verbose. It's that Samdzat guy who's constantly assuming everyone's a social reject.
|
On March 10 2012 08:33 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:32 Shiori wrote:
I don't think about what I'm saying when I get angry. . You should.
I'm talking about rage scenarios, not run-of-the-mill "oh that's inconvenient" anger. Yeah, obviously you try to keep control, but everyone has moments where that control slips. Everyone.
It's also more of the fact that when people are legitimately pissed off, we give them a bit of slack in that what they're saying probably isn't the most well-thought out speech.
|
On March 10 2012 08:21 gulati wrote:
I really miss the days of gaming where you could speak your mind and act like a human being, without red tape and censorship everywhere. I am proud to admit that I speak extremely foul, vulgar and hateful, and I will never, ever change who I am or my speech patterns to please anybody, regardless of how big the paycheck becomes.
As a Personal Statement: Yes, Alex, I do own Evil Geniuses apparel. So don't take my statement as if I hate your company or you. I just don't respect your decision whatsoever, because I too am a very educated man, and my view on speech is an inverse-correlation to your linear mindset of speech and human behavior. Sorry to say.
Best of luck to Orb. He was my third favorite non-Korean caster.
TLDR: I'm keeping it 'real'. Fuck the haters!
Good luck sir. Just warning you that holding on to 'who you are', particularly in how you speak and carry yourself, is kind of overrated. Everyone grows and evolves anyway.
Getting a regular paycheck and free room-and-board so you can talk about Starcraft all day ... now that's fucking sweet.
It's easy to look at Orb's situation and feel sorry for the guy, but I hope he looks at this as learning experience. The kid has a lot of potential. He would be a fool to cling to his nerd-rage, it's the only thing holding him back right now.
|
On March 10 2012 08:33 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:32 sereniity wrote:On March 10 2012 08:29 iloveAthene wrote:On March 10 2012 08:24 slipperhat wrote:
So...I was just watching EG.DeMoN's dota2 stream, and he said "n-----fucker" live over the air. What happens to him? you serious bro? tweet that shit As much as I want to see EGs reaction, it'd feel bad to potentially ruin Demons career too just for that rofl... Pretty much everyone on EG.Dota has used the word nigger on some occasion. It's a notoriously BM sport.
But its our duty to keep them honest and treat all their employees as equally as possible, yes?
|
On March 10 2012 08:33 Megabuster123 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:25 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:20 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 08:16 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:09 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 08:05 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:01 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 07:57 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 07:52 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 07:33 Zaros wrote:
[quote]
agreed lol It's because they've made some preliminary philosophical discoveries about how signifiers are not externally motivated and apply in arbitrary fashion to their signifieds, don't examine this discovery in any rigorous fashion and conclude "words mean whatever man" and use this as an excuse not to examine their own actions and/or the social power of language. It's pathetic. You're giving a transparently post-hoc rationalization borne directly out of cognitive dissonance far too much credit. (Though I don't blame you for wanting to believe these people are capable of more.) What? I'm not giving these people any credit, I'm calling them fools. They explicitly make the arbitrariness of signifiers argument in their blatherings, although they don't know enough to call it that. Sorry if I seemed combative. I disagree with you only to the extent that you think these people are thinking this through at all. I don't think there's any kernel of an idea under their arguments except "I can't be accountable for this." Otherwise I've generally enjoyed your posts in this thread, so, again, sorry! NP I was just confused :D There's generally two camps of apologists. The first are the basements dwellers and the second are the people who try to pursue the "if you are offended you give the word power" line, which is total bs. I'm referring to the second camp here. Yeah. Those in the second group strike me as simply disingenuous. The argument can't survive even cursory disinterested scrutiny. They're just offering up the nonsense that cognitive dissonance flushes into their heads when confronted with their irreconcilable positions that (1) there is a good reason to be using racist language, but (2) they are not racist. But maybe we're saying the same thing at this point? The pretentious condescension in this post is literally awe-inspiring. The constant assumptions you make about the people who disagree with you make me think you have some severe hypocritical prejudices against people on the internet who may not have the same paradigm as you. So, show how my "assumptions" are wrong. Present a coherent argument. I'm not ashamed of condescending to those who won't do their homework. What's "pretentious" about my posts anyway? What am I pretending to be, in your opinion? Well, you're pretentious because of how unnecessarily verbose you are. The fact that everyone other than you is arguing in layman's terms so that everyone can be involved in the debate can somewhat attest to that. The assumptions I'm referring to are the instances of calling people basement dwellers and social rejects and what not.
By "layman's terms" you mean poorly defined terms and specious arguments?
Your objection is "you no more abt this than me so nofair  "
|
I find the fact that Orb was "dismissed from EG broadcasts" hilarious, seeing as Idra for example has insulted people on bnet on and off stream for years. I don't know if Idra has used the N word or not, but I'm certain he has said some pretty serious insults many times.
However Idra brings way too much publicity to EG for them to ever do something about that. I'd say they even endorse his behavior as it is one of the main reasons for his popularity. Idra himself has confirmed that, on an old interview with Carmac I believe.
Bottom line, I don't like hypocrisy.
|
On March 10 2012 08:33 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:32 sereniity wrote:On March 10 2012 08:29 iloveAthene wrote:On March 10 2012 08:24 slipperhat wrote:
So...I was just watching EG.DeMoN's dota2 stream, and he said "n-----fucker" live over the air. What happens to him? you serious bro? tweet that shit As much as I want to see EGs reaction, it'd feel bad to potentially ruin Demons career too just for that rofl... Pretty much everyone on EG.Dota has used the word nigger on some occasion. It's a notoriously BM sport.
I know but hey... Alex Garfield has a major in black study or whatever the fuck it was, he'll handle it! And ofcourse Demon is hurting e-sports, we have to get rid of him! He doesn't belong in this highly sophisticated moniclistic community of tea-sipping nerds.
|
On March 10 2012 08:33 Megabuster123 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:25 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:20 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 08:16 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:09 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 08:05 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:01 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 07:57 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 07:52 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 07:33 Zaros wrote:
[quote]
agreed lol It's because they've made some preliminary philosophical discoveries about how signifiers are not externally motivated and apply in arbitrary fashion to their signifieds, don't examine this discovery in any rigorous fashion and conclude "words mean whatever man" and use this as an excuse not to examine their own actions and/or the social power of language. It's pathetic. You're giving a transparently post-hoc rationalization borne directly out of cognitive dissonance far too much credit. (Though I don't blame you for wanting to believe these people are capable of more.) What? I'm not giving these people any credit, I'm calling them fools. They explicitly make the arbitrariness of signifiers argument in their blatherings, although they don't know enough to call it that. Sorry if I seemed combative. I disagree with you only to the extent that you think these people are thinking this through at all. I don't think there's any kernel of an idea under their arguments except "I can't be accountable for this." Otherwise I've generally enjoyed your posts in this thread, so, again, sorry! NP I was just confused :D There's generally two camps of apologists. The first are the basements dwellers and the second are the people who try to pursue the "if you are offended you give the word power" line, which is total bs. I'm referring to the second camp here. Yeah. Those in the second group strike me as simply disingenuous. The argument can't survive even cursory disinterested scrutiny. They're just offering up the nonsense that cognitive dissonance flushes into their heads when confronted with their irreconcilable positions that (1) there is a good reason to be using racist language, but (2) they are not racist. But maybe we're saying the same thing at this point? The pretentious condescension in this post is literally awe-inspiring. The constant assumptions you make about the people who disagree with you make me think you have some severe hypocritical prejudices against people on the internet who may not have the same paradigm as you. So, show how my "assumptions" are wrong. Present a coherent argument. I'm not ashamed of condescending to those who won't do their homework. What's "pretentious" about my posts anyway? What am I pretending to be, in your opinion? Well, you're pretentious because of how unnecessarily verbose you are. The fact that everyone other than you is arguing in layman's terms so that everyone can be involved in the debate can somewhat attest to that. The assumptions I'm referring to are the instances of calling people basement dwellers and social rejects and what not.
Oh, so it was just kind of a generic anti-intellectualism? Ok. Well, sorry, but I'm not hurt.
I didn't do any of that other stuff you mentioned, so it seems like you're just generally confused. I don't understand why, so I'm not sure I can help with that.
|
On March 10 2012 08:35 iloveAthene wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:33 Shiori wrote:On March 10 2012 08:32 sereniity wrote:On March 10 2012 08:29 iloveAthene wrote:On March 10 2012 08:24 slipperhat wrote:
So...I was just watching EG.DeMoN's dota2 stream, and he said "n-----fucker" live over the air. What happens to him? you serious bro? tweet that shit As much as I want to see EGs reaction, it'd feel bad to potentially ruin Demons career too just for that rofl... Pretty much everyone on EG.Dota has used the word nigger on some occasion. It's a notoriously BM sport. But its our duty to keep them honest and treat all their employees as equally as possible, yes?
Already tweeted Alex about his hypocrisy WRT Idra; no response. I don't imagine this would get much either, and I seriously don't think it would warrant actually firing someone anyway.
|
Canada11594 Posts
This is not the thread to start pitchforking over hearsay on other EG players. Keep it focused on EG-Orb.
|
On March 10 2012 08:33 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:32 sereniity wrote:On March 10 2012 08:29 iloveAthene wrote:On March 10 2012 08:24 slipperhat wrote:
So...I was just watching EG.DeMoN's dota2 stream, and he said "n-----fucker" live over the air. What happens to him? you serious bro? tweet that shit As much as I want to see EGs reaction, it'd feel bad to potentially ruin Demons career too just for that rofl... Pretty much everyone on EG.Dota has used the word nigger on some occasion. It's a notoriously BM sport.
how is that even remotely allowed, given the position they seem to have taken on the issue. and i'm not trying to burn DeMoN at the stake here, i'm just wondering what kind of action does that mean for him, if any? you can't help but be curious.
|
On March 10 2012 08:36 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:33 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 08:25 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:20 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 08:16 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:09 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 08:05 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:01 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 07:57 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 07:52 sam!zdat wrote:
[quote]
It's because they've made some preliminary philosophical discoveries about how signifiers are not externally motivated and apply in arbitrary fashion to their signifieds, don't examine this discovery in any rigorous fashion and conclude "words mean whatever man" and use this as an excuse not to examine their own actions and/or the social power of language.
It's pathetic. You're giving a transparently post-hoc rationalization borne directly out of cognitive dissonance far too much credit. (Though I don't blame you for wanting to believe these people are capable of more.) What? I'm not giving these people any credit, I'm calling them fools. They explicitly make the arbitrariness of signifiers argument in their blatherings, although they don't know enough to call it that. Sorry if I seemed combative. I disagree with you only to the extent that you think these people are thinking this through at all. I don't think there's any kernel of an idea under their arguments except "I can't be accountable for this." Otherwise I've generally enjoyed your posts in this thread, so, again, sorry! NP I was just confused :D There's generally two camps of apologists. The first are the basements dwellers and the second are the people who try to pursue the "if you are offended you give the word power" line, which is total bs. I'm referring to the second camp here. Yeah. Those in the second group strike me as simply disingenuous. The argument can't survive even cursory disinterested scrutiny. They're just offering up the nonsense that cognitive dissonance flushes into their heads when confronted with their irreconcilable positions that (1) there is a good reason to be using racist language, but (2) they are not racist. But maybe we're saying the same thing at this point? The pretentious condescension in this post is literally awe-inspiring. The constant assumptions you make about the people who disagree with you make me think you have some severe hypocritical prejudices against people on the internet who may not have the same paradigm as you. So, show how my "assumptions" are wrong. Present a coherent argument. I'm not ashamed of condescending to those who won't do their homework. What's "pretentious" about my posts anyway? What am I pretending to be, in your opinion? Well, you're pretentious because of how unnecessarily verbose you are. The fact that everyone other than you is arguing in layman's terms so that everyone can be involved in the debate can somewhat attest to that. The assumptions I'm referring to are the instances of calling people basement dwellers and social rejects and what not. By "layman's terms" you mean poorly defined terms and specious arguments? Your objection is "you no more abt this than me so nofair "
I never said I didn't understand you. I'm a 3rd year history/ philosohy double major. Just because you know some big words doesn't mean you're more versed in this than anyone else.
|
On March 10 2012 08:33 Megabuster123 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:25 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:20 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 08:16 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:09 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 08:05 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:01 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 07:57 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 07:52 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 07:33 Zaros wrote:
[quote]
agreed lol It's because they've made some preliminary philosophical discoveries about how signifiers are not externally motivated and apply in arbitrary fashion to their signifieds, don't examine this discovery in any rigorous fashion and conclude "words mean whatever man" and use this as an excuse not to examine their own actions and/or the social power of language. It's pathetic. You're giving a transparently post-hoc rationalization borne directly out of cognitive dissonance far too much credit. (Though I don't blame you for wanting to believe these people are capable of more.) What? I'm not giving these people any credit, I'm calling them fools. They explicitly make the arbitrariness of signifiers argument in their blatherings, although they don't know enough to call it that. Sorry if I seemed combative. I disagree with you only to the extent that you think these people are thinking this through at all. I don't think there's any kernel of an idea under their arguments except "I can't be accountable for this." Otherwise I've generally enjoyed your posts in this thread, so, again, sorry! NP I was just confused :D There's generally two camps of apologists. The first are the basements dwellers and the second are the people who try to pursue the "if you are offended you give the word power" line, which is total bs. I'm referring to the second camp here. Yeah. Those in the second group strike me as simply disingenuous. The argument can't survive even cursory disinterested scrutiny. They're just offering up the nonsense that cognitive dissonance flushes into their heads when confronted with their irreconcilable positions that (1) there is a good reason to be using racist language, but (2) they are not racist. But maybe we're saying the same thing at this point? The pretentious condescension in this post is literally awe-inspiring. The constant assumptions you make about the people who disagree with you make me think you have some severe hypocritical prejudices against people on the internet who may not have the same paradigm as you. So, show how my "assumptions" are wrong. Present a coherent argument. I'm not ashamed of condescending to those who won't do their homework. What's "pretentious" about my posts anyway? What am I pretending to be, in your opinion? Well, you're pretentious because of how unnecessarily verbose you are. The fact that everyone other than you is arguing in layman's terms so that everyone can be involved in the debate can somewhat attest to that. The assumptions I'm referring to are the instances of calling people basement dwellers and social rejects and what not. Edit: Well, turns out I fucked up. You're only crime is being somewhat pretentious and verbose. It's that Samdzat guy who's constantly assuming everyone's a social reject.
I don't assume anything. People in this thread reveal themselves to be social rejects.
User was warned for this post
|
Personally speaking, I hate the whole theory of political correctness (if that word even exists really), if I were to whine about everytime someone made jokes about mafia being related to being Italian, or pizza or anything else stereotypical about Italian, really pretty much not a single caster/player would pretty much be without a contract. Reference to the godfather aswell 
I understand that african-americans have gone down a really harsh period in our recent history, but I believe that society needs to stop being so pathetically whimpy about the use of words. Being offended by literally everything is soooooo bloody ridiculous, and taking things out of context or to overexaggerate them everytime is in my view totally lame and underproductive.
I remember when part of the community whined over the term 'rape' in gaming context because it could 'hurt' the feelings of people affected by rape. Now in my opinion that was and still is 100% total bullsh*t, the reason being that terms like holycow can offend an Indian (real indian not native american), or goddam, or holy sh*t could offend a christian/jew/muslim (often used by Incontrol also on casts of Nasl season1, or what ever. Yet those terms are used because people of those communities are generally less butthurt about it, and non-members of those communities don't 'stand up' for them on the matter.
Now I understand Alex is under pressure by sponsors and by the community and since he is running a business he is pretty much forced (or he is sincerely disturbed by this thing... that's irrelevant to the point), but really this mentality leads to so many cases of possible whine.
Yes ni**er is not a nice term, I understand that, but really, is f*ck, d*ck, p*ssy, sh*t or what ever any better? if you consider ni**er as a bad word start removing everything else aswell, as in my opinion it is pure hypocricy to punish one person for using one term (outside of a cast) just because more people are butthurt about it. Yes this is business so money > logic, but really, guys stop being such babies and accept that people might say things you don't like without going to cry like a baby to a businessman about it. I understand if Orb would've said on cast "god I hate those damn ni**ers", or "he acted like a total ni**er" as that is a clear example of RACISM, and on cast you should use 0 bad words if you want SC2 to become a real sport (how many times do you hear pro-commentators of sports swear on live tv?) on the other hand using the word nigger as it is used today by MOST people outside of a cast really should not cause people to clintch their a**hole, goddamit alot of streams use rap music with WAY more vulgar or offensive words, where are those buthurt people then?
And by the way on the use of fag, or faggot, yes it isn't nice but please don't call people homophobic because they use such terms, I have alot of gay friends that use them, what matters is the CONTEXT of where the word is used, the MEANING of the sentence, and the WAY you use it, and with WHO you use it. You are not an anti-gay bigot or a homofobe just because you joke around with a mate and call him a fag, or a homo, implying that is just simply stupid.
In conclusion, and sorry for the long post, in MY opinion, swearing should just not be in casts, so on that level I would justify Orbs removal ONLY if he had used the word ni**er on a cast, as that is a violation of professionality while working. Obviously I would personally not fire someone for saying sh*t on cast compared to ni**er (which is worse because it could offend people directly), I'd probably give the dude another chance for a sh*t or a f**k.
So Alex, I agree with the removal of Orb to a certain extent, but not with your justification for it. Far too politically correct for my taste, if you gotta be politically correct you gotta follow your logic with everything, not just with the community which acts more buthurt about it, which, to be honest they have the right too really after what they've gone through and what they still go through. But really, if every community in this world would stick up to a denigration of their culture or stereotype, human beings would probably only be able to formulate the most basic of basic phrases. So, instead of becomming a race (human race) of whimps and kiddos who get offended over everyword, maybe we should fight to make everyone abit more 'manly' (not in the chauvenist sense ladies) and take a word for what it is meant to be in the phrase and not its 'general' meaning.
|
On March 10 2012 08:38 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:33 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 08:25 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:20 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 08:16 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:09 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 08:05 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:01 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 07:57 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 07:52 sam!zdat wrote:
[quote]
It's because they've made some preliminary philosophical discoveries about how signifiers are not externally motivated and apply in arbitrary fashion to their signifieds, don't examine this discovery in any rigorous fashion and conclude "words mean whatever man" and use this as an excuse not to examine their own actions and/or the social power of language.
It's pathetic. You're giving a transparently post-hoc rationalization borne directly out of cognitive dissonance far too much credit. (Though I don't blame you for wanting to believe these people are capable of more.) What? I'm not giving these people any credit, I'm calling them fools. They explicitly make the arbitrariness of signifiers argument in their blatherings, although they don't know enough to call it that. Sorry if I seemed combative. I disagree with you only to the extent that you think these people are thinking this through at all. I don't think there's any kernel of an idea under their arguments except "I can't be accountable for this." Otherwise I've generally enjoyed your posts in this thread, so, again, sorry! NP I was just confused :D There's generally two camps of apologists. The first are the basements dwellers and the second are the people who try to pursue the "if you are offended you give the word power" line, which is total bs. I'm referring to the second camp here. Yeah. Those in the second group strike me as simply disingenuous. The argument can't survive even cursory disinterested scrutiny. They're just offering up the nonsense that cognitive dissonance flushes into their heads when confronted with their irreconcilable positions that (1) there is a good reason to be using racist language, but (2) they are not racist. But maybe we're saying the same thing at this point? The pretentious condescension in this post is literally awe-inspiring. The constant assumptions you make about the people who disagree with you make me think you have some severe hypocritical prejudices against people on the internet who may not have the same paradigm as you. So, show how my "assumptions" are wrong. Present a coherent argument. I'm not ashamed of condescending to those who won't do their homework. What's "pretentious" about my posts anyway? What am I pretending to be, in your opinion? Well, you're pretentious because of how unnecessarily verbose you are. The fact that everyone other than you is arguing in layman's terms so that everyone can be involved in the debate can somewhat attest to that. The assumptions I'm referring to are the instances of calling people basement dwellers and social rejects and what not. Edit: Well, turns out I fucked up. You're only crime is being somewhat pretentious and verbose. It's that Samdzat guy who's constantly assuming everyone's a social reject. I don't assume anything. People in this thread reveal themselves to be social rejects.
I'm not a social reject!!!
|
On March 10 2012 08:36 threshy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:33 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 08:25 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:20 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 08:16 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:09 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 08:05 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 08:01 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 07:57 threshy wrote:On March 10 2012 07:52 sam!zdat wrote:
[quote]
It's because they've made some preliminary philosophical discoveries about how signifiers are not externally motivated and apply in arbitrary fashion to their signifieds, don't examine this discovery in any rigorous fashion and conclude "words mean whatever man" and use this as an excuse not to examine their own actions and/or the social power of language.
It's pathetic. You're giving a transparently post-hoc rationalization borne directly out of cognitive dissonance far too much credit. (Though I don't blame you for wanting to believe these people are capable of more.) What? I'm not giving these people any credit, I'm calling them fools. They explicitly make the arbitrariness of signifiers argument in their blatherings, although they don't know enough to call it that. Sorry if I seemed combative. I disagree with you only to the extent that you think these people are thinking this through at all. I don't think there's any kernel of an idea under their arguments except "I can't be accountable for this." Otherwise I've generally enjoyed your posts in this thread, so, again, sorry! NP I was just confused :D There's generally two camps of apologists. The first are the basements dwellers and the second are the people who try to pursue the "if you are offended you give the word power" line, which is total bs. I'm referring to the second camp here. Yeah. Those in the second group strike me as simply disingenuous. The argument can't survive even cursory disinterested scrutiny. They're just offering up the nonsense that cognitive dissonance flushes into their heads when confronted with their irreconcilable positions that (1) there is a good reason to be using racist language, but (2) they are not racist. But maybe we're saying the same thing at this point? The pretentious condescension in this post is literally awe-inspiring. The constant assumptions you make about the people who disagree with you make me think you have some severe hypocritical prejudices against people on the internet who may not have the same paradigm as you. So, show how my "assumptions" are wrong. Present a coherent argument. I'm not ashamed of condescending to those who won't do their homework. What's "pretentious" about my posts anyway? What am I pretending to be, in your opinion? Well, you're pretentious because of how unnecessarily verbose you are. The fact that everyone other than you is arguing in layman's terms so that everyone can be involved in the debate can somewhat attest to that. The assumptions I'm referring to are the instances of calling people basement dwellers and social rejects and what not. Oh, so it was just kind of a generic anti-intellectualism? Ok. Well, sorry, but I'm not hurt. I didn't do any of that other stuff you mentioned, so it seems like you're just generally confused. I don't understand why, so I'm not sure I can help with that.
I wouldn't call alienating language anit-intellectualism when the vast majority of the people you're going to argue on a starcraft forum aren't going to understand you at all. And I realized it wasn't you, I edited that into my post and apologize for fucking up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
