|
This thread is for discussing recent bans. Don't discuss other topics here. Take it to website feedback if you disagree with a ban or want to raise an issue. Keep it civil.NOTE: For those of you who want to find the actual ABL thread where the bans are posted. Please look in here: https://tl.net/forum/closed-threads/ |
On May 03 2013 05:40 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 05:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On May 03 2013 05:30 KwarK wrote:
Judges and lawyers aren't some special moral group that are better than the rest of us, I have no doubt there are plenty of them with disgusting opinions that won't be tolerated on tl. You're right, I could explain why he was wrong rather than ban him. But I can also explain why he is wrong and ban him and that way we have less rape apologism on the forum. I see that as a worthy end and therefore disagree that I have accomplished very little. i was referring not to the fact that they hold disgusting opinions, which is undoubtedly true as to some, but that they recognize the legal legitimacy of "blaming" the victim. something you appear to have zero tolerance for despite the legitimacy it holds in society at least as to legal matters. keep with your narrow view of the world though where you choose to ban instead of addressing opinions you dont agree with. i am sure it will work out well for you in the end. Juries are fucking retarded because the general population are fucking retarded. The fact that a jury can be convinced that a woman deserved it because she was a slut or that a black guy did it because let's face it, they're all the same, does not make the arguments good ones. I don't have the power to moderate the world but on team liquid I'll do what I can.
whether the defense gets brought before the jury is a legal question for the judge, and numerous judges and justices that are smarter than you and me have approved "blaming" the victim in rape cases subject to exceptions (i.e., the rape shield laws). are you not getting this? you banned a guy for holding an opinion that is legally recognized as a defense to rape. so congratulations for narrowing not only your own views, but also the views of tl.net in the guise of "moderation." despicable.
|
On May 03 2013 05:40 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 05:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On May 03 2013 05:30 KwarK wrote:
Judges and lawyers aren't some special moral group that are better than the rest of us, I have no doubt there are plenty of them with disgusting opinions that won't be tolerated on tl. You're right, I could explain why he was wrong rather than ban him. But I can also explain why he is wrong and ban him and that way we have less rape apologism on the forum. I see that as a worthy end and therefore disagree that I have accomplished very little. i was referring not to the fact that they hold disgusting opinions, which is undoubtedly true as to some, but that they recognize the legal legitimacy of "blaming" the victim. something you appear to have zero tolerance for despite the legitimacy it holds in society at least as to legal matters. keep with your narrow view of the world though where you choose to ban instead of addressing opinions you dont agree with. i am sure it will work out well for you in the end. Juries are fucking retarded because the general population are fucking retarded. The fact that a jury can be convinced that a woman deserved it because she was a slut or that a black guy did it because let's face it, they're all the same, does not make the arguments good ones. I don't have the power to moderate the world but on team liquid I'll do what I can.
I think it would be awesome if KwarK were able to moderate the world. I think he is a good mod. Although the feedback threads would probably become massive demonstrations of clones/PBUs :p
For what it's worth, I think KwarK is amazingly restrained in that thread.
|
On May 03 2013 05:46 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 05:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On May 03 2013 05:30 KwarK wrote:
Judges and lawyers aren't some special moral group that are better than the rest of us, I have no doubt there are plenty of them with disgusting opinions that won't be tolerated on tl. You're right, I could explain why he was wrong rather than ban him. But I can also explain why he is wrong and ban him and that way we have less rape apologism on the forum. I see that as a worthy end and therefore disagree that I have accomplished very little. i was referring not to the fact that they hold disgusting opinions, which is undoubtedly true as to some, but that they recognize the legal legitimacy of "blaming" the victim. something you appear to have zero tolerance for despite the legitimacy it holds in society at least as to legal matters. keep with your narrow view of the world though where you choose to ban instead of addressing opinions you dont agree with. i am sure it will work out well for you in the end. Legal legitimacy is a pretty low bar considering that defense lawyers have a legal obligation to throw the kitchen sink at jurors. These sound like the arguments of overburdened public defenders just going through the motions. Sometimes it sticks, but non-retarded jurors just roll their eyes.
you obviously have no idea how the criminal justice system works. lawyers are not allowed to just throw the kitchen sink at jurors in a rape case. there are laws that specifically delineate what can and cannot be done (i.e., the so-called rape shield statutes, evidentiary laws).
|
United States44033 Posts
On May 03 2013 05:52 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 05:40 KwarK wrote:On May 03 2013 05:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On May 03 2013 05:30 KwarK wrote:
Judges and lawyers aren't some special moral group that are better than the rest of us, I have no doubt there are plenty of them with disgusting opinions that won't be tolerated on tl. You're right, I could explain why he was wrong rather than ban him. But I can also explain why he is wrong and ban him and that way we have less rape apologism on the forum. I see that as a worthy end and therefore disagree that I have accomplished very little. i was referring not to the fact that they hold disgusting opinions, which is undoubtedly true as to some, but that they recognize the legal legitimacy of "blaming" the victim. something you appear to have zero tolerance for despite the legitimacy it holds in society at least as to legal matters. keep with your narrow view of the world though where you choose to ban instead of addressing opinions you dont agree with. i am sure it will work out well for you in the end. Juries are fucking retarded because the general population are fucking retarded. The fact that a jury can be convinced that a woman deserved it because she was a slut or that a black guy did it because let's face it, they're all the same, does not make the arguments good ones. I don't have the power to moderate the world but on team liquid I'll do what I can. whether the defense gets brought before the jury is a legal question for the judge, and numerous judges and justices that are smarter than you and me have approved "blaming" the victim in rape cases subject to exceptions (i.e., the rape shield laws). are you not getting this? you banned a guy for holding an opinion that is legally recognized as a defense to rape. so congratulations for narrowing not only your own views, but also the views of tl.net in the guise of "moderation." despicable.
I dunno if they're that smart if they don't realise that taking things which have nothing to do with consent and allowing them to be presented as evidence for consent is really stupid. I think it's much more likely that judges, a group dominated by old white men, are historically not that up to date with the social advances being pushed by feminism. I also doubt that they're that much smarter than me because, not to blow my own trumpet too hard, people don't actually get much smarter than me.
All in all I feel very comfortable being an arbiter of acceptability, particularly over something as obviously unambiguous as rape apologism.
|
|
|
United States44033 Posts
On May 03 2013 06:03 dAPhREAk wrote:
jesus christ.
KwarK will suffice.
|
Lalalaland34503 Posts
Will one of you create another Website Feedback thread about this already, we need another one of them.
|
On May 03 2013 05:52 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 05:40 KwarK wrote:On May 03 2013 05:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On May 03 2013 05:30 KwarK wrote:
Judges and lawyers aren't some special moral group that are better than the rest of us, I have no doubt there are plenty of them with disgusting opinions that won't be tolerated on tl. You're right, I could explain why he was wrong rather than ban him. But I can also explain why he is wrong and ban him and that way we have less rape apologism on the forum. I see that as a worthy end and therefore disagree that I have accomplished very little. i was referring not to the fact that they hold disgusting opinions, which is undoubtedly true as to some, but that they recognize the legal legitimacy of "blaming" the victim. something you appear to have zero tolerance for despite the legitimacy it holds in society at least as to legal matters. keep with your narrow view of the world though where you choose to ban instead of addressing opinions you dont agree with. i am sure it will work out well for you in the end. Juries are fucking retarded because the general population are fucking retarded. The fact that a jury can be convinced that a woman deserved it because she was a slut or that a black guy did it because let's face it, they're all the same, does not make the arguments good ones. I don't have the power to moderate the world but on team liquid I'll do what I can. whether the defense gets brought before the jury is a legal question for the judge, and numerous judges and justices that are smarter than you and me have approved "blaming" the victim in rape cases subject to exceptions (i.e., the rape shield laws). are you not getting this? you banned a guy for holding an opinion that is legally recognized as a defense to rape. so congratulations for narrowing not only your own views, but also the views of tl.net in the guise of "moderation." despicable.
But judges aren't really there to decide what's socially acceptable or not. They're just there supposedly to interpret statutes on what is legally permissible or not. Statutes written by congressmen like Todd Akin.
|
On May 03 2013 06:04 KwarK wrote:KwarK will suffice.
how about blowhard? i am not sure whether your last post expressing your intellectual superiority was tongue-in-cheek given your general demeanor on the forums.
|
United States44033 Posts
I guess we ought to get this back on topic. Back on topic gents.
|
This is amazing.
edit: o no dun stap plz
|
GoonMicro was just banned by pPingu.
That account was created on 2013-05-02 03:29:59 and had 0 posts.
Reason: PBU
Just so I can post here legally 
KwarK is heavy handed, but that's just too bad for those of particular opinions.
Website feedback thread please 
|
On May 03 2013 06:06 Firebolt145 wrote:
Will one of you create another Website Feedback thread about this already, we need another one of them.
I'd give it a couple weeks for people to get unbanned. It's been too long since our last KwarK post on website feedback.
Sad thing was, the thread that got them banned wasn't even about rape  sometimes I just don't understand people at all
|
On May 03 2013 01:25 Kasaraki wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 01:13 farvacola wrote:SupLilSon was just temp banned for 2 weeks by KwarK.
That account was created on 2011-10-08 10:33:08 and had 3164 posts.
Reason: Rape apologism.
Nausea was just temp banned for 1 week by KwarK.
That account was created on 2010-10-08 07:06:21 and had 448 posts.
Reason: Shitposting general.
edlover420 was just temp banned for 1 week by KwarK.
That account was created on 2012-12-27 04:56:53 and had 109 posts.
Reason: Literally "she was asking for it".
ain was just temp banned for 2 weeks by KwarK.
That account was created on 2010-07-29 00:15:43 and had 524 posts.
Reason: Bye.
Darkwhite was just temp banned for 2 weeks by KwarK.
That account was created on 2007-06-24 06:11:33 and had 13 posts.
Reason: Rape apologism. Best part of waking up, KwarK banning rape apologists in my cup! I guess you could say... *puts on sunglasses* ... they were asking for it.
you make me smile kasaraki.
|
On May 03 2013 06:14 MstrJinbo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 06:06 Firebolt145 wrote:
Will one of you create another Website Feedback thread about this already, we need another one of them. I'd give it a couple weeks for people to get unbanned. It's been too long since our last KwarK post on website feedback. Sad thing was, the thread that got them banned wasn't even about rape sometimes I just don't understand people at all
Yeah, that got me too. How on Earth did it go from sexism in gaming to alcohol and consent for sex?
|
pPingu can you tell us who GoonMicro was? I'm surprisingly curious. o0;
|
Mom was just banned by KadaverBB.
That account was created on 2013-05-03 06:32:27 and had 9 posts.
Reason: You've had your fun.
Never thought about this username not being taken yet, lol. X-D
|
United States97276 Posts
On May 03 2013 09:02 cLAN.Anax wrote:Show nested quote +Mom was just banned by KadaverBB.
That account was created on 2013-05-03 06:32:27 and had 9 posts.
Reason: You've had your fun. Never thought about this username not being taken yet, lol. X-D
It's an imposter. I asked my mom about it and she said she had never heard of teamliquid
|
On May 03 2013 09:02 cLAN.Anax wrote:Show nested quote +Mom was just banned by KadaverBB.
That account was created on 2013-05-03 06:32:27 and had 9 posts.
Reason: You've had your fun. Never thought about this username not being taken yet, lol. X-D
Dude, how heartless does one have to be to ban Mom! That is messed up man. =)
|
your Country52798 Posts
Sorry, guys. Mom's banned now, so Dad will have to take over. *resists urge to create alt account named "Dad"*
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
