|
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/ |
? are u guys trolling, sn0 man is like a dota forum regular
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On April 04 2014 02:26 enord wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2014 14:46 BigFan wrote:On April 03 2014 13:43 Nevuk wrote:
Oh. I always thought it stood for permanently banned user. close enough  not at all close :D
:'(
On April 04 2014 07:43 Shock710 wrote:
? are u guys trolling, sn0 man is like a dota forum regular
I think he was trolling them lol
|
On April 04 2014 08:28 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2014 02:26 enord wrote:On April 03 2014 14:46 BigFan wrote:On April 03 2014 13:43 Nevuk wrote:
Oh. I always thought it stood for permanently banned user. close enough not at all close :D :'( Show nested quote +On April 04 2014 07:43 Shock710 wrote:
? are u guys trolling, sn0 man is like a dota forum regular I think he was trolling them lol
Quite successfully, I might add
|
/meh. I take people at face value. I only try to take avoid aggressive, combative trolls. Otherwise no skin off my back. I don't follow you all around TL like a hawk.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On April 04 2014 08:54 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2014 08:28 BigFan wrote:On April 04 2014 02:26 enord wrote:On April 03 2014 14:46 BigFan wrote:On April 03 2014 13:43 Nevuk wrote:
Oh. I always thought it stood for permanently banned user. close enough not at all close :D :'( On April 04 2014 07:43 Shock710 wrote:
? are u guys trolling, sn0 man is like a dota forum regular I think he was trolling them lol Quite successfully, I might add
very success. You got 3 members to try and explain MOBAs for you lol.
On April 04 2014 09:12 ThomasjServo wrote:
/meh. I take people at face value. I only try to take avoid aggressive, combative trolls. Otherwise no skin off my back. I don't follow you all around TL like a hawk.
hmm for me, this post was how I noticed he trolled:
On April 04 2014 04:40 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2014 04:38 ThomasjServo wrote:On April 04 2014 04:29 Sn0_Man wrote:
Whats a MOBA? Multiplayer online battle arena Sounds suspiciously like Quake. Are you sure you didn't mean FPS?
this post was the signal to me that he was trolling. Dunno why since technically MOBA does sound like Quake lol but it just stood out.
|
Lalalaland34507 Posts
Okay while the way you all fell for Sn0_Man was funny, topic guys ~
|
manicshock was just temp banned for 2 days by Plexa.
That account was created on 2010-11-06 10:32:41 and had 729 posts.
Reason: As a LGBT friendly website, equating homosexuality to 'deviancy and questionable morals' is unacceptable. You're welcome to your own opinion on the matter, just keep it off TL.
Post:
On April 04 2014 15:23 manicshock wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2014 02:26 Whitewing wrote:On April 03 2014 00:13 manicshock wrote:On April 02 2014 22:37 Whitewing wrote:On April 02 2014 17:02 manicshock wrote:On April 02 2014 15:47 Whitewing wrote:On April 02 2014 02:24 Yoav wrote:
A world where people get boycotted (even "soft-boycotted") for unpopular charitable donations they've made would be a weird place.
Gay rights in particular is a difficult issue... lots of decent, tolerant, good folks are against it because of a Biblical textual dispute. (The verses in question almost certainly refer to pederasty, the Greek custom of institutionalized molestation of boys by older men). In many countries, the bias isn't even religious... in Africa, the argument that it's "un-African" is routinely deployed. Anywhere where traditional gender roles persist is going to likewise be very negative toward homosexuality.
So you can try to change minds, but just saying that anyone who had a negative opinion of gay marriage at one point is a bad person is going to leave you in a strange place, where you are convinced most folks in Africa, eastern Europe, and Asia are bad human beings. If you genuinely believe that gay marriage is wrong because of your faith, then you aren't actually a tolerant person. Oh the irony. Here, let me define tolerance for you: Tolerance is defined as a friendly and fair attitude toward unfamiliar or different opinions and practices or toward the persons who hold or practice them. Can we re-read your statement: you called everyone who holds a difference of opinion to yours not tolerant because they won't condone something. Friendly and fair isn't agreeing, it's treating your opinion as I would anyone else's whether they hold the same one or not and giving it a fair shot. I can respect how you want equality in gay marriage, but I certainly won't agree with it for a few reasons. It destroys the fundamental family unit of a husband and wife, all for the carnal desires of people who choose to be different. So what you're saying is that it is intolerant to oppose intolerance, and it is therefore impossible to call someone out for being intolerant based on their faith without being a hypocrite. The amount of bull is unbelievable. Is it intolerant to oppose people who believe that raping women is an acceptable behavior? There's a huge amount of difference in being intolerant of someone's beliefs (and frankly have no evidence or good reasoning for them in the first place) which can change with new information and being intolerant of someone's sexual preference, which cannot be changed. Not all opinions are created equal. There is nothing that gives faith a special protection from criticism, and I do not have to sit here quietly and listen to people behave in a bigoted fashion towards others just because they believe it. Shocker: beliefs can be wrong! You have a right to have a belief, and I respect your right to have it, but I don't have to respect the belief itself and I have the right to call the belief idiotic and hateful. Believing something does not make it true or right. It is not hypocritical to call out someone for bigotry. I don't give a shit what your beliefs are: if you are opposed to gay marriage, you are a bigot, plain and simple. If you don't want to be considered a bigot, then change your beliefs. So if we put the shoe on the other foot, you're a bigot and hateful as well as incredibly intolerant of people who don't believe people should be able to get married when they're gay. Because they believe it, due to a number of reasons. Yes, you're being incredibly hypocritical because you're not discussing the reasons why a religious person would believe it, it's a lot deeper then "Zomg I just believe that gay marriage shouldn't happen because I believe!". Man, the biggest hyprocrites here are clearly the ones who can't accept that there are reasons within religion beyond just believing it shouldn't be. Sure they can be wrong, you should try to prove it before just assuming and then calling me a bigot and ignorant. Gay marriage is a choice. Period. Did I say it's intolerant to oppose something you disagree with? Here let me quote myself, because clearly you don't have any reading comprehension: Friendly and fair isn't agreeing, it's treating your opinion as I would anyone else's whether they hold the same one or not and giving it a fair shot. I can respect how you want equality in gay marriage, but I certainly won't agree with it for a few reasons. Woah. Half the paragraph. Flew right over my head. Not all opinions are created equally, yours is clearly wrong because there's absolute truth flying in the face of it. Just like there's absolute truth flying against rape, 10 commandments you know. But I guess the basis for the majority of modern justice/legal systems is just a bunch of hogwash right? We're living with moral relativity now, so if it became culturally fine then yes people can totally agree on a bunch of things like murder and all sorts and say they're fine even if religion stands in the way. You're so completely wrong it's almost laughable. Firstly, you're making a claim that you have good reasons to oppose gay marriage, burden of proof is on you on this one. Provide those good reasons. Go ahead, give me one good reason. I've never heard a single good reason to oppose it that wasn't based on some amount of complete horseshit along the lines of "this book says it's bad" or "god says no" or some other collection of nonsensical statements with no basis in fact, evidence or reality. Thus, I have considered this perspective and rejected it. If you want to consider me intolerant of stupidity and hate, then fine, feel free to do so. All religious reasoning boils down to "my faith says this." Well it's called faith specifically because it doesn't have any evidence for it. If it had evidence or any basis in fact, it would be science, not faith, and we this conversation wouldn't even be happening, we'd just be accepting your position. Religion always comes down to a belief without evidence, and the rest of us shouldn't have to deal with you imposing your nonsensical views upon us. Well I hate to break it to you pal, but I'm not going to just lay here and let bigots use their beliefs as a justification for restricting rights from others and taking away freedoms they should have. I'm not going to sit here and let your bullshit hurt others without opposition. I don't give a single flying fuck what you believe: if you don't have evidence, it's worth jack shit, and you have no right to use the fact that you believe in it as a justification for opposing the freedoms and rights of others. You are not the victim, stop trying to play one. Here: the family is the fundamental unit of society, when the family is damaged so is every other aspect of it. I think that's what I said in the beginning. A family based on deviancy and questionable morals is a cracked foundation. If the family is splintered apart, and treated as simply another aspect or idea, it weakens it thereby leading to more unfortunate and broken homes. If demanding supposedly equal rights infringes on others rights, is it truly "equal"? For example, this whole thread was started because a company decided someone did something in their personal life and decided to make a statement of it. Will it become discrimination if a gay couple demanded they be married in a church if the church doesn't approve it and the courts decide whether they have any rights? There's plenty of evidence showing the family is key to the growth of a nation. There's the question of at what point will the crusade start or stop, will it simply be a question of vengeance or aggression to show a sense of "moral superiority" because they're "politically correct" where their moral high ground is simply a question of moral relativism in order to stop the freedom of religion (to believe as you choose, the same you clearly adhere to as if I denied you the right to believe gays should be married you wouldn't be okay with that). Anyway, it's honestly a waste of time being here. You either lack reading comprehension, or simply don't read what's typed and throw words like "bigot" and "hate" as you blindly and ignorantly walk on. User was temp banned for this post.
Checked his history. This is the first instance (that I can see) that he infringed in this manner. Was that phrase the only reason he got banned, or was there more in the post that was found objectionable enough to lead to the ban? (not fighting the ban, only seeking further understanding)
|
The ban reason is awfully clear.
|
Clear as fucking day. Don't bring your homophobic opinion out into the open on TL. Keep them where they belong, to youself(ie the person who was banned)
|
TL, the tolerant intolerant
|
On April 05 2014 02:37 dAPhREAk wrote:
TL, the tolerant intolerant
They just treat all intolerance equally. Racism and homophobia are treated the same. Same with sexism. Each has an equal chance of being hit with the ban hammer.
|
Clarity wasn't my concern. Thoroughness was. I conjectured there was more to his ban for that post than the one phrase, which the ban reason deals with only.
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
Using gay as an insult isn't considered an insta-ban though (issue still in discussion), especially when it is in half jest.
His post was a lot better (at least he explains himself and acts civil about it) than the usual drivel on General despite his unaccepted opinion. If that's bannable then using gay as an insult, even as a joke, should be instantly bannable as well.
|
United States23455 Posts
Some guy got banned from the aLive thread for randomly calling him "aGay" twice. Very clever.
|
|
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37120 Posts
|
Ah, I got the post address I got there by. Respect my scroll, data
|
I was wondering how long it was going to take for baskerville to get banned again
|
On April 05 2014 02:37 dAPhREAk wrote:
TL, the tolerant intolerant
boohoo, won't anyone think of the rights of bigots to ostracize gays 
|
your Country52798 Posts
On April 06 2014 01:49 TheFish7 wrote:I was wondering how long it was going to take for baskerville to get banned again
I think one day he'll get integrated into TL society, but he isn't ready yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
