BruceVC

Gee, a surprise you'd agree. People investing time and effort doesn't really mean much at all. You mention debate etiquette (thanks for the laugh) and at the same time rail on about posters just being anti-Western shills (that's what you mean by 'team oby'). And either side is just spitting fire at the other. Entertaining for sure, but not exactly a serious thread. But, oh well, you can keep on with your 'duty'. Malc the intention of a debate around politics is to inform people, not to make them laugh. But I'm glad I could make you laugh. This is not the desired outcome but a positive development nonetheless

These are clearly offensive comments and inciting violence or at least hate towards gay people. Yet if I understand what you are saying the gay person has no legal recourse? that isn't what we said. review. we said no slander. we didn't speak to iied or privacy or other such stuff, in part 'cause facts is kinda shallow. now, in regards to your new questions, in the US if you can prove that the individual were attempting to incite direct and imminent lawless action and that such lawlessness were likely, the first amendment is gonna offer no protection, but again, is only in the case o' imminent violence or lawlessness. just a general hate-filled rant 'bout how all ________ should be "rounded up"? nope. sorry. keep in mind that the US is a revolutionary government. the founders were quite mindful o' the notion that if laws were enacted that chill debate or curb dissent, such laws could be used to stifle any unpopular or subversive speaker. yeah, nazis and gay-bashers is kinda contemptible, but those same laws that would be used to quiet nazis and gay-bashers today coulda' been used to silence civil rights speakers back in the 50s and 60s. btw, the American Revolution were never all that popular with the local populace... is not like we had a huge anti-English sentiment here even at the time o' the Boston Tea Party. heck, the tea tax actual resulted in lower tea costs-- folks being hurt most were smugglers, like John Han****. the Founders recognized the value o' allowing unpopular speakers to have a voice. so, let the gay basher rant and rail. "Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. They did not fear political change. They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty. To courageous, self-reliant men, with confidence in the power of free and fearless reasoning applied through the processes of popular government, no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present, unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence." J. Brandeis (Whitney v. California) HA! Good Fun! Okay thanks for explaining, you have answered most of my questions

This raises an interesting perspective. In the example I mentioned the person is gay, he or she is not denying this. So you cannot slander them by saying "you are gay". But the person attacking them says things like " all gays needs to rounded up and up in concentration camps, the less gays in the world the better" These are clearly offensive comments and inciting violence or at least hate towards gay people. Yet if I understand what you are saying the gay person has no legal recourse? I can apply this example to any minority group that is typically discriminated against, I am just using homophobia as an example in the USA context

Nope. The vote is actually irrelevant, that it was made under duress with a third of the members missing and with Right Sector providing security is simply the cherry on the top that would make the vote invalid under any circumstance. What makes it invalid in the first place is that it was unconstitutional and did not follow the correct procedure by any definition. Wow, I'm confused? The original vote to dispose Yanukovych was illegal but the referendum in Crimea was acceptable and constitutional ?

is no need to feel bad 'bout generalizing. as we said earlier in this thread, the way Free Speech is viewed beyond the boarders o' the USA is fascinating. Chinese Constitution protects freedoms of speech, but such freedoms don't mean anything if government can ignore such protections, yes? Sweden is very protective of freedom of the press. nevertheless, if a Swedish journalist wrote something that offended muslims he could be in trouble and freedom o' speech protections would take a backseat to the muslim's "dignity." etc. from an American pov, protecting polite speech, protecting speech that offends nobody, is kinda pointless. if nobody is offended, why would such speech need protections? we tried to explain to an individual in another thread that protecting Liberty and protecting Democracy is frequent adversarial. he didn't understand. nevertheless, in the United States we accept that, "one man's vulgarity is another's lyric," and we don't let the Democratic process or current notions o' what is acceptable trample 'pon the individuals' freedom o' speech. US Constitutional protections o' speech is unique, but more important, our cultural values is different. even so, is not as if all Americans think it is ok to burn koran or crosses or flags. many Americans is disturbed by such and is often shocked that people is allowed to get away with such things. typical American has some fuzzy threshold regarding what speech is beyond the pale... which is why we don't let The People decide what is and ain't legal. also, is tough for folks outside the US to grasp that our Free Speech protections is a prohibition against government interference. say bad stuff about your boss' mother is not gonna be protected by the Constitution. free speech doesn't get you freedom from prosecution for tangential related crimes or torts. you steal documents or software or whatever, and then try to use freedom o' speech to hide and you is gonna get burned. similarly, if you write a story that is claiming that Bob has syphilis and it ain't true, you is gonna face libel... though famous people get less protection than average folks. child p0rn is considered symbolic speech, but it ain't protected. "obscene" speech isn't protected, but try and define is not easy. p0rn is not necessarily legal obscene. fighting words ain't protected, but we not got time enough to explain fully. yell "fire," in a crowded theatre is not protected. attempts to protect children get a slight lowering o' the standard... google "bong hits for jesus," and "seven dirty words" if you is genuine interested. am understanding we didn't clear up the issue at all. regardless, while it is best not to make generalizations, shady would not be making a mistake in thinking that europeans see free speech fundamental different than does Americans. HA! Good Fun! This has been a particularly interesting post, thanks for trying to explain how the whole free speech works in the USA as it is confusing for an outsider. Let me ask you something, we know in the USA you can sue someone for making slanderous comments. But can you sue and win a case for offensive comments. For example lets say I'm gay and some news presenter is very homophobic directly about me. Could I sue?

Some people are certainly trying to make it into one. No, it pretty much is. Notice how this is just a war with neither side giving much of an inch and being snide ? I mean, you've invented this "team oby" BS. Sorry Malc but I agree with Mor on this. This topic isn't a joke, some people have invested time and effort into making numerous points that position both sides of the debate. Even if I don't agree with "team oby" I do respect the effort they put into there posts. This is basic debate etiquette The reason why I still participate in this debate is there are still people who have a misinformed perspective around why Russia is doing what it is doing. I feel it is my duty to help them understand the correct context for what is happening in Ukraine

He has the skill and he won due to his talent, but its a good step in the direction for equality and recognition around people who are different to most other people

Don't you ever get tired of asking a question that has no substance?

Malc that's a complicated question but the general rule is Western based revolutionaries are the "good guys " We know this because Western countries offer there citizens the best quality of life and overall citizens of Western countries are the most happy. So if you put that question in an ideological perspective than Western revolutionaries are the "good guys" But I'm not sure why you think there is a choice of good and bad revolutionaries in the Ukraine example, there is only the pro-Russian separatists which have been operating illegally since day 1 so they are the "bad guys "

"stop being a self hating man hater." Now that's trolling, I am learning how to spot it But for the record I'm not a man hater, I just believe in the absolute equality and fair representation of the genders where its logical, for example I don't think it would be fair for the men's and women's rugby team to play against each other in a full contact game

Does that include dudes who feel like they're a woman inside? Nothing wrong with that, its good to be in touch with your more feminine side as a man

Indeed you should have seen the doctor first. I always thought that it was common knowledge that anyone over the age age of 18 who starts a sport or rigorous training session should go to the doctor to ensure there are no underlying but unobvious health issues, like heart related

For me its no issue whatsoever if certain members on RPGCodex don't like these forums. I don't frequent that website because many members across as RPG elitists and they don't moderate or seem to care about bigotry or offensive comments around many social issues. Any website where people are allowed to make jokes about rape, for example, I have no time for Bruce, have you played Fallout 2? Just curious. Sadly I haven't played Fallout 1 or 2

Rape content as a depiction someone getting raped: no Jokes about rape: no Hints about rape as a fact that happened or is about to happen: yes It's not really the same thing. Aside from that, how this subject managed to crawl in the "Paul Kirsch will write the collector's book" topic is beyond me. That's a very accurate way to explain my view on this matter

rpg codex

For me its no issue whatsoever if certain members on RPGCodex don't like these forums. I don't frequent that website because many members across as RPG elitists and they don't moderate or seem to care about bigotry or offensive comments around many social issues. Any website where people are allowed to make jokes about rape, for example, I have no time for

Volo I've mentioned this to you before but the main issue some people have with your comments is that at times you make controversial but short, or monosyllable, posts and then don't engage in debate around what you think. But I have noticed a real effort on your part lately to explain what you mean. So keep up the more informative explanations I know you don't like being referred to as a Troll ( who does I know it annoys me when people say I'm a troll ) and your opinion is valid even if people don't agree. But you will get more people taking you seriously if you continue to engage in proper debating etiquette

Zora my advice is before you post any links see if you can substantiate what you think from maybe 3 or 4 other websites. The issue I have is generally you guys posts links and the source is RT....which we know is biased. This goes towards the credibility of what you guys generally tell us about Ukraine. If you follow the 3-4 other website check rule you won't post as much misinformation

Oh my hat, this event was amazing. We setup a camp on blankets and tried some excellent food and good wine. I am normally not a big wine drinker but I think I have changed my perspective. All my friends are into there wine and when I was drinking quality wine I could taste the difference in the various flavours. The secret to eating at events like this is not to eat too many large portions of food from the various stalls, so what you do is you share the food. That way you get to sample a larger variety. We ate oysters, springbok( a type of venison) spring rolls, pickled fish, duck pate, cheese platters, roasted rabbit and many other yummy treats. I also bought some imported French Camembert cheese which I'll treat myself and eat later. What a good event and I'll definitely be at the next one

Walsie is 100 % correct around the actions of the Ukrainian government. They already let a junk of there country get annexed by Russia in the Crimea. There is no, and I'll repeat that...NO, country in the world that will allow parts of its sovereign state to get broken away. They were very patient with the pro-Russian separatists but now the whatever happens in a consequence of there intransigence Its absurd that some people on these forums think the Ukrainian government is being unreasonable. The correct action would have been to vacate all buildings they were occupying and wait for the election before they decided they weren't going to be part of greater Ukraine

I've said this before and I'll say it again, the graphics look very good. I am really keen to see how Frostbite delivers the overall aesthetic experience

The thing is I do eat brain, I have eaten sheep and calf brain. Obviously when its served it looks nothing like a brain. I've had it sliced thin and with a good sauce like a Sage sauce

You kidding me about not eating Octopus before? You are such an adventurous eater I would have thought your folks would have had you munching on a nice octopus tentacle when you were "knee high to a grasshopper" ? But I assume you have eaten calamari before which is squid and from the same family as octopus...so the tastes are very similar

If I really wanted to watch biased, untrue, anti-western videos I would just watch one of the many declarations of war by one of the various Al-Qaeda associated groups that are common on the Internet if you want to find them

Okay that does surprise me..are you sure about that? Yep, they do, probably more than the 4 I've noticed there though as, well, I'm not gathering intel on them. You are the NSA and I claim my £5.