Current Events > ATTN: Asherlee10

(+) Yeah! (+)

Moth366 posted...

also i have no idea wtf theliarparadox is talking about

If your views have changed and you're no longer doing the "centrist" debate bro bullshit that you shitted up RI with in 2019, I'll drop it and move on.

If you're just feigning ignorance because you know you're in a time and place where there's no more plausible deniability for people who still hold such views, that will be a little more difficult for me to ignore.

KanWan posted...

I am genuinely surprised this topic didnt turn into classic mud flinging, nice!

well i mean for my own part i don't know any of you so why would i >.>

TheLiarParadox posted...

If your views have changed and you're no longer doing the "centrist" debate bro bullshit that you shitted up RI with in 2019, I'll drop it and move on.

If you're just feigning ignorance because you know you're in a time and place where there's no more plausible deniability for people who still hold such views, that will be a little more difficult for me to ignore.

You're gonna have to be more specific. Some of my views have changed. Some have not. I have a policy of not mollifying or appeasing anyone who speaks about my behavior the way you just did, though.

I will say this much. If anything you're thinking about is now banned in RI by Fandom, then yeah, by default, I don't say it anymore.

What is RI.

spriga posted...

What is RI.

CE's sworn enemy

spriga posted...

What is RI.

A place we need to migrate to

VeggetaX posted...

A place we need to migrate to

Also this

spriga posted...

What is RI.

Social board called Random Insanity that actually used to be more popular than CE at one point.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/403-random-insanity

It is the promised land

Lol I remember getting modded for board invasion for posting on RI one time. It was sometime between 2005-2008 I think. Some people on CE all decided to make topics on RI (I think with the purpose of invading "for fun"). I think I made a topic or a post introducing myself, not to invade, but because they kept talking about the board so I wanted to check it out lol.

Edit: Actually it had to have been between 2005-2006, because I'm pretty sure it was on my original account.

This was the GameFAQs equivalent of Reply All instead of Reply

HudGard posted...

This was the GameFAQs equivalent of Reply All instead of Reply

Honestly it just makes me feel a little nostalgic when I see an ATTN topic. They used to be extremely common back in 2005 when I first joined CE since PMs didn't exist back then.

HudGard posted...

This was the GameFAQs equivalent of Reply All instead of Reply

Jupiter posted...

Honestly it just makes me feel a little nostalgic when I see an ATTN topic. They used to be extremely common back in 2005 when I first joined CE since PMs didn't exist back then.

What can I say? We're of a different era. <3

VeggetaX posted...

A place we need to migrate to

Be our guest. Nobody is stopping you from doing that.

Heineken14 posted...

Be our guest. Nobody is stopping you from doing that.

Silly you. I'm already posting there.

VeggetaX posted...

Silly you. I'm already posting there.

Can confirm.

spriga posted...

What is RI.

It lost da gamefaqs war of 2003, CE actually took deir best users as prizes iirc

Jupiter posted...

Social board called Random Insanity that actually used to be more popular than CE at one point.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/403-random-insanity

An actual response. Thank you.

Moth366 posted...

You're gonna have to be more specific.

You defended Trump's racist tweets, argued about the white supremacist connotations of the OK hand gesture and doubled down after images of known Nazis and white supremacist murderers like the Christchurch mosque shooter used it, argued across multiple topics that punching Richard Spencer was immoral, complained that the debate around mass shootings was becoming about ideology of the shooters and not about accessibility of guns in a topic about the white supremacist El Paso Walmart shooting, tried to both sides ANTIFA violence and right-wing violence and complained about property crimes when showed the massive disparity.

I'm sure there's more but you get the idea.

I will say this much. If anything you're thinking about is now banned in RI by Fandom, then yeah, by default, I don't say it anymore.

Don't say it anymore or don't believe it anymore?

TheLiarParadox posted...

You defended Trump's racist tweets, argued about the white supremacist connotations of the OK hand gesture and doubled down after images of known Nazis and white supremacist murderers like the Christchurch mosque shooter used it, argued across multiple topics that punching Richard Spencer was immoral, complained that the debate around mass shootings was becoming about ideology of the shooters and not about accessibility of guns in a topic about the white supremacist El Paso Walmart shooting, tried to both sides ANTIFA violence and right-wing violence and complained about property crimes when showed the massive disparity.

I'm sure there's more but you get the idea.

Don't say it anymore or don't believe it anymore?

Yeah I suppose that's why my tag holds up

I mean did you really not know what RI is?

TheLiarParadox posted...

stuff

jesus christ i can't believe i'm talking about some of these things again, do you all really think the ok sign is...you know what never mind that one's too stupid

Well...I don't both-sides stuff anymore, unless I'm for or against both sides. Most of what you said is stuff where we just don't see things the same way, but I will argue the immorality of sucker-punching Richard Spencer 100% of the time. It's the easiest, most black-and-white moral argument you can make, and I didn't think I'd ever talk about that again. The concept of stochastic terrorism is just victim-blaming with extra steps and I reject it offhand. If you value non-violence, you don't sucker-punch people who are not being violent. It's that simple. You're morally judging me on something for which I morally judge you in equal measure.

TheLiarParadox posted...

Don't say it anymore or don't believe it anymore?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question

Never thought I'd see Moth on CE arguing about shit.

kind9 posted...

Never thought I'd see Moth on CE arguing about shit.

Honestly, me neither. But I guess I was conceptually frozen in the amber of 2019 here. @_@ TLP wants to have arguments that I thought were stupid and easy back then, and they only seem dumber and easier now.

...seriously, the ok hand sign, that's what continues to have his hackles up...

the...immorality...of punching richard spencer

brutha

Dungeater posted...

the...immorality...of punching richard spencer

brutha

Frankly, I resent the equation of clowns like Spencer to the people who industrially slaughtered my family. The "alt-right" are not the Nazis. They're larpers at best.

they're nazis

its nuts u would go "the alt right arent nazis" completely unprompted like that

nephew what are you doing

Just when I thought this topic was fizzling

If they hold nazi ideals I would say that makes them (neo-)nazis. What I don't understand is why some people take issue with calling them nazis. We're obviously not talking about the German Nazi party. There's also such thing as crypto-nazism, where they clearly hold certain ideals but like to skirt around them.

Dungeater posted...

they're nazis

its nuts u would go "the alt right arent nazis" completely unprompted like that

nephew what are you doing

Small-n nazis, if you will. Look, I hope it's obvious enough that I'm not interested in defending their ideas.

Perhaps too large a scope as well. I'm down to keep this specific to Spencer if you want.

kind9 posted...

If they hold nazi ideals I would say that makes them (neo-)nazis. What I don't understand is why some people take issue with calling them nazis. We're obviously not talking about the German Nazi party. There's also such thing as crypto-nazism, where they clearly hold certain ideals but like to skirt around them.

No. It's not obvious. It's willfully vague. And remember that we're talking about the morality of sucker-punching someone. The further detached from the actual Nazis you get, the less of an argument you have on the grounds of "acceptable targets." Richard Spencer is a clown. He was having an interview. He was mid-sentence about the pin on his jacket. This is not a man deserving of assault. And all the exasperated scoffing in the world won't make it any easier for me to see that.

Moth366 posted...

Small-n nazis, if you will. Look, I hope it's obvious enough that I'm not interested in defending their ideas.

Perhaps too large a scope as well. I'm down to keep this specific to Spencer if you want.

what is this distinction? youd rather argue pedantically than just go yea theyre nazis, their goals are genocide, theyre arresting dissenters, theyre deporting people to camps without due process

gross

Moth366 posted...

No. It's not obvious. It's willfully vague. And remember that we're talking about the morality of sucker-punching someone. The further detached from the actual Nazis you get, the less of an argument you have on the grounds of "acceptable targets." Richard Spencer is a clown. He was having an interview. He was mid-sentence about the pin on his jacket. This is not a man deserving of assault. And all the exasperated scoffing in the world won't make it any easier for me to see that.

ok so like u just dont know how the world works, i feel a little bad now. ppl dont exist in a vacuum

going to bat for someone just because he wasnt espousing the most vile views imaginable in that second

is wrong nephew

delete this nephew

Moth366 posted...

Small-n nazis, if you will. Look, I hope it's obvious enough that I'm not interested in defending their ideas.

Perhaps too large a scope as well. I'm down to keep this specific to Spencer if you want.

No. It's not obvious. It's willfully vague. And remember that we're talking about the morality of sucker-punching someone. The further detached from the actual Nazis you get, the less of an argument you have on the grounds of "acceptable targets." Richard Spencer is a clown. He was having an interview. He was mid-sentence about the pin on his jacket. This is not a man deserving of assault. And all the exasperated scoffing in the world won't make it any easier for me to see that.

But it is obvious, for the simple fact that the Nazi party doesn't existing no more. When someone alive right now is called a Nazi it should be understood as neo-Nazi.

Here's how Richard Spencer is listed on wikipedia:

Richard B. Spencer (born 1978), American neo-Nazi and white supremacist

As for whether or not he deserved to be punched. I think if a person spends as much time as he does preaching hate against others they are free game. It's not as if he's spreading hate in a vacuum. He is actually talking to and influencing people, and more than likely many of those people have done violence against others because of his influence.

Dungeater posted...

what is this distinction? youd rather argue pedantically than just go yea theyre nazis, their goals are genocide, theyre arresting dissenters, theyre deporting people to camps without due process

gross

Hold on. Who's "they?" And does "they" include Richard Spencer? You've only gotten more vague.

Are you casting everyone you think is Nazis under a singular umbrella? I want to understand what you're saying, but I can only do so much on my end.

Dungeater posted...

going to bat for someone just because he wasnt espousing the most vile views imaginable in that second

...his right not to be sucker-punched? Yes. I value non-violence. You're advocating pre-crime. I am against pre-crime.

Question for you in particular: Are you American?

I was trying to remember her user name a while back in some topic about the weirdest thing we've seen on the boards or something. I know this topic wasn't for me, but thanks for the reminder anyway.

Oop, just read that last post. Being a Nazi removes your right to not be sucker punched. There is no such thing as a "sucker punch" in a Nazi's life, in fact - a Nazi is always asking for it.

Everybody's has a little bit of a weird.

"Small n nazis" is coded language. A dog whistle if you will

kind9 posted...

As for whether or not he deserved to be punched. I think if a person spends as much time as he does preaching hate against others they are free game. It's not as if he's spreading hate in a vacuum. He is actually talking to and influencing people, and more than likely many of those people have done violence against others because of his influence.

That is a perfectly valid and rational point of view, stemming from an ideological frame of reference I simply do not share. The concept of "free game." I do not believe in free game for violence. I cannot, since non-violence is one of my values. There are no acceptable targets. Ideally, there are only two applications of violence in society: 1) criminals have violence enacted upon them by law enforcement in response to criminal behaviors, and 2) nations enact violence upon other nations in the conduction of war. Now, if you think that Richard Spencer's speech should be criminalized, that's a whole other debate. >.> I'm not interested in talking about free speech.

kind9 posted...

Here's how Richard Spencer is listed on wikipedia:
Richard B. Spencer (born 1978), American neo-Nazi and white supremacist

I do not trust Wikipedia's descriptions of people or social phenomena. Compare Wiki's entries for "white power" and "black power" to see why.

delete this nephew

Villain_S_Fiend posted...

I was trying to remember her user name a while back in some topic about the weirdest thing we've seen on the boards or something. I know this topic wasn't for me, but thanks for the reminder anyway.

Oop, just read that last post. Being a Nazi removes your right to not be sucker punched. There is no such thing as a "sucker punch" in a Nazi's life, in fact - a Nazi is always asking for it.

My last reply to kind9 addresses this. @.@ Again, your view is rational but exists in an ideological frame of reference I do not share.

Will_VIIII posted...

"Small n nazis" is coded language. A dog whistle if you will

*head tilt* ?

Convenient if true, but I thought that up on the spot, I have no idea where you're taking this.

head tilt

Tilt head

Moth366 posted...

The concept of "free game." I do not believe in free game for violence. I cannot, since non-violence is one of my values. There are no acceptable targets. Ideally, there are only two applications of violence in society: 1) criminals have violence enacted upon them by law enforcement in response to criminal behaviors, and 2) nations enact violence upon other nations in the conduction of war. Now, if you think that Richard Spencer's speech should be criminalized, that's a whole other debate. >.> I'm not interested in talking about free speech.

I'm generally non-violent as well. But I'm not going to act like someone did a horrible thing by punching a Nazi who probably had it coming. It looks like you're pro war, but take a hard stance against punching a Nazi. But war is full of the worst kind of violence and often totally unjustified. Isn't there an inconsistency there in your views?