Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Why was "the_serb" banned?

wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2014 11:02:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Yes, he was annoying. Yes, he had a preoccupation with torture and rape. But, did he accost any members? Did he engage in activity that violated TOS? To my knowledge, no.

His material was always relevant to the topic. That the topic was offensive does not necessarily merit a ban, yes?

Part of me is glad he got banned, but another part makes me question what is actually bannable. I don't think people should be banned simply for posting controversial and potentially offensive topics.

Overall, I don't think he did anything bannable, and thus shouldn't be banned.

This is just opinion, obviously. Actual moderation is such a private affair that it's impossible for anyone to fully analyze any decision made by moderators.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Linkish1O2
Posts: 2,003
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 1:50:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
oh my gosh is it bad i just got a chuckle out of this.
"I am a mystery and to unlock the mystery at my core, one must simply embrace slendermans hug with no fear."- me

"I hearby declare myself a phantom in the darkness."-me
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 5:21:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I liked, the serb's debates. Although, I do remember one debate where he said gays should be tortured. In the debate he said here is why and then linked to some soft core gay porn. It was like a ten minute clip. I though it would show gay people murdering a baby or something. It didn't. After my fianc" caught me watching gay softcore porn for ten minutes, she had to sit me down and have a serious discussion :(

She never did believe my story, and now I'm forced to put a lot more effort into sex. So, in a way. The Serb made my fianc" a very happy woman.
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 5:23:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 5:21:32 AM, Wylted wrote:
I liked, the serb's debates. Although, I do remember one debate where he said gays should be tortured. In the debate he said here is why and then linked to some soft core gay porn. It was like a ten minute clip. I though it would show gay people murdering a baby or something. It didn't. After my fianc" caught me watching gay softcore porn for ten minutes, she had to sit me down and have a serious discussion :(

She never did believe my story, and now I'm forced to put a lot more effort into sex. So, in a way. The Serb made my fianc" a very happy woman.

lol
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
Linkish1O2
Posts: 2,003
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 5:34:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 5:21:32 AM, Wylted wrote:
I liked, the serb's debates. Although, I do remember one debate where he said gays should be tortured. In the debate he said here is why and then linked to some soft core gay porn. It was like a ten minute clip. I though it would show gay people murdering a baby or something. It didn't. After my fianc" caught me watching gay softcore porn for ten minutes, she had to sit me down and have a serious discussion :(

She never did believe my story, and now I'm forced to put a lot more effort into sex. So, in a way. The Serb made my fianc" a very happy woman.

Wow, just......wow
"I am a mystery and to unlock the mystery at my core, one must simply embrace slendermans hug with no fear."- me

"I hearby declare myself a phantom in the darkness."-me
Buggie111
Posts: 20
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 7:49:23 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
He posted a poll about violent porn, which stuck on the front page for quite a while. Might have been the tipping point.
Buggie111
Posts: 20
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 7:50:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 5:45:00 AM, WheezySquash8 wrote:
He scares me.

You missed his wonderful bout with invisibledeity.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 8:11:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 5:21:32 AM, Wylted wrote:
I liked, the serb's debates.

The man didn't complete 90% of his debates...
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 8:42:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The Serb was nothing more than the latest troll account, and I'm pretty sure he posted porn. He was the new Anti-Athiest, and this forum is better that he's not here. To disagree with that is to value homoerotic torture fetishes and pornography's being posted in this forum -and anyone who thinks that this is the place for homoerotic torture fetishes or pornography's being posted here both fails to understand what it in this community's or its members best interest.
Tsar of DDO
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 1:10:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/15/2014 11:02:53 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Yes, he was annoying. Yes, he had a preoccupation with torture and rape. But, did he accost any members? Did he engage in activity that violated TOS? To my knowledge, no.

His material was always relevant to the topic. That the topic was offensive does not necessarily merit a ban, yes?

Part of me is glad he got banned, but another part makes me question what is actually bannable. I don't think people should be banned simply for posting controversial and potentially offensive topics.

Overall, I don't think he did anything bannable, and thus shouldn't be banned.

This is just opinion, obviously. Actual moderation is such a private affair that it's impossible for anyone to fully analyze any decision made by moderators.

I was personally involved with his being banned.

I was talking to him, he was asking em for my views on torture. I simply told him my views, but he kept poking for more answers. Not even a word of a lie, he kept the conversation on the male genitalia.

Eventually, he accused me of being homophobic because I didn't talk to him anymore. 1) for the record I am not, but 2) I took issue his his praising of war-rape. In one of the polls he claimed it was justified to rape men to make men be more open with their sexuality. I told him this, to which he responded "anytime I think about raping someone my C*$K gets rock hard, as I'm sure other men do ;)"

I immediately sent the convo to Airmaxx, who banned him.

That piece of trash doesn't deserve to live, much less be on this site.
Thank you for voting!
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 1:21:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/15/2014 11:02:53 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Yes, he was annoying. Yes, he had a preoccupation with torture and rape. But, did he accost any members? Did he engage in activity that violated TOS? To my knowledge, no.

His material was always relevant to the topic. That the topic was offensive does not necessarily merit a ban, yes?

Part of me is glad he got banned, but another part makes me question what is actually bannable. I don't think people should be banned simply for posting controversial and potentially offensive topics.

Overall, I don't think he did anything bannable, and thus shouldn't be banned.

This is just opinion, obviously. Actual moderation is such a private affair that it's impossible for anyone to fully analyze any decision made by moderators.

Also, if you look at some of the putrid stuff he brought up, he admitted to being tortured and raped, as well as having done it himself, and continued to threaten to use it. One of which he claimed he would go as far as to rape a daughter of a convicted fellon to get info out of him.

This is a felony by US law, and cannot be tolerated on this site. This is in fact a ban-able offense. DDO is pretty clear on that.

The person defending him and some of the nasty claims he made, is either misguided as to some of the content he espoused, or is insane. What happens when another member see's this and they actually were raped? Should they have to re-live the trauma because of that idiot? I don't think so.
Thank you for voting!
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 1:24:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 1:21:14 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/15/2014 11:02:53 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Yes, he was annoying. Yes, he had a preoccupation with torture and rape. But, did he accost any members? Did he engage in activity that violated TOS? To my knowledge, no.

His material was always relevant to the topic. That the topic was offensive does not necessarily merit a ban, yes?

Part of me is glad he got banned, but another part makes me question what is actually bannable. I don't think people should be banned simply for posting controversial and potentially offensive topics.

Overall, I don't think he did anything bannable, and thus shouldn't be banned.

This is just opinion, obviously. Actual moderation is such a private affair that it's impossible for anyone to fully analyze any decision made by moderators.

Also, if you look at some of the putrid stuff he brought up, he admitted to being tortured and raped, as well as having done it himself, and continued to threaten to use it. One of which he claimed he would go as far as to rape a daughter of a convicted fellon to get info out of him.

This is a felony by US law, and cannot be tolerated on this site. This is in fact a ban-able offense. DDO is pretty clear on that.

IMHO such speech should be tolerated. If we did not tolerate dialogue of anything that was a felony in the US, we would not be able to debate the merits of changes in homicide laws, for example, as anyone arguing for a change in the status quo would be arguing for something that is a felony in the US.

Before you attack this position, I just want to make clear that I think what you posted prior about the PMs probably merited a ban.

The person defending him and some of the nasty claims he made, is either misguided as to some of the content he espoused, or is insane. What happens when another member see's this and they actually were raped? Should they have to re-live the trauma because of that idiot? I don't think so.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 1:52:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 1:21:14 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/15/2014 11:02:53 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Yes, he was annoying. Yes, he had a preoccupation with torture and rape. But, did he accost any members? Did he engage in activity that violated TOS? To my knowledge, no.

His material was always relevant to the topic. That the topic was offensive does not necessarily merit a ban, yes?

Part of me is glad he got banned, but another part makes me question what is actually bannable. I don't think people should be banned simply for posting controversial and potentially offensive topics.

Overall, I don't think he did anything bannable, and thus shouldn't be banned.

This is just opinion, obviously. Actual moderation is such a private affair that it's impossible for anyone to fully analyze any decision made by moderators.

Also, if you look at some of the putrid stuff he brought up, he admitted to being tortured and raped, as well as having done it himself, and continued to threaten to use it. One of which he claimed he would go as far as to rape a daughter of a convicted fellon to get info out of him.

This is a felony by US law, and cannot be tolerated on this site. This is in fact a ban-able offense. DDO is pretty clear on that.

The person defending him and some of the nasty claims he made, is either misguided as to some of the content he espoused, or is insane. What happens when another member see's this and they actually were raped? Should they have to re-live the trauma because of that idiot? I don't think so.

So should no mention or debate on rape take place at all, to avoid making people relive the trauma? If anything shouldn't it be brought up more often as to destroy the stigma attached to discussing such an important topic. The Serb continually brought up torture and gave several people opportunities to discuss the moral implications of torture and rape.
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 3:02:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 1:24:12 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 4/16/2014 1:21:14 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/15/2014 11:02:53 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Yes, he was annoying. Yes, he had a preoccupation with torture and rape. But, did he accost any members? Did he engage in activity that violated TOS? To my knowledge, no.

His material was always relevant to the topic. That the topic was offensive does not necessarily merit a ban, yes?

Part of me is glad he got banned, but another part makes me question what is actually bannable. I don't think people should be banned simply for posting controversial and potentially offensive topics.

Overall, I don't think he did anything bannable, and thus shouldn't be banned.

This is just opinion, obviously. Actual moderation is such a private affair that it's impossible for anyone to fully analyze any decision made by moderators.

Also, if you look at some of the putrid stuff he brought up, he admitted to being tortured and raped, as well as having done it himself, and continued to threaten to use it. One of which he claimed he would go as far as to rape a daughter of a convicted fellon to get info out of him.

This is a felony by US law, and cannot be tolerated on this site. This is in fact a ban-able offense. DDO is pretty clear on that.

IMHO such speech should be tolerated. If we did not tolerate dialogue of anything that was a felony in the US, we would not be able to debate the merits of changes in homicide laws, for example, as anyone arguing for a change in the status quo would be arguing for something that is a felony in the US.

I don't think you understood what I said. I don't have a problem discussing if rape should be illegal or not. That's not what I was referring to, i have an issue with someone saying "I'm a police officer, and if the guy won't talk, I'm gonna rape his daughter. That ought to teach him" Otherwise I agree with you.

Before you attack this position, I just want to make clear that I think what you posted prior about the PMs probably merited a ban.

Dearly noted.


The person defending him and some of the nasty claims he made, is either misguided as to some of the content he espoused, or is insane. What happens when another member see's this and they actually were raped? Should they have to re-live the trauma because of that idiot? I don't think so.
Thank you for voting!
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 3:03:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 1:52:29 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 4/16/2014 1:21:14 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/15/2014 11:02:53 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Yes, he was annoying. Yes, he had a preoccupation with torture and rape. But, did he accost any members? Did he engage in activity that violated TOS? To my knowledge, no.

His material was always relevant to the topic. That the topic was offensive does not necessarily merit a ban, yes?

Part of me is glad he got banned, but another part makes me question what is actually bannable. I don't think people should be banned simply for posting controversial and potentially offensive topics.

Overall, I don't think he did anything bannable, and thus shouldn't be banned.

This is just opinion, obviously. Actual moderation is such a private affair that it's impossible for anyone to fully analyze any decision made by moderators.

Also, if you look at some of the putrid stuff he brought up, he admitted to being tortured and raped, as well as having done it himself, and continued to threaten to use it. One of which he claimed he would go as far as to rape a daughter of a convicted fellon to get info out of him.

This is a felony by US law, and cannot be tolerated on this site. This is in fact a ban-able offense. DDO is pretty clear on that.

The person defending him and some of the nasty claims he made, is either misguided as to some of the content he espoused, or is insane. What happens when another member see's this and they actually were raped? Should they have to re-live the trauma because of that idiot? I don't think so.

So should no mention or debate on rape take place at all, to avoid making people relive the trauma? If anything shouldn't it be brought up more often as to destroy the stigma attached to discussing such an important topic. The Serb continually brought up torture and gave several people opportunities to discuss the moral implications of torture and rape.

No, see post above. Serb took it way farther than that.
Thank you for voting!
Juan_Pablo
Posts: 2,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 3:20:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The serb posted a lot of really controversial stuff, including promoting torture and endorsing rape.

There's a tolerance threshold that DDO moderators probably follow, which determines whether a member is actually contributing to intelligent, civilized discourse or whether he's promoting cruelty and violence.

In my opinion, after reading much of what he posted, it seems like he had it coming.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 4:56:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 3:03:33 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/16/2014 1:52:29 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 4/16/2014 1:21:14 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/15/2014 11:02:53 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Yes, he was annoying. Yes, he had a preoccupation with torture and rape. But, did he accost any members? Did he engage in activity that violated TOS? To my knowledge, no.

His material was always relevant to the topic. That the topic was offensive does not necessarily merit a ban, yes?

Part of me is glad he got banned, but another part makes me question what is actually bannable. I don't think people should be banned simply for posting controversial and potentially offensive topics.

Overall, I don't think he did anything bannable, and thus shouldn't be banned.

This is just opinion, obviously. Actual moderation is such a private affair that it's impossible for anyone to fully analyze any decision made by moderators.

Also, if you look at some of the putrid stuff he brought up, he admitted to being tortured and raped, as well as having done it himself, and continued to threaten to use it. One of which he claimed he would go as far as to rape a daughter of a convicted fellon to get info out of him.

This is a felony by US law, and cannot be tolerated on this site. This is in fact a ban-able offense. DDO is pretty clear on that.

The person defending him and some of the nasty claims he made, is either misguided as to some of the content he espoused, or is insane. What happens when another member see's this and they actually were raped? Should they have to re-live the trauma because of that idiot? I don't think so.

So should no mention or debate on rape take place at all, to avoid making people relive the trauma? If anything shouldn't it be brought up more often as to destroy the stigma attached to discussing such an important topic. The Serb continually brought up torture and gave several people opportunities to discuss the moral implications of torture and rape.

No, see post above. Serb took it way farther than that.

I know. Sometimes my dumbass just try's to find a silver lining.
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,091
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 4:57:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 1:10:24 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/15/2014 11:02:53 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Yes, he was annoying. Yes, he had a preoccupation with torture and rape. But, did he accost any members? Did he engage in activity that violated TOS? To my knowledge, no.

His material was always relevant to the topic. That the topic was offensive does not necessarily merit a ban, yes?

Part of me is glad he got banned, but another part makes me question what is actually bannable. I don't think people should be banned simply for posting controversial and potentially offensive topics.

Overall, I don't think he did anything bannable, and thus shouldn't be banned.

This is just opinion, obviously. Actual moderation is such a private affair that it's impossible for anyone to fully analyze any decision made by moderators.

I was personally involved with his being banned.

I was talking to him, he was asking em for my views on torture. I simply told him my views, but he kept poking for more answers. Not even a word of a lie, he kept the conversation on the male genitalia.

Eventually, he accused me of being homophobic because I didn't talk to him anymore. 1) for the record I am not, but 2) I took issue his his praising of war-rape. In one of the polls he claimed it was justified to rape men to make men be more open with their sexuality. I told him this, to which he responded "anytime I think about raping someone my C*$K gets rock hard, as I'm sure other men do ;)"

I immediately sent the convo to Airmaxx, who banned him.

That piece of trash doesn't deserve to live, much less be on this site.

Wow... um, he sounds pretty psychologically messed up/
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 4:58:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 3:02:53 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/16/2014 1:24:12 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 4/16/2014 1:21:14 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/15/2014 11:02:53 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Yes, he was annoying. Yes, he had a preoccupation with torture and rape. But, did he accost any members? Did he engage in activity that violated TOS? To my knowledge, no.

His material was always relevant to the topic. That the topic was offensive does not necessarily merit a ban, yes?

Part of me is glad he got banned, but another part makes me question what is actually bannable. I don't think people should be banned simply for posting controversial and potentially offensive topics.

Overall, I don't think he did anything bannable, and thus shouldn't be banned.

This is just opinion, obviously. Actual moderation is such a private affair that it's impossible for anyone to fully analyze any decision made by moderators.

Also, if you look at some of the putrid stuff he brought up, he admitted to being tortured and raped, as well as having done it himself, and continued to threaten to use it. One of which he claimed he would go as far as to rape a daughter of a convicted fellon to get info out of him.

This is a felony by US law, and cannot be tolerated on this site. This is in fact a ban-able offense. DDO is pretty clear on that.

IMHO such speech should be tolerated. If we did not tolerate dialogue of anything that was a felony in the US, we would not be able to debate the merits of changes in homicide laws, for example, as anyone arguing for a change in the status quo would be arguing for something that is a felony in the US.

I don't think you understood what I said. I don't have a problem discussing if rape should be illegal or not. That's not what I was referring to, i have an issue with someone saying "I'm a police officer, and if the guy won't talk, I'm gonna rape his daughter. That ought to teach him" Otherwise I agree with you.

This then can evolve into a discussion about the justifiability of rape. Yes, such a discussion is abhorrent to most people, but is it a valid topic to discuss? I would think so. Historically, rape was not seen as a severe offense for men, only for women, so raping someone's daughter could be seen historically as a form of damaging of property and quite possibly "just" retribution for not cooperating with law enforcement. Then post-rape victim blaming could result in the woman being hanged for a capital offense (for women only). Neither the police officer nor the society he occupied in such a situation wouldn't view the rape as a crime against a person, or a person that "mattered" at any rate.

My point being, something like that could go in all kinds of directions, and if someone wasn't comfortable with the topic, they wouldn't need to participate in the discussion. As long as they were not harassed over it, then I don't see a problem, IMHO.

Before you attack this position, I just want to make clear that I think what you posted prior about the PMs probably merited a ban.

Dearly noted.


The person defending him and some of the nasty claims he made, is either misguided as to some of the content he espoused, or is insane. What happens when another member see's this and they actually were raped? Should they have to re-live the trauma because of that idiot? I don't think so.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 5:05:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 4:58:58 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 4/16/2014 3:02:53 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/16/2014 1:24:12 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 4/16/2014 1:21:14 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/15/2014 11:02:53 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Yes, he was annoying. Yes, he had a preoccupation with torture and rape. But, did he accost any members? Did he engage in activity that violated TOS? To my knowledge, no.

His material was always relevant to the topic. That the topic was offensive does not necessarily merit a ban, yes?

Part of me is glad he got banned, but another part makes me question what is actually bannable. I don't think people should be banned simply for posting controversial and potentially offensive topics.

Overall, I don't think he did anything bannable, and thus shouldn't be banned.

This is just opinion, obviously. Actual moderation is such a private affair that it's impossible for anyone to fully analyze any decision made by moderators.

Also, if you look at some of the putrid stuff he brought up, he admitted to being tortured and raped, as well as having done it himself, and continued to threaten to use it. One of which he claimed he would go as far as to rape a daughter of a convicted fellon to get info out of him.

This is a felony by US law, and cannot be tolerated on this site. This is in fact a ban-able offense. DDO is pretty clear on that.

IMHO such speech should be tolerated. If we did not tolerate dialogue of anything that was a felony in the US, we would not be able to debate the merits of changes in homicide laws, for example, as anyone arguing for a change in the status quo would be arguing for something that is a felony in the US.

I don't think you understood what I said. I don't have a problem discussing if rape should be illegal or not. That's not what I was referring to, i have an issue with someone saying "I'm a police officer, and if the guy won't talk, I'm gonna rape his daughter. That ought to teach him" Otherwise I agree with you.

This then can evolve into a discussion about the justifiability of rape. Yes, such a discussion is abhorrent to most people, but is it a valid topic to discuss? I would think so. Historically, rape was not seen as a severe offense for men, only for women, so raping someone's daughter could be seen historically as a form of damaging of property and quite possibly "just" retribution for not cooperating with law enforcement. Then post-rape victim blaming could result in the woman being hanged for a capital offense (for women only). Neither the police officer nor the society he occupied in such a situation wouldn't view the rape as a crime against a person, or a person that "mattered" at any rate.

Just to make this clear, I don't condone this kind of activity...but I do recognize that there are still places in the world that do:

"In this case, one could say the 16-year-old girl did not die just once. It was a death that was repeated over and over again. First there were the rapists who lured her out of her home and then gang-raped her. Then the same rapists raped her one more time for daring to complain to the police. The administration and police were unable to give her or her family any meaningful security. Then there were the goons who allegedly set her ablaze. Even after she finally succumbed to her injuries on December 31, there was no respite. "

http://www.firstpost.com...

If we ban discussion on topics like this, then we preclude discussion about whether or not something like this should be allowable, even though it still occurs in the world. Obviously most people would think it shouldn't be, but in a debate, someone would have to take the devil's advocate stance to attempt to justify it...and this is a debating website, after all.

My point being, something like that could go in all kinds of directions, and if someone wasn't comfortable with the topic, they wouldn't need to participate in the discussion. As long as they were not harassed over it, then I don't see a problem, IMHO.


Before you attack this position, I just want to make clear that I think what you posted prior about the PMs probably merited a ban.

Dearly noted.


The person defending him and some of the nasty claims he made, is either misguided as to some of the content he espoused, or is insane. What happens when another member see's this and they actually were raped? Should they have to re-live the trauma because of that idiot? I don't think so.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 5:19:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 3:02:53 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 4/16/2014 1:24:12 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
i have an issue with someone saying "I'm a police officer, and if the guy won't talk, I'm gonna rape his daughter. That ought to teach him" Otherwise I agree with you.

I actually recall a debate that involved this exact scenario, and it was a really good debate. The question was, if there was a terrorist threatening to nuke New York City, and this terrorist had a daughter, and you knew that raping this daughter would deter this terrorist and save the lives of everyone in New York City, would you rape her? Under a utilitarian calculus, the answer would invariably be "yes"...you would rape one girl to save tens of millions of lives.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 5:27:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I mean, we can keep going...

Let's say the CIA knew the whereabouts of bin Laden's family while he was still alive. Would the CIA use his family as bargaining chips/hostages to get to bin Laden, to even go so far as to kill or torture them? Of course they would.

It's just the trolley dilemma over, and over again.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Mikal
Posts: 11,270
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 5:50:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 5:27:19 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
I mean, we can keep going...

Let's say the CIA knew the whereabouts of bin Laden's family while he was still alive. Would the CIA use his family as bargaining chips/hostages to get to bin Laden, to even go so far as to kill or torture them? Of course they would.

It's just the trolley dilemma over, and over again.

Sadly that is why I am pro torture, and only to that extent.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2014 5:52:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/16/2014 5:50:02 PM, Mikal wrote:
At 4/16/2014 5:27:19 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
I mean, we can keep going...

Let's say the CIA knew the whereabouts of bin Laden's family while he was still alive. Would the CIA use his family as bargaining chips/hostages to get to bin Laden, to even go so far as to kill or torture them? Of course they would.

It's just the trolley dilemma over, and over again.


Sadly that is why I am pro torture, and only to that extent.

Yeah, the trolley dilemma is all about choosing the less bad, so agree that all the choices in such cases are "sad".
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?