I’ve been researching France in World War 2 recently, and I stumbled upon this article on JSTOR:
Unfortunately, my regular free JSTOR account cannot access this.
Please let me know if you have access to this article in any way. Thank you!
Leaving the forum
-
Well Kurt, in a way I regret your decision, and in a way I don’t.
Your posts are always well-written. Your grammar and syntax are impeccable, your argumentation follows a logical course, and you frequently quote sources to substantiate what you’re saying. And by those qualities, you certainly distinguish yourself from quite a few others in a positive way.
On the other hand, you do have a tendency to bring up the same subjects time and again, and in some of your posts I’ve noticed what appears to be an active effort to turn a topic away from its original intent and towards matters that seem to have your particular interest. It’s not for me to determine whether such efforts are intentional or merely a byproduct of a focus on certain aspects of World War II history that you believe to be all-important. But they have resulted in the derailment of many a topic.
My overall impression is that you have a preconceived view on certain matters, and then build your discourse on the presentation of evidence supporting that view. You’re by far not unique in that respect: there are many others who have their own preconceived views, and very few, if any, spend the same amount of time and effort on defending their view as you do. But believing to know the truth in advance is not the road to obtaining new knowledge and not a solid basis for debate.
I’m generally not too optimistic about our efforts to gain a better understanding of the causes and implications of World War II on this forum. Countless scholars have written entire libraries about it, so some modesty would behoove us. I’m usually happy enough when someone directs me to a new source or points out an aspect that I hadn’t considered before, but I’m typically not too impressed by the conclusions people arrive at. Not because I have anything better to offer myself, but I do try to err on the side of caution.
-
I agree with you kaleun.
But what happens when moderator are off topic?I believe that some moderateurs should pay attention has their writing and their position which sometimes touches the contempt!
And should also make a self-examination. -
Stop deleted every single post I’ve made in this thread.
-
The one post i effected was moved to Moderation, not deleted.
Stay on Topic.
-
Why don’t you move this topic to General Discussion where it belongs?
-
Because Kurt only posts in this section and it is his “goodbye” thread. He should be afforded at least that much. Why does it matter to you?
-
Thats too bad, sorry to see ya go.
Together we all make the personality of this site and its sad to loose another, we become more generic,plain,blah,etc.
Dont forget about all of us -
Sorry to see you go. I have enjoyed reading your posts. I have empathy for you. I don’t conscribe to many ‘traditional’ histories told by those in power to deceive and control us. I share your passion for throwing off the shackles of accepted WWII history. Now, you know how Patton felt when he disagreed with the Allied ‘peace’ efforts after WWII. And, how Robert Taft felt when he disagreed with the Nuremburg Trials. I hate censorship. But, I encourage you to stay. I haven’t agreed with Gargantua at times, but I have found him very civil and mature since our disagreement. He is the A and A Villian after all, lol. Gargantua is the type of guy I’d want at my table playing Axis and Allies. You disagree, but you move on, and you move on without bitterness. Forgive, but forgive with a well-fortfied castle, that’s my motto. Just sharing my heart. I enjoyed what you wrote.
I appreciate this post, and the kind words you’ve written. At the same time, it’s our responsibility to stand up to those who would censor ideas. For me, that means leaving the forum. I’d be happy to return at some future point if the policy of idea censorship is abandoned.
-
it’s our responsibility to stand up to those who would censor ideas. For me, that means leaving the forum.
I FORMALLY request that you stay. Leaving isn’t standing up, it’s succumbing to the pressure of the censor.
Join the discussion in the website section, regarding new forum policy, and RESIST censorship.
Your support is needed.
-
it’s our responsibility to stand up to those who would not allow me to go off topic in threads that have nothing to do what the OP is talking about. For me, that means leaving the forum. I’d be happy to return at some future point if the policy of closing threads that are off topic and end up in flame wars is abandoned.
If you finally get over swapping words like “censorship” with “closing threads that went off topic and ended up in flame wars”……you might be happier. So stay and post only about the topic at hand.
The only censorship is removing words like F*** or J*P or caustic or insulting posting against another member here. Get over it.
In fact find one post of yours that was edited. You wont because it was never done. The only thing that was done was 4-5 threads got closed for being off topic and this was posted in the last post before the thread was locked. This whole censorship nonsense is nothing but never fessing up to going off topic…in fact way off topic, and others who have an axe to grind using the word to further false premises against moderation because time and again THEY themselves get in trouble with the established rules.
WW2 posts need to be related to the game. All the forum threads have relation to the game, so by inference the History thread should bear some similarity to the game ( battles, leaders, and campaigns) as opposed to how many Jews got murdered on trains in 1943 with pages of supporting documentation that have nothing to do anything here. Eugenics, and Holocaust related posts have nothing to do with Axis and Allies. In fact, many of the simplistic posts dealing with this issue nearly always end up in flame wars and trolls appear. Like Political talk, these subjects also fall into the " do not post about this" category out of the experience we get from dealing with the problems.
-
Kurt……Personally, I don’t like the German Food shortage line of posts from you. That was my first impression of you, it elicited a strong negative reaction towards you that I am working on overcoming. That being said, I don’t think you should leave, you are a smart guy and your posts while a bit long at times do provoke thought and I do look at the sources you cite.
IL, as for feeling the need to edit the word Jap…Really? So, would Yank, Brit and Canuck or even Canucklehead be words that are off limits?
-
How bout you call a Japanese a J*P?
See how they like that. They don’t.
Posting that word is nothing for idiots who want shock effect for being a troll. We do have Japanese-Americans who post here and it is not the sites goal to mess with them.
Also, that is only an example. The work K**e is extremely insulting to Jews and has also been removed from posts. You see all these hurtful words have no place on this site. It is a site for everyone from all backrounds and not subject to the vernacular of ignorance.
-
Kurt……Personally, I don’t like the German Food shortage line of posts from you. That was my first impression of you, it elicited a strong negative reaction towards you that I am working on overcoming. That being said, I don’t think you should leave, you are a smart guy and your posts while a bit long at times do provoke thought and I do look at the sources you cite.
IL, as for feeling the need to edit the word Jap…Really? So, would Yank, Brit and Canuck or even Canucklehead be words that are off limits?
I appreciate the kind words, both from you and from Gargantua. The owner of the forum seems open to the idea of reforming current list policies. Should that occur, I’d be delighted to stay.
Before I end this post, I’d like to call attention to Imperious Leader’s second-most recent post in this thread. I’d written, “I’d be happy to return at some future point if the policy of idea censorship is abandoned.” In quoting me, he changed my words to, “I’d be happy to return at some future point if the policy of closing threads that are off topic and end up in flame wars is abandoned.” Changing words in that way is highly inappropriate for a list participant, let alone a list moderator.
-
In quoting me, he changed my words to, “I’d be happy to return at some future point if the policy of closing threads that are off topic and end up in flame wars is abandoned.” Changing words in that way is highly inappropriate for a list participant, let alone a list moderator.
If you finally get over swapping words like “censorship” with “closing threads that went off topic and ended up in flame wars”……you might be happier. So stay and post only about the topic at hand.
It was what it would look like if you stated what actually happened, not a quote from you. It is rather what you should have written.
It was a point made since not once have you ever reflected on the actual problem, which is topics closed due to going off topic. You can choose to cry censorship, even if that never occurred to you as nobody EVER changed any post you made. Its easy to scapegoat the problem as “censorship” to avoid the actual issue which was clearly those threads got closed because THEY WERE OFF TOPIC and they all got a post indicating that at the time.
“Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body.”
This means the posts which you make claims about should have been edited or removed. NONE of that was done. All your posts are still in the closed threads and were never edited or removed. Nothing was SUPPRESSED.
I feel “censorship” is a good value added word that you use that brings for sympathy to your claims. If anybody would ever bother to read the closed threads, it would be a no brainer why they were actually closed.
It is so clear as to not even warrant any wriggling room for any other issue that can be claimed.
Again you will be better off if you just avoid putting threads into hijack mode with off topic posts, which also leads to flame wars because of the political nature of these posts.
If the thread was about “Making Mac and Cheese” we don’t need something like:
“600,000 Jews were transported as hard labor from Belarus according to Schoernhurst and this cost the Reich 100,000 Marks and was performed 2.23.1943”
It has nothing to do with the thread!
Just so you know we do have a policy against political discussion, this is due to many flame wars that developed over the years and experience of same. They are not allowed so in terms of censorship we may be doing this, but the rule was not mine to make. We also close political threads and have since like 2007 ish.
-
KurtGodel7:
First off, in “COULD FRANCE OF FOUGHT ON?” thread, Reply #23, you cite wikipedia. Â Seriously? Â Wikipedia, the one online journal universally banned from all the world’s (fine, all the respectable ones) university and college campuses for being utterly unreliable.
Now, dont get me wrong, I’m want to use it to define some terms - but generally when it’s bloody common knowledge (certain SOMEBODIES demand freaking you cite every piece of common knowledge, else they go on a rant about how they have a letter from their dead so-in-so giving unvalidated, unrelated opinion that is contradictory.)
Secondly, I happen to have quite a few Polish friends - FROM POLAND, it takes f***ing balls to charge a German tank from horseback. Â I’m not saying the Germans were all illigitimate children or all people who liked to engage in unaquiessed coital activities (you can translate, I am sure) - but what I am saying, is BE MORE CIRCUMSPECT. Â Fine, yer German, fine, you have pride in your heritage. I’m bloody Ukrainian and I tell you what, I’m proud of America AND Ukraine. Â Just try to back off a bit, there are Poles, Frogs, Limeys, Krauts, Reds, Yankee Doodles, Nips and Chinks here, not to mention a bloody helluva lot more.
Tertially, dude, SERIOUSLY, super race (pre-war Japanese options, reply #75) now you’re just BEGGING Imperious Leader to ban you, he’s banned others for far less, hell, I have CONSIDERED (emphases to the EXTREME there) banning others for less, and I’ve yet to ban anyone! (certain somebodies, of course, will beg to differ, but then, who gives a rats anus droppings what they think?)
In summation, may I point out that (while I tried pretty hard to demonstrate) you can technically bait people without breaking the rules (no offence intended to the three of you out there, and you three know who you are and what I am referring too) it’s still a violation of the rules.
Personally, if a topic goes awry, I don’t think IL and I or DM or YG or Dezrt, or Djensen or the planet as a whole give a pah-toot, as long as it stays clean and sober. Â We ARE, however, a bit shell shocked after “HE WHO SHALL NOT BE NAMED” routinely invaded threads for the expressed intent to derail them and get them locked, in a very clear and deliberate attempt to both drive readers away and shot down intelligent converse.
Just my two copper Sestertius on the matter.
-
@Cmdr:
KurtGodel7:
First off, in “COULD FRANCE OF FOUGHT ON?” thread, Reply #23, you cite wikipedia. Seriously? Wikipedia, the one online journal universally banned from all the world’s (fine, all the respectable ones) university and college campuses for being utterly unreliable.
Now, dont get me wrong, I’m want to use it to define some terms - but generally when it’s bloody common knowledge (certain SOMEBODIES demand freaking you cite every piece of common knowledge, else they go on a rant about how they have a letter from their dead so-in-so giving unvalidated, unrelated opinion that is contradictory.)
Secondly, I happen to have quite a few Polish friends - FROM POLAND, it takes f***ing balls to charge a German tank from horseback. I’m not saying the Germans were all illigitimate children or all people who liked to engage in unaquiessed coital activities (you can translate, I am sure) - but what I am saying, is BE MORE CIRCUMSPECT. Fine, yer German, fine, you have pride in your heritage. I’m bloody Ukrainian and I tell you what, I’m proud of America AND Ukraine. Just try to back off a bit, there are Poles, Frogs, Limeys, Krauts, Reds, Yankee Doodles, Nips and Chinks here, not to mention a bloody helluva lot more.
Tertially, dude, SERIOUSLY, super race (pre-war Japanese options, reply #75) now you’re just BEGGING Imperious Leader to ban you, he’s banned others for far less, hell, I have CONSIDERED (emphases to the EXTREME there) banning others for less, and I’ve yet to ban anyone! (certain somebodies, of course, will beg to differ, but then, who gives a rats anus droppings what they think?)
In summation, may I point out that (while I tried pretty hard to demonstrate) you can technically bait people without breaking the rules (no offence intended to the three of you out there, and you three know who you are and what I am referring too) it’s still a violation of the rules.
Personally, if a topic goes awry, I don’t think IL and I or DM or YG or Dezrt, or Djensen or the planet as a whole give a pah-toot, as long as it stays clean and sober. We ARE, however, a bit shell shocked after “HE WHO SHALL NOT BE NAMED” routinely invaded threads for the expressed intent to derail them and get them locked, in a very clear and deliberate attempt to both drive readers away and shot down intelligent converse.
Just my two copper Sestertius on the matter.
-
The quality of Wikipedia articles varies, depending on the sources cited. Some Wikipedia articles are reliable, others less so.
-
I’m American, not German. I have little if any German blood. My screen name was chosen to honor a man who was arguably the finest mathematician ever to have lived. I am not a mathematician. Even if I were to become one, my mathematical work would not be remotely comparable to Kurt Goedel’s.
-
“Super race” is not an accurate two-word summary of the post in question. That post contains the following words: “Normally researchers who have announced that one race is superior began with specific conclusion in mind, and attempt to find ways to justify that conclusion. . . . This is pseudoscience.”
-
That post also contained the words, “The word eugenics can also be used to describe the concept of applying the principles of genetic science to human beings, in an effort to change the gene pool in some specific way. This is not pseudoscience, any more than selectively breeding better crops, faster horses, or specific breeds of dogs is pseudoscience.” It is not a violation of the terms of service to point out that the laws of science and the principles of genetics apply to human beings every bit as much as they apply to plants and animals. If any moderator has “banned others for far less,” that represents an inappropriate use of moderator power. (Not to mention the censorship of ideas which prompted me to want to leave in the first place.)
As for Imperious Leader’s posts: he keeps stating that the threads he’s closed had gone off-topic. It’s not clear why he feels the need to be a broken record on that point, when I’d already addressed it with my first post. I’d indicated that I have no objection to his requirement that threads stay on-topic. I do object, strongly, to the notion that it would never be appropriate to create a thread about, or discuss (for example) the Anglo-American food blockade of Germany during WWII, the effect that blockade had on Germany’s food situation, or whether Germany was able to feed all the people within its borders. Banning the discussion of certain ideas, or certain parts of history, because they are too “sensitive,” represents censorship of ideas. Politically correct censorship of ideas is not cool, and is not even remotely appropriate for a forum about WWII history.
-
-
Good response Godel.
I tried to post one but it was deleted…
-
I do object, strongly, to the notion that it would never be appropriate to create a thread about, or discuss (for example) the Anglo-American food blockade of Germany during WWII, the effect that blockade had on Germany’s food situation, or whether Germany was able to feed all the people within its borders. Banning the discussion of certain ideas, or certain parts of history, because they are too “sensitive,” represents censorship of ideas. Politically correct censorship of ideas is not cool, and is not even remotely appropriate for a forum about WWII history.
The problem with this AGAIN is that not one of these posts was “censored” ….not edited or removed. They are all in those closed off topic threads for anybody to read. Also, we do have a restriction to topics of History that have relevance to Axis and Allies, which is what this site is about. I suppose you can have a Eugenics thread, but you probably would not get any reply’s
Politics threads and posts are restricted and have been for years…this is the rule from Djensen, not me. So in terms of censorship, the only topic in this category is from the boss.Essentially, we don’t allow discussions of ‘superior races’ or what not because this always leads to flame wars. In the History section please just stick to Battles, Equipment, Leaders, etc. because that has some relevance to Axis and Allies.
Kurt you never suffered from anything except he was in 5 closed threads due to going off topic. I wish you would move on because with respect to you, the only issue is “going off topic”
Most people can readily see if they bothered to look at those threads what actually happened. So it is really a non issue.
Oh and BTW Gargantua’s claim that his post was deleted was actually moved to Moderation since it was a bait and those are not allowed. Perhaps read and obay your own moniker: " don’t pick fights"
-
Oh and BTW Gargantua’s claim that his post was deleted was actually moved to Moderation since it was a bait and those are not allowed. Perhaps read and obay your own moniker: " don’t pick fights"
That’s BAIT.
-
Your avatar, your aforementioned post or your last post?
Suggested Topics
