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
-
-
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.)
A) It matters not if the President of the United States writes a wikipedia article about himself, it’s still an unreliable source. I’ve had that argument before, trust me, if the Arkhangel Michael came down and personally wrote an article in Wikipedia, it would not be taken as reliable.
B) The term “Super Race” is what I was addressing. Using it in any way other than in a negative connotation is going to get you attacked by Jews, Africans, etc. Sorry, but that’s the way it is. Why not use the term genetically appealing instead, it’s not got the same connotation, but it still conveys the message.
C) Eugenics too has a negative connotation - luckily the public screw-you-lls are screwing up America’s youth to the point that most people dont know what it means, but it’s still something to watch for.
-
-
The site founder gave me my avatar against the summation of my will and wishes, are you implying he baited you?
DJ always did have creative solutions. Maybe you should heed his warning?
-
Whats the topic of this thread again….oh yea, see ya Kurt, and have fun
-
He is staying. Welcome back Kurt!
-
well, at least he (Kurt) cutted his posts down to a third of it… 8-)
-
I really have no words for this, Kurt how many times have I pointed this out to you and begged you to stop? Falling on your sword before one of the mods removed you may seem more noble but the end result is the same. The forum will be a lesser place because of this.
While someone leaving is always a lousy thing to see happen, what is more disgusting is watching people gloat over it, that is the real tragedy of this.
-
Wait. Nobody “removed him” and he is staying anyway
We didn’t do anything except close off topic threads. No edits, not removals, no censorship. Nothing.
In the past edits/removal were only to remove flames, troll posts, F words, etc.
Usually that focused just on one person :-D
-
In the past edits/removal were only to remove flames, troll posts, F words, etc.
Right, except or my posts on a regular basis, which violate none of those stipulations above.
Probably including this post shortly, which highlights you’re over zealous moderation.
-
Right, except or my posts on a regular basis, which violate none of those stipulations above.
LOL. Now that is really funny!
You are too kind sir!
-
@Imperious:
Right, except or my posts on a regular basis, which violate none of those stipulations above.
LOL. Now that is really funny!
You are too kind sir!
Hence why it’s best just to delete the entire post.
Think of it as Character Insurance. You say something completely out of character - sounding more like a petulant 9 year old boy who doesn’t want to eat his peas - instead of your normal, well thought out, dissertation. IL, DM, Myself, someone else with authority sees it, and we just remove it. Bam. Damage mitigated - flame war (hopefully) averted. This is commonly referred too as our JOBS. :-o
-
I really have no words for this, Kurt how many times have I pointed this out to you and begged you to stop? Falling on your sword before one of the mods removed you may seem more noble but the end result is the same. The forum will be a lesser place because of this.
While someone leaving is always a lousy thing to see happen, what is more disgusting is watching people gloat over it, that is the real tragedy of this.
Thanks for writing this. I put a lot of thought and effort into my longer posts, and it’s nice to know people like you appreciate them.
I would also like to address two incorrect statements Imperious Leader has made. The first is his implication that the only real issue is his decision to close threads which have gone off topic. That has nothing to do with why I’m leaving, as I’ve repeatedly explained. (And he has repeatedly ignored.)
His second incorrect statement is the claim that I’m staying. I have not sent him any PMs since I began this thread. He has no inside knowledge about whether I’m staying or going. Other than participating in djensen’s thread about how list moderation rules might be changed, I’m adhering to the limits I’d set for myself in my OP. This means I’m removing myself from regular discussions until it is made clear that list moderators are no longer allowed to censor ideas.
In the extremely unlikely event I significantly change my position, I will communicate that to the forum directly. I will not use Imperious Leader, or any other third person, as a go-between. If anyone seems to be making statements on my behalf, those statements should be ignored.
I’d like to make one final statement about Clyde’s post. I realize that if I leave voluntarily, the effect will be the same as if I’m banned for having expressed non-mainstream ideas. However, there are only so many hours in a day. How many of those hours should I invest into a forum in which moderators exert pressure to discourage or prevent people from expressing non-conformist ideas?
I have been a participant on discussion lists in which people are allowed to express any idea at all, as long as they are civil. That model works extremely well, especially if the moderators nip violations of civility standards in the bud. (It’s also important that the mods be neutral; rather than applying one standard of civility to someone they like, and a different standard to someone they dislike.) I’d much rather invest my time in a forum like that than one in which the mods believe it’s their right–even their responsibility!–to censor anything “politically sensitive.”
-
How many of those hours should I invest into a forum in which moderators exert pressure to discourage or prevent people from expressing non-conformist ideas?
Invest the same hours as you did before since nobody ONCE changed any post you ever made in any manner, but did close 5 threads because the ended up in flame wars or totally off topic commentary. If by closing threads like “making a chocolate shake” ended up into “Stalin shipped 50,452 into forced labor camps and selected a number of these for eugenics tests to determine who was superior” you get and deserve a closed thread.
Not because we don’t like the topic, but because it freaking don’t belong with ‘chocolate’ threads.
Funny how you never once have any proof about where you got a post changed or altered, since a claim of censorship might have currency but you don’t even have a starting point to even discuss that.
And you were already told that politics are not allowed here by the owner of the site. Also, he said all topics should have some relevance to the game in some manner because really this is an Axis and Allies site and not Republican vs. Democrat or Holocaust talk.
Bring your “non- conformist” ideas to the table as long as its about the GAME, or History with a direct relation to the same ( battles, equipment, leaders, campaigns).
I’ve repeatedly explained. (And he has repeatedly ignored.)
But you have to have evidence of how your posts were censored. If you don’t have edited posts or removed posts you got nothing to complain. Its’ pretty basic right?
SHOW WHERE YOU WROTE SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY REMOVED OR EDITED. CAN YOU DO THAT KURT?
Otherwise, anybody who never posted can cry “censorship” and leave.
-
SHOW WHERE YOU WROTE SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY REMOVED
How’s he’s supposed to show it, when it’s removed?
DUH
-
Thats easy.
Look for continuity in those threads. His posts are always reposted in rebuttals by other forum members. Also, look at Kurt’s posts themselves. If somebody removed the ones about race, eugenics, Nazi transport stats, etc….then how come those 5 threads are full of that commentary?
Second, look for something like this: � Last Edit: Today at 08:59:35 am by Imperious Leader �
Talk about grasping for straws… geez
DUH
-
@Imperious:
How many of those hours should I invest into a forum in which moderators exert pressure to discourage or prevent people from expressing non-conformist ideas?
Invest the same hours as you did before since nobody ONCE changed any post you ever made in any manner, but did close 5 threads because the ended up in flame wars or totally off topic commentary. If by closing threads like “making a chocolate shake” ended up into “Stalin shipped 50,452 into forced labor camps and selected a number of these for eugenics tests to determine who was superior” you get and deserve a closed thread.
Not because we don’t like the topic, but because it freaking don’t belong with ‘chocolate’ threads.
Funny how you never once have any proof about where you got a post changed or altered, since a claim of censorship might have currency but you don’t even have a starting point to even discuss that.
And you were already told that politics are not allowed here by the owner of the site. Also, he said all topics should have some relevance to the game in some manner because really this is an Axis and Allies site and not Republican vs. Democrat or Holocaust talk.
Bring your “non- conformist” ideas to the table as long as its about the GAME, or History with a direct relation to the same ( battles, equipment, leaders, campaigns).
I’ve repeatedly explained. (And he has repeatedly ignored.)
But you have to have evidence of how your posts were censored. If you don’t have edited posts or removed posts you got nothing to complain. Its’ pretty basic right?
SHOW WHERE YOU WROTE SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY REMOVED OR EDITED. CAN YOU DO THAT KURT?
Otherwise, anybody who never posted can cry “censorship” and leave.
You are refuting straw men. I have not claimed that any of my posts have been edited or deleted. I have expressed acceptance of the idea of keeping threads on-topic. What I am not okay with, and do not accept, is the idea that there are certain pieces of history which must not be discussed because they are too “sensitive.” A policy such as that is not appropriate for a WWII history forum. It represents censorship of ideas and of history.
Please confine your future remarks to the things I’ve actually stated, without wandering off down rabbit trails completely unrelated to my one area of concern.
-
What I am not okay with, and do not accept, is the idea that there are certain pieces of history which must not be discussed because they are too “sensitive.”
And how then did that effect you in the forums? And second, why blame moderators for closing off topic threads when Djensen clearly said no political talk or matters not relating to Axis and Allies the game in terms of military History?
If you want to talk about how Jews got murdered in the gas chamber and we got perhaps Jewish kids as members, don’t you think some topics are a bit too taboo for a AXIS AND ALLIES GAME WEBSITE?
Also, because threads of this nature are not handled with careful hands and any two bit racist can get on a soapbox and flame these threads with hurtful words. The point being is to touch on this topic or related topics gets the most simplistic ignorant commentary that we have ever seen and it does not belong on this site. It may not be you ( it isn’t) but it is the multitude of half baked idiots who will respond to your post.
If you want to get a long thread in about a sensitive matter, perhaps post in the Dupuy Institute, or the World Center for Holocaust Research website. This is a game website and we don’t have the wherewithal to deal properly with very sensitive topics because our membership is mostly young people. And some of them seem to know about everything and nothing but
will post flames or ignorant rebuttals, resulting in closed threads… -
In Fairness, he posted in the subsection called WORLD WAR II HISTORY
Which is listed under OTHER FORUMS
Clearly implying that OPEN DISCUSSION, about WORLD WAR II HISTORY is meant to be had in that forum.
Per Djensen, in the rules revision discussion thread, it’s that exact issue, which may see this part of the forum closed, because as it currently stands, comment is allowed.
P.S. For the record, everything Nazi is Taboo. So unless we’re going to start playing Grey Pieces vs Allies, we’d better just accept that WWII history has some ugly components, that may undeniably offend people.
-
ignorant rebuttals
Oh- and Yes -, I’ve learned to become quite familiar with reading those.
-
In Fairness, he posted in the subsection called WORLD WAR II HISTORY
In fairness the 5 threads he was involved in got off topic and got closed, not censored. Just because the thread says “did Hitler have a stunt double” does not mean somebody can start posting " hey the NAZI’s transported 43,926 slaves from Belorussia on 4th July 1943 and Stalin was worse than Hitler"
It has no relevance to the closed thread.
Which is listed under OTHER FORUMS
And?
Clearly implying that OPEN DISCUSSION, about WORLD WAR II HISTORY is meant to be had in that forum.
Implying that threads can go off topic too right? how bout flame wars? Are the rules just not applying because it is a History forum?
Per Djensen, in the rules revision discussion thread, it’s that exact issue, which may see this part of the forum closed, because as it currently stands, comment is allowed.
No silly it does not. The rules do not allow off topic commentary or as per Djensen, topics not related to Axis and Allies. The rules of the site are still in force.
P.S. For the record, everything Nazi is Taboo. So unless we’re going to start playing Grey Pieces vs Allies, we’d better just accept that WWII history has some ugly components, that may undeniably offend people.
Well no. If we compare Battleships and the Bismarck is part of the conversation, that is not taboo.
Talking about cremation methods should be. Or even Hitlers Gas Bill :mrgreen: ( even for students who are too old to be students)
Not allowed. I have yet to see any evidence where Kurt’s posts got censored.
-
I just want to say tanks to whoever posted the cake recipe in the heavy tank vs tank buster thread
Tanks for stayin round Kurt
Suggested Topics
