SubJeff on 4/5/2014 at 13:10
Are you or have you ever been a paedophile Koyla?
I'm getting so sick of your stupidity.
Thirith on 4/5/2014 at 14:39
Sigh. Perhaps I'm stupid too, but I still have no idea what you were going on about in that thread, SubJeff. You know what, though? Give it a fucking rest. Perhaps you are smarter than the rest, but at times you're obtuse and fucking bad at making yourself clear. Going on about how others are stupid just makes you look and sound like a dick.
Kolya on 4/5/2014 at 15:43
Quote Posted by SubJeff
Are you or have you ever been a paedophile Koyla?
I'm getting so sick of your stupidity.
Why don't you just provide a link to a post where you were accused of paedophilia, SubJeff? Instead of lashing out with what you fear yourself, like a coward?
Doesn't work with me by the way. I was cleaning the windows earlier and having watched the fantastic HAIR film two times this weekend, I sang out "Sodomy" at the top of my lungs while drawing down the glass.
So far I haven't been arrested nor fired yet. :D
[video=youtube;TzwGfP98vGM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzwGfP98vGM[/video]
SubJeff on 4/5/2014 at 15:55
Quote Posted by Thirith
Going on about how others are stupid just makes you look and sound like a dick.
I'll make it clear then, seeing as even Koyla can't get this.
I was talking about a lowering of the age of consent to 15 from 16 in the USA.
Considering that:
* The age of consent in much of Europe is less than this (varies from 14 to 18 I think).
* Koyla has admitted having sexual intercourse with someone younger than 15 and doesn't consider himself a paedophile.
how on
Earth can I have been talking about paedophiles?
Add to that that fact that I
stated I was talking about an
ethnic or religious group that wanted that change, how could you possibly think I was talking about paedophiles as a minority when I
clearly stated I was talking about another minority altogether.
If understanding this makes me a dick I'm happy to be one.
Quote:
Why don't you just provide a link to a post where you were accused of paedophilia, SubJeff?
No one accused me
of paedophilia you brick, but of making out that paedophiles were an oppressed minority by proxy of your misunderstanding of the written word. If I'm saying they are an oppressed minority I am, by extension, saying they should be un-oppressed and thus am in support of their cause, which of course I'm not. You don't refer to, for example, murders as an oppressed minority because they are locked up, and to do so would be to support them in the right to murder. This is not rocket science.
If you chaps, who I do not consider myself smarter than btw, can't get this then what hope do I have when idiots with an axe to grind get hold of it?
Kolya on 4/5/2014 at 16:45
None of that happened either. It's just your fear that someone might misunderstand it like that. But no one in the thread said you were supporting paedos or anything similar to that. No one except yourself came to that conclusion.
That's very thin ground to act as capricious as you do my friend. Provide a link or shut up and change that ridiculous first post in the Eich thread.
Muzman on 4/5/2014 at 17:22
Quote Posted by Kolya
A) Olin wasn't talking about his work or company.
B) No one ever accused SubJeff of supporting paedophilia. He came up with this comparison of gay marriage to people who would like to have sex with minors. And (
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=143721&p=2246576&viewfull=1#post2246576) I haphazardly assumed he was talking about - but clearly not supporting - paedophiles. After all he used this as an example of why minorities should NOT be granted every wish. How could he be supporting paedos then?
Now if only I had known then that he really was talking about a fictional "Kolya-tribe" of child-fuckers, as he later nonchalantly explained, none of this would ever have happened. Fortunately I managed to (
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=143721&p=2247922&viewfull=1#post2247922) clear up this misunderstanding in the thread, before it was crippled and closed.
Firstly, Olin was representing them on the internet in public fora, as far as they were concerned. Thus they chose to distance themselves from him. The point being, if even ordinary workers of little real consequence are subject to such stringencies a community manager almost certainly is too. I expect the terms of his contract would be broad enough to allow for all manner of apparent arbitrary capriciousness. It's not the 'about work' bit to be focusing on but the 'you are representing the company' bit, for better or worse.
On the second; that seems to fit with my impression. He was using an example of differing age of consent standards and the moral judgement that could go along with it as a parallel to whether or not we should judge Eich. Roughly anyway. And it's got some baggage about moving to a relativistic standard of almost infinite reactionary witch hunting empowered by a limitless capacity to be seen to be offensive to someone .
Without getting into those weeds the point was whether or not this hypothetical could be used against him later. Technically yes. But how worried should someone be? I say not very. The difference is that Eich wasn't spun, he acted. Of course that can be spun too, but it's somewhere up the Muhz scale of hardness in terms of being something to ground criticism of character on. Quite a ways up in this case, really.
This is all just for clarity really.
Which brings us to secret fora and their aid to robust free thought. In a huge side-bar; My main problem is the theory seems faulty for the situation. If the idea is to foster old school discussion and revitalise things a bit (the second bit may be a minor part of the idea. I'm just lumping all this in with all the other naval gazing we do from time to time) all well and good. But I don't think a reluctance to speak out played a very big part, or any part really, in the gradual decline. Facebook is filled with free and frank exchanges, despite the best efforts of the NSA. Convenience, aging and the changing ways people engage on the 'net seem more appropriate culprits to me.
But even if it's not addressing a cause, that doesn't mean it can't offer something new which may have it's own appeal.
I can actually imagine that kind of thing becoming more common soon, thank to the various factors we've been on about re: speaking off the cuff and getting hoist by your own petard etc. So who knows. I can't really picture it getting much use, but if people want to try it I guess they can.
SubJeff on 4/5/2014 at 23:24
Quote Posted by Kolya
None of that happened either. It's just your fear that someone
might misunderstand it like that. But no one in the thread said you were supporting paedos or anything similar to that. No one except yourself came to that conclusion.
That's very thin ground to act as capricious as you do my friend. Provide a link or shut up and change that ridiculous first post in the Eich thread.
Err, in this thread you've assured me no one accused me of paedophilia.
I never said they did.
You clearly cannot read.
And no one accused you of being a twat, don't worry.
SubJeff on 4/5/2014 at 23:25
And is rather be a little cautious than sorry about all this years from now.
SubJeff on 4/5/2014 at 23:34
<quote>
Quote:
I explained a good reason for age of consent. And that isn't oppression of a minority (I guess you're referring to paedophiles) but the protection of minors
.</quote>
This is directly saying I'm calling paedophiles an oppressed minority.
SubJeff on 4/5/2014 at 23:36
<quote>
Quote:
"People who want to have sex with 14 year olds" are <i>not</i> a fucking minority group. Jesus fucking christ, dude.
</quote>
As is this.
