OT: Shooting in Oregon Mall

[BF4L]

I am not sure. It is a great question and one that I would have answered with ease 2 days ago but now I am not so sure.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

As for the other question, let me try to explain. The reason I asked if you feel you should have the right to ban posters if personally attacked rather than asking a mod for that protection is because the rationale is analogous to having a gun for the purpose of home protection. Mods are trusted with that power by the board. If ordinary posters, with long and consistently sane posting histories (showing them to be trained and mentally stable), had that power they could exercise it if they feel attacked. Perhaps someone who felt attacked here today on the board may have exercised that power had they possessed it.

No poster on here can r*pe his wife with their posts while he waits 2 minutes for the Mods to come help. This is not a great analogy.

 

[BF4L]

No poster on here can r*pe his wife with their posts while he waits 2 minutes for the Mods to come help. This is not a great analogy.

^^

Plus I have decided to take the high road on that person. No need for me to get upset at his lies. I reported him to the mods but probably should have just ignored him. Lesson learned.

 

[abaskin18]

No poster on here can r*pe his wife with their posts while he waits 2 minutes for the Mods to come help. This is not a great analogy.

And people rarely wait until their wife is being raped before they introduce their gun into a situation. If he had a "gun" in the context of the analogy, my guess is he would have used it.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

And people rarely wait until their wife is being raped before they introduce their gun into a situation. If he had a "gun" in the context of the analogy, my guess is he would have used it.

Based on his past history and his apparent gun education, I completely disagree with you, but that's just my personal belief.


Banning someone for a couple of days on a message board because of personal attacks is not analogous to using a gun in an argument.

I see where you are trying to go with this, but I think it is a real leap to make that comparison.

 

[abaskin18]

I am not sure. It is a great question and one that I would have answered with ease 2 days ago but now I am not so sure.

You seemed to answer with ease two minutes ago until your position collapsed on itself.

I do hope you can reconcile your beliefs and come to a conclusion that's best for yourself and for us all. Be well.

 

[BF4L]

You seemed to answer with ease two minutes ago until your position collapsed on itself.

I do hope you can reconcile your beliefs and come to a conclusion that's best for yourself and for us all. Be well.

Not that simple.

 

[abaskin18]

Based on his past history and his apparent gun education, I completely disagree with you, but that's just my personal belief.


Banning someone for a couple of days on a message board because of personal attacks is not analogous to using a gun in an argument.

I see where you are trying to go with this, but I think it is a real leap to make that comparison.

An ordinary poster on a message board with a ban hammer is analogous to an ordinary citizen with a gun and the right to use it. In a situation in which that person feels they or someone else is being attacked that person may use it. It's not the same, it's analogous.

 

[abaskin18]

Not that simple.

Well, that's progress.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

An ordinary poster on a message board with a ban hammer is analogous to an ordinary citizen with a gun and the right to use it. In a situation in which that person feels they or someone else is being attacked that person may use it. It's not the same, it's analogous.

No.


It's not.

But I see that you seem to think that it does, which is.....surreal but to each their own, I guess.

 

[Jimmy_the_Tongue]

They are going to publicly ID the victims today...the youngest is a 5 year old. Don't know if I even want to see the list. I've never been so affected by something like this in my entire life. I couldn't even sleep last night. My heart is broken. My stomach is sick. All for what? A coward who couldn't manage his own life? Fuck this. Burn in Hell ( I won't even dignify his existence by acknowledging his name).

 

[abaskin18]

No.


It's not.

But I see that you seem to think that it does, which is.....surreal but to each their own, I guess.

You really don't see how two situations in which ordinary responsible citizens have the right to use deadly force if they feel attacked (within the context of those two situations, message board posting and real life, respectively) comparable in any aspect? Because if ya do...analogous.

Are you maybe hung up thinking I'm equating message board posting to real life?

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

Is there a SportsHoopla amendment that guarantees the right to ban?

Are their rogue posters without training and mod abilities who can ban whenever they want and can ban other accidentally in the process?

Can you buy the ability to ban on the Flyers board for 50 vdollars?

I mean, come on. It is not that simple.

 

[Comeds]

You really ought to be able to ban them on your own. I mean, why should you have to wait for the mods to come and protect you when you could do it yourself...?

I'll let that sink in while I move on.

?

I think it finally sunk in. In that analogy if everyone and anyone could ban anyone what a fucking mess message boards like these would be.

 

[abaskin18]

Is there a SportsHoopla amendment that guarantees the right to ban?

Are their rogue posters without training and mod abilities who can ban whenever they want and can ban other accidentally in the process?

Can you buy the ability to ban on the Flyers board for 50 vdollars?

I mean, come on. It is not that simple.

I'm not sure you know what analogous means? It doesn't matter how many aspects exist in which they are not comparable.

 

[Comeds]

Is there a SportsHoopla amendment that guarantees the right to ban?

.

Would that be a well regulated right to ban or just a right to ban? Sometimes it seems like the words well regulated are invisible.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

I know exactly what analogous means. I also know what asinine means and this comparison is more the latter than the former. Analogous assumes at least some small level of comparability. This little game does not meet that standard, IMO. I get it. You are sold on it. You are trying to be clever and have sold yourself on how clever it is. I disagree.

 

[abaskin18]

I know exactly what analogous means. I also know what asinine means and this comparison is more the latter than the former. Analogous assumes at least some small level of comparability. This little game does not meet that standard, IMO. I get it. You are sold on it. You are trying to be clever and have sold yourself on how clever it is. I disagree.

We definitely disagree on the definition of analogous.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

Ok, I'll bite. Define it in your own words.


(I can't believe a discussion that has been so good to this point has reached this level, and I apologize, )

 

[dare2be]

I disagree, 46. Maybe you missed the context of the original comment that precipitated the analogy. B4NL said he would prefer to be able to defend himself from an intruder with a gun (ban), than to wait around for the cops (mods) to show up and do it (or not) for him. There is a basic analogy there. Hitting the report button is like calling 911, hitting the ban button is like using a gun with deadly force.