Making it Better: The future of WP

Post Reply New Topic

The problem is that for MONTHS there has been an issue with attacks on a small group of people (calling them reichwingers, insinuating they are Nazi's\nazi supporters\racists\white supremecists\lacking intelligence) for the "crime" of having a centrist or right wing view of any issue (or even just suggesting a different approach to tackling an issue). We even had a thread "is it OK to punch a nazi" (post consisted of "and why is your answer 'yes'") where this "nazi=conservative" link was being pushed (if possible, have a look at the signatures used by the participants which were changed at around this time):

Source: http://dev.wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=388147&p=8546983#p8546983
With the clear insinuation that anyone disagreeing with force (the originator of the post even stated at one point he didn't care if someone was killed) was a "reichwinger", and so were nazi sympathisers, while also insinuating this also applies to anyone on the right of the political spectrum.

Or we get:
Source: https://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=387586&p=8532702#p8532702

Or we get (thankfully edited by a moderator):

Former source: https://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=389161&p=8573222#p8573222
the very clear implication (being that it came from a professional (technical-) writer and so would have been intentionally worded this way) being that to be conservative means you cannot be perceptive, intelligent, or wise.

Or in pointing out that federal officers were sent to a city to protect federal property because the local police were unable to\prevented from doing so:

Former source: https://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=388913&f=21&p=8573352#p8573352
(Since deleted, but indicating any belief that federal officers were sent to protect property made one "horribly racist".)

Then you popped up in the middle of a discussion where a number of people had been complaining about these sorts of things having been happening and allowed to continue, and the first thing you did was make posts which implied you took the side of those taking these types of actions...

And before you ask, these WERE all reported, yet some were permitted to remain...And that is only a sample of how the site has been headed.

No-one here is in favor of racism (as far as I know). The problem is what we are also against, and where a lot of problems come from, are false claims of racism and "white supremecy" being levelled at others on the site by people who disagree with them, but are unwilling to hold a discussion to try and explain different viewpoints, nor provide any evidence to support these libelous claims.

There is also the matter of anyone who has a centrist\right wing view here being the target of "nazi" claims, or being "right-wing", which was in "fashion" among some members for quite a while, even after being reminded attacks on groups such as this was not permitted.

The problem is that for MONTHS there has been an issue with attacks on a small group of people (calling them reichwingers, insinuating they are Nazi's\nazi supporters\racists\white supremecists\lacking intelligence) for the "crime" of having a centrist or right wing view of any issue (or even just suggesting a different approach to tackling an issue)

I see all of these but it seems like par for the course. PPR has always been a place where people speak freely and are allowed to share their beliefs. And it’s generally been accepted that if you can’t stand the heat stay out of the kitchen. And by that I mean members sensitive to things like “all conservatives are nazis” should probably avoid the ppr forum.

Other groups of people.
While it is acceptable to attack and debate beliefs (political, religious etc) it is not acceptable to make generalised attacks on the adherents of those beliefs.

I would love to see the screenshot Alex took yesterday or the day before of the post by Slyfox (offensive N word can be easily redacted in Paint or similar) that he used to attack SlyFox's reputation, too.

Did anyone else see that post?
Simples.

I have already gotten several PMs about Sly's comment asking if I saw it and what it said. I don't know if some members here are going around asking other members if they saw it. Did anyone else get PMs asking about that comment?

I see all of these but it seems like par for the course. PPR has always been a place where people speak freely and are allowed to share their beliefs. And it’s generally been accepted that if you can’t stand the heat stay out of the kitchen. And by that I mean members sensitive to things like “all conservatives are nazis” should probably avoid the ppr forum.

I think that this is not a friendly place anymore.

So are you saying that being called racist is not "injurious to a person's reputation, exposes a person to public hatred, contempt or ridicule, or injures a person in his/her business or profession"? I cannot imagine there are many places in the world where a claim of racism against a person would not have that sort of impact. Whether the site as a whole (or only the poster) would be responsible for unfounded claims, though, is an interesting question which may require some investigation...

So, what you are saying, is that you are happy for people to make unsubstantiated claims such as that, provide no evidence to support the claim when it is asked for, and the person so labelled has to prove a negative "that they are not racist" with no indication what was supposedly "racist" that they had done, otherwise they MUST be guilty of being "racist"...... Automatic assumption of guilt, rather than the accuser having to prove their claim.

July 27, 2020: Washington Post and Kentucky Teen Reach Undisclosed Settlement

The Washington Post announced on July 24th that it had reached a settlement with the parents of a Kentucky teenager who sued the newspaper last year over its depiction of an encounter between their son and a Native American activist.

“We are pleased that we have been able to reach a mutually agreeable resolution of the remaining claims in this lawsuit,” said Kristine Coratti Kelly, a spokeswoman for The Post. Kelly did not disclose the terms of the agreement.

Teenager Nicholas Sandmann became the subject of national attention after a filmed encounter between him and a Native American activist went viral online. The short video depicted a smiling Sandmann in a “Make American Great Again” hat, standing face-to-face with indigenous activist Nathan Philips.

The Sandmanns have also sued a number of news organizations and public figures for defamation. Earlier this year, CNN reached a settlement with the parents, but the lawsuit against The New York Times and five others are ongoing.

Virtually the entire media—mainstream, left, and right—initially smeared the Covington kids as racists based on a short, misleading video clip of the incident. https://reason.com/2019/02/21/nick-sand ... uit-libel/

I see all of these but it seems like par for the course. PPR has always been a place where people speak freely and are allowed to share their beliefs. And it’s generally been accepted that if you can’t stand the heat stay out of the kitchen. And by that I mean members sensitive to things like “all conservatives are nazis” should probably avoid the ppr forum.

I see all of these but it seems like par for the course. PPR has always been a place where people speak freely and are allowed to share their beliefs. And it’s generally been accepted that if you can’t stand the heat stay out of the kitchen. And by that I mean members sensitive to things like “all conservatives are nazis” should probably avoid the ppr forum.