What is the point?

[RosaRL]

What is the point of restricting people who do not spam or troll in these forums?

It seems relatively pointless to me and it crushes discussion and debate by removing some of the more provocative posters from the threads.

What ever happened to 'let a thousands schools of thought contend?'

It is an outrage.

It is an outrage because what offense has been committed?

It is an outrage that those who have been restricted here are even being denied the right to speak much like those in locked up by the US in that hellhole on the cuban island - no?

[RedComrade]

The point is there are some fascists in red clothes on here who dont like the idea of intelligent opposition, theyd rather ban people on the spur of the moment then vote or allow the defendants to explain themselves in an open trial of their peers, hypocrites and pseudo-comrades, the whole lot of em'!

[RedComrade]

watch theyll close this thread within minutes

[RedComrade]

wouldnt surprise me if they booted me from the CC and caged me too while theyre at it

[RosaRL]

I've noticed the way that they are shutting down the threads.

Its a shame.

I dont moderate that way at all.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

You are right, those poor, hungry racists, homophobes, fascists should have free reign of the board to offend us, try to give us viruses, and dull down the conversation. This is a political discussion board, not a nursury.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Exactly.This is pathetic.Fucking pathetic.You all are to lame not to give a reason for this.To lame to debate or hear us out.

[Andrei Kuznetsov]

As an administrator of my own forums and as a Maoist (which means I uphold Stalin as a revolutionary Communist), I know that I don't ban Anarchists, Trotskyists, and people who oppose Stalin. Heck, I welcome anyone who is willing to have a civil debate. Why is Che-Lives clamping down on debate on dissent? Why are the administrators acting like John Ashcroft? We demand an explanation.

[synthesis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 02:45 AM
wouldnt surprise me if they booted me from the CC and caged me too while theyre at it
What the fuck is your problem?

[Comrade Ceausescu]

You are right, those poor, hungry racists, homophobes, fascists should have free reign of the board to offend us, try to give us viruses, and dull down the conversation. This is a political discussion board, not a nursury.

I'm sure you'd be saying the exact same thing if you were restricted.

[RedComrade]

Why dont you cage Midnight Marauder too, isnt shut the fuck up worse then calling someone a trot, what a bunch of fucking individualistic hypocrites!

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

Originally posted by Andrei [email protected] 13 2004, 10:46 PM
As an administrator of my own forums and as a Maoist (which means I uphold Stalin as a revolutionary Communist), I know that I don't ban Anarchists, Trotskyists, and people who oppose Stalin. Heck, I welcome anyone who is willing to have a civil debate. Why is Che-Lives clamping down on debate on dissent? Why are the administrators acting like John Ashcroft? We demand an explanation.
Wow, what a terrific person you are! Right now we are trying to come up with some sort of concensus about Stalinists, but there is no way I'm going to support opening the board to Sam Adams and Castro_Sucks type of people.

[RosaRL]

racist, homophobic, and Fascist?

In my experience - and I have quite a bit at this - that it is the stalin supporter that is the most advid fighter against oppression - against fascist, racist and yes defenders of the gay and lesbian community.

Lets not forget that Stalin lead the defeat of nazi germany.

[Vinny Rafarino]

I will leave this one open.



I hope you all will read your posts tomorrow and laugh at yourselves.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

I agree we shouldn't restrict Stalinists merely because they are Stalinists. If you can talk intelligently like COMRADE RAF, or Chairman Mao, then that's great. If you are going to troll like Bolshevika, then they can stay restricted, Stalinist or not.

[Y2A]

I don't get why we(capitalists) and stalinists that don't flame or spam are restricted to only post here.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

I will leave this one open.



I hope you all will read your posts tomorrow and laugh at yourselves.

Go ahead and get real cozy with the Che-Lives ruling elite.


I agree we shouldn't restrict Stalinists merely because they are Stalinists. If you can talk intelligently like COMRADE RAF, or Chairman Mao, then that's great. If you are going to troll like Bolshevika, then they can stay restricted, Stalinist or not.

Comrade Raf insults people.Is this a bad thing?No.Thats life.Thats all I have to say about it.I was not here or didn't see it when Bolshevika allegedly "spammed" and "trolled".I have never done either.Neither has Comrade Zeke.

[Bolshevika]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 02:56 AM
I agree we shouldn't restrict Stalinists merely because they are Stalinists. If you can talk intelligently like COMRADE RAF, or Chairman Mao, then that's great. If you are going to troll like Bolshevika, then they can stay restricted, Stalinist or not.
Hey midnight, shut the fuck up you moron. Go back to Chit Chat and speak with people of your mental calibur, asshole. If you would've gotten restricted, then I would've supported you, but you are an upper class weasel and have no sense of comradeship. Even Red Comrade, whose ideology is far different from mine, is a much more loyal and better communist than you are :angry:

I am with Comrade Ceausescu. I do not see how Comrade RAF is any less of a "troll" than I am. I agree that RAF is one of them.

[RosaRL]

The thing is, if you get rid of all your opposition, then what is there left to debate?

Good debate needs someone to debate against. If not then everyone can then stare at the screen. Eventually everyone leaves and finds the newest place where it hasnt happend yet.

Restricting stalinist here means that no one can debate them in other threads!

So many good sites have died this way (by banning and restricting the opposition) and it is a shame.

(and a funny side note - isnt that exactly what stalin was accused of by so many?)

I love debate that is wild and challenging and i've looked forward to digging im more with folks here. I dont want to see this site wither away like so many others have already.

People know the histories.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

Not everyone who is not a Stalinist is lockstep on every issue like the guys at the RCP are. I know this must be hard to imagine, but we don't pull our ideas from the "RCP Draft Programme". There is plenty to argue on, from abortion, to animal rights, to Saddam. I ENJOY being able to agrue intelligently without the interference of some right-wing troll. That is why I'm here. Come one Bolshevika, I've got this from your AOL IM profile- "What's funnier than a baby impaled on a rusty clothes hanger?". Even your name, Tinkledrinker6, screams immaturity. Try acting like an adult some time and perhaps you won't be restricted.

[Bolshevika]

Well I made the screename a good while ago (almost 3 years infact). What is your point, you judge somebody because of their screename? How about yours "Xxmarauder77xX", this screams mediocre! Are you mediocre Marauder? How about your Che-lives screename, with your cutesy miscapitalization.

Do you see how silly it is?

It is not only me who you bash and insult, it is Comrade Ceausescu, ErnestoLynch (who doesn't even post much) and Zeke, who have been restricted. Do you think they are "immature" and "Trolls"?

[RosaRL]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 03:20 AM
Not everyone who is not a Stalinist is lockstep on every issue like the guys at the RCP are. I know this must be hard to imagine, but we don't pull our ideas from the "RCP Draft Programme". There is plenty to argue on, from abortion, to animal rights, to Saddam. I ENJOY being able to agrue intelligently without the interference of some right-wing troll. That is why I'm here.
There is a huge difference in having a meaningful debate and dealing with a 'right wing troll' - or any troll for that matter. Trolls come in all shades.

However, several of the people restricted here have more than shown that they can and do have meaningful debates with people, yet there seems to be a problem with that.

In fact, I have see a lot of low level post from people who post here that are not restricted.

What is being restricted is a political line. The question remains as to why that line is being restricted.

It is not that I agree with these guys, either, by the way. I have had rather intense and intellegent debates with them over Cuba and the other so called 'socialist' nations as well as the issue of 'should ellectorial politics be a tactic?'

[SonofRage]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2004, 09:06 PM
Hey midnight, shut the fuck up you moron. Go back to Chit Chat and speak with people of your mental calibur, asshole. If you would've gotten restricted, then I would've supported you, but you are an upper class weasel and have no sense of comradeship. Even Red Comrade, whose ideology is far different from mine, is a much more loyal and better communist than you are :angry:

I am with Comrade Ceausescu. I do not see how Comrade RAF is any less of a "troll" than I am. I agree that RAF is one of them.
It is this kind of language that gets stalinists restricted. You should all follow the example of Chairman Mao who consistantly articulates his position withouth resorting to name-calling or trolling.

[Y2A]

How can you guys even debate with only a selected few of communists allowed to post and no capitalists allowed to post outside of this forum. Whats with the restrictive mods on these boards? I can understand banning spam or trolling but the vast majority of us do not do that, and it is hypocritical aswell considering that many of you do the same, continuously posting hitler pictures or calling us "imperialists" is not a logical debate.

[Pete]

:lol: Some of the things you guys are posting here are hilarious. Read them after a few days and the cooling of emotions. Since RAF is leaving this open, I won't go around him (it is his forum afterall).

Myself and the other mods have no idea what happened, any direction of any of your emotions at us is short sighted and, well, quite insignificant in the long run. Its not like there is a 'ruling elite' here made up of mods and admins. The Admins do what they think best for the board, when the Commie Club members don't like it they make a fuss, and what they agree too based on polls usually happens, unless the Admins think the board is in danger, or the person being discussed derserves/does not deserve the 'punishment' they deem necassary.

But this is not a country, it is a webboard.

Personally I think all Leninists are more or less misguided, but I do accept their leftist approach. Its just when people start throwing around labels without a clue what they are saying, or are just causing shit for no reason "you damn trot" ect, then that needs to be put to an end. Such labels, as with the label 'stalinist,' are harmful to debate. It is usually only the 'stalinists' who use the labels, and the rightwingers (I concede we use them back at you :P ) as well.

If you have a complaint IM an admin. Exploitedclass is on most often, the others (excluding Dhul Fiqar.. I don't know where he has been) are around every so often and will do soemthing to help you/answer you at least.

Hang in there, those innocently charged.

The guilty, well, you're damned I guess.

[RedComrade]

Wow sonofrage, did you not read the reply on the other page where midnightmarauder iniates the flaming by telling us all to shut the fuck up, but then again i guess thats allowed, hell you can say preety much anything as long as your not a stalinist (except for "good" stalinists like RAF and Mao). We got stalinists caged for calling people trot when half of RAF's post make them look PG by comparison.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

The flame was not directed to all stalinsts, but to complaint that we are restricting right-wingers. The Stalinist position is currently being debated.

[Pete]

The Stalinist position is currently being debated.

I've been here for over a year.. it is always being debated.

[RedComrade]

I didnt realise anyone was complaining about the treatment of cappies (at least in this thread) i apologize to anyone who thought that was my objective. I am just fed up with the disunity amongst members of the far-left, be they market socialists (me) or stalinists (those in question); lets stop helping Bush and his cronies and unite by putting an end to these divisive, heavy-handed, authoritarian tactics.

[Y2A]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 03:41 AM
The flame was not directed to all stalinsts, but to complaint that we are restricting right-wingers. The Stalinist position is currently being debated.
Do you mean right-wingers or capitalists? There is a difference you know. And either way still makes it pointless to restrict people for having an ideology that you dislike, but hell it's your board, do as you wish. I am just pointing out the hypocracy of you guys going around calling everyone an "imperialist pig" or continously posting pictures of holocaust jews telling us that is what we support and then labeling us "trolls", utterly ridiculous.

[Bolshevika]

Sensible capitalists, like Y2A seems to be, should be able to post on other parts of the boards. However, people like El_Profe and Sam Adams should be banned.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

It is this kind of language that gets stalinists restricted. You should all follow the example of Chairman Mao who consistantly articulates his position withouth resorting to name-calling or trolling.

Wow. You are complaining about trolling and stuff.What next? Pigs can fly? I agree with Bolshevika. I would allow left wing capitalists on my forum. They can be very intelligent, and they are more open minded then the right.

[Monty Cantsin]

i didnt want to start a new topic but wonts the point of this site http://www.cominform.org/trot2.htm :angry:

just shows how dull Stalinists really are.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Talk about irrelavence. There is plenty of anti-Stalin humour out there. I take it for what it is-humour.

[Monty Cantsin]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 14 2004, 04:49 AM
Talk about irrelavence. There is plenty of anti-Stalin humour out there. I take it for what it is-humour.
got any anti-stalin sites like to see what there like.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Makes fun of socialism,really.

Another old Stalin joke --- let's rerun them all now before
they are completely out of date.
----------------
Stalin and his foreign secretary, Molotov, have made a goodwill
visit to Poland, and are returning to Moscow on the night train.
It's pitch dark. After an hour or so, Stalin says,
"I wonder where we are now?"
Molotov opens the window, put his hand outside for a second,
and says "Still in Poland, Comrade Stalin."
Stalin is impressed, but says nothing, for fear of looking dumb.

A couple of hours later, Stalin says, "I guess we must be in
Russia by now." Molotov puts his hand outside the window again
and says, "No, Comrade Stalin, we're only in East Germany."
Again Stalin is impressed but keeps quiet.

Finally after several more hours, Molotov puts his hand outside
the window and says, "Now we're in the USSR."

This time Stalin cannot contain his curiosity, and demands to know
how Molotov can find his way in the dark.
After a bit of hesitation, Molotov replies,

"Well, to tell the truth, Josef Vissarionovich,
the first time I put my hand outside,
somebody spat on it, so I knew we were still in Poland.
The second time, somebody kissed it, so I knew we were
in East Germany. The third time, somebody stole my watch,
so I knew we were in the Soviet Union..."

Mototov The Follower
There was a time in the nineteen forties when Vyacheslav Molotov was Soviet foreign minister. He was a shrewd man and a hard bargainer but worked for Joseph Stalin, who was The Boss.

Molotov was once overheard talking to Stalin by trans-Atlantic telephone during the course of some very intricate negotiations with the West. He said, "Yes, Comrade Stalin," in quiet tones, then again, "Yes, Comrade Stalin, and then, after a considerable wait, "Certainly, Comrade Stalin. Suddenly he was galvanized into emotion. "No, Comrade Stalin," he barked, "No. That's, no. Definitely, no. A thousand times, no!"

After a while, he quieted and it was "Yes, Comrade Stalin," again. The reporter who overheard this was probably never so excited in his life. Clearly, Molotov was daring to oppose the dictator on at least one point, and it would surely be important to the West to know what that point might be.

The reporter approached Molotov and said as calmly as possible, Secretary Molotov, I could not help but hear you say at one point, "No, Comrade Stalin."

Molotov turned his cold eyes on the reporter and said, "What of it?"

"May I ask," said the reporter, cautiously, "What the subject under discussion was at that time?"

"You may," said Molotov. "Comrade Stalin asked me if there was anything which he had said with which I disagreed."


Happy?These are all completly misleading about Stalin,but I still chuckled at them.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2004, 09:43 PM
The point is there are some fascists in red clothes on here who don't like the idea of intelligent opposition, they'd rather ban people on the spur of the moment then vote or allow the defendants to explain themselves in an open trial of their peers, hypocrites and pseudo-comrades, the whole lot of em'!
Now that's what I call "comradely criticism". :lol:

Ok, "RedComrade", let's get specific.

Who got banned unjustly?

Just take your time, no hurry, but come up with some usernames or I, at least, will conclude that you are blowing smoke out of your ass.

The same offer applies to others...who are the "intelligent oppositionists" that we have banned?

Or is it restrictions that you are complaining about?

I can understand the cappies pissing and moaning; they would not be happy unless they could pollute the entire board with their nonsense...and the entire planet for that matter.

It ain't gonna happen here. Get over it!

Malte, who is the owner of this board, established a policy almost from the beginning that "Stalinists" would be restricted to Opposing Ideologies.

For many reasons, he doesn't like "Stalinists"...especially teen-age "Stalinists". Currently, there are, I believe, three "grown-up" "Stalinists" who are allowed to post in all the other forums.

You may think this is "unfair"...and perhaps you are justified in that feeling.

But you will find, I think, that it is the universal practice among message boards that the owner calls the shots.

Message boards are not "soviets".

Having said that, it should also be noted that there is always considerable discussion in the private forum on bannings, restrictions, and other board policies...which, on occasion, have persuaded Malte to change his mind.

In that sense, I have been informed that Che-Lives is actually far more democratic than most message boards...in which the owners simply ban people without comment.

A "totally democratic" message board on the internet that would also be open to anyone who could do a google search is clearly a practical impossibility.

Consider what would happen to Che-Lives if our recent influx of Rand-cultists were "allowed to make policy"? Since there are normally less than 100 active members at any given time, it wouldn't take many to totally trash the whole board.

Malte will not permit that to happen. If I were in his position, I wouldn't either.

If you think this is "a fucking outrage" or that it makes us "red fascists", tough shit!

From time to time, people who have been restricted are unrestricted...usually because their posts have shown that they have "grown up" a bit. It's always a possibility.

You might want to think about that before you post another "this is an outrage" epistle.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Ok I believe I have done nothing wrong.If you are gonna criticize the way I debate,you need to criticize the people I am debating with as well because it is just as much there problem as it is mine.I believe that I have made some good contributions to this board.I just think the restriction was totally random.I could understand a few instances where I acted up and wouldn't have been suprised or complained much about restriction,but that was in the past,now this seems odd and absurd.I am certainly very angry.I suppose you all think you're very clever.I would disagree.

[kylieII]

I agree, it does seem odd that people who don't troll or spam are restricted. It as has been pointed out before just prevents criticism and evaluation, which is how theories become stronger. Its ironic how similar that is to the criticisms a lot apply to the soviet union, of it not allowing opposing views.
It goes along with the view some seem to have, not all but some, that marxism is a perfect theory with no flaws. All those who do not follow it exactly according to the holy Marx texts is obviously incorrect, a counter revolutionairy and secretly wants to enslave everyone.

[BuyOurEverything]

redstar: While I completely understand and agree with and understand the 'official line' of Che-Lives that you're espousing, I have a particular disagreement with Comrade Ceausescu, Bolshevika and Elijahcraig remaining restricted. They are, from what I've seen fairly rational and courteous. Who hasn't resorted to name calling and irrational arguments at some point? There are quite a few people who do it alot more than any of the 'Stalinists' who have just been restricted. If that's our rationale for restricting people, there should be alot more people on the list. Perhaps a certain someone who never uses punctuation? Or maybe that guy who defending CASTRO_SUCKS?

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Thank you all for the support but it seems that this is what is going to happen.The ADMIN I pm'd is barely even hearing me out.

[Rasta Sapian]

blaaaa blaaaa blaaaaaa

[Bolshevika]

Well, it's official, the "Stalinists" are being banned for gaining too much influence and convincing various members and violating the "Anti-authoritarian" revisionist line. Anti authoritarian autocrats :angry:

[LuZhiming]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 09:41 PM
Or maybe that guy who defending CASTRO_SUCKS?
What's wrong with that?

[ernestolynch]

If Che himself posted here - how long before he would get 'restricted'?

A serious question to those who support the 'restricting' of Communists on this forum.

If you can't or won't answer that question then your dishonesty will be revealed. How about you put it up as a poll in your Trotsky Club, sorry I meant Tufty Club.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

blaaaa blaaaa blaaaaaa

And you accuse us of fucking spamming?

[ernestolynch]

Originally posted by Rasta [email protected] 14 2004, 10:24 PM
blaaaa blaaaa blaaaaaa
Great contribution, kid.

[redstar2000]

...I have a particular disagreement with Comrade Ceausescu, Bolshevika and Elijahcraig remaining restricted.--BuyOurEverything

I'm not wild about the idea myself; if I were the owner of the board, I'd probably unrestrict them and see how they did.

But I'm not...the owner of the board, that is.

You know it's not always "an easy call". If you restrict everybody that you seriously disagree with, then you have one forum "where all the action is" and all the other forums wither and die.

But if you don't do some restricting, then you find yourself rewriting the same posts over and over again, refuting "arguments" that are so stupid that they practically drool.

I think what happens with a "live" message board is that over a period of time it develops a kind of "culture". People who find that "culture" comfortable have no worries about being restricted or banned...no one would "want" to do that. As you know, almost all threads in the private forum that propose restrictions or bans on "nominal leftists" lose...people at Che-Lives "don't like" to ban or restrict people.

People who are fairly distant from the message board's "culture" and who have, in addition, an aggressive and even hostile attitude, are very likely to be restricted and, if they are "real assholes", even banned.

What would happen to me if I went to a "Stalinist" board and just "ripped into" those people, really tried to "tear them a new asshole" in every thread? You don't think they'd look around at each other and mutually exclaim "Who needs this prick? Ban his obnoxious ass!"?

I wouldn't be "part of their culture".

One thing I've never entirely understood about the attitude that many people have towards message boards--I'm speaking of those who seek out boards where they know that nearly everyone completely disagrees with them.

Why do that? What's the point?

Over the last year, I've "checked out" a lot of boards; I settled quickly on this board because I discovered people here that were interested in what I had to say, prepared to give my ideas serious consideration.

If I said the same things that I say here at other message boards, people would just think I was a "dumb shithead" and would, no doubt, tell me so. Why would I want to hear that?

Why attempt to "hang out" at message boards where people really don't want to hear what you have to say?

I can't figure that one out...at all.


If Che himself posted here - how long before he would get 'restricted'?

Dumb question. Che would "restrict" himself...to the Spanish Forum.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Whatever.I do not think you have to have the same ideologies to be in the same "culture".And I really haven't done that "ripping" thing you described in quite a while.

[Ortega]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 04:41 PM
Or maybe that guy who defending CASTRO_SUCKS?
At least I never spammed or trolled...

And besides, I was never a Capitalist or Stalinist anyway. I was just defending a new member, and I backed off when his posts got more and more irrational and bordering on trolling and flaming.

I'd say these guys deserve to be restricted a lot more than I did...

[ernestolynch]

So what is this 'culture' of which you speak, RS2000?

[Comrade Ceausescu]

At least I never spammed or trolled...

And besides, I was never a Capitalist or Stalinist anyway. I was just defending a new member, and I backed off when his posts got more and more irrational and bordering on trolling and flaming.

I'd say these guys deserve to be restricted a lot more than I did...

Easy for you to say.I thought you tolerated me....Little did I know....

[Ortega]

ernestolynch, I am sickened by your avatar. Apparently you've changed it now, probably just to get back onto the board, but I've realized for the first time that you were using for your avatar a picture of an ice pick from cominform, a supposed picture of the ice pick that killed Trotsky.
It sickens me that anyone could be so full of hate toward one man, especially one with whom they have merely political differences.

[ernestolynch]

:ph34r:

It was meant to sicken. Revolutions aren't picnics, kid.

[Ortega]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 06:57 PM
:ph34r:

It was meant to sicken. Revolutions aren't picnics, kid.
What does this have to do with Trotsky? Trotsky's death had nothing to do with any sort of popular revolution - he had been exiled and was living a peaceful life abroad, when your hero Papa Joe sent a KGB agent to drive an ice pick through his head!

[Vinny Rafarino]

I've realized for the first time that you were using for your avatar a picture of an ice pick from cominform, a supposed picture of the ice pick that killed Trotsky.



One of the best avatars I have seen actually...I go a kick out of it...



Good grief...I think saying that it "sickens" you would be more dramatic than......perhaps an off Broadway production of "Oklahoma".


Did I land on Bizarro-world here comrade Lynch?

[ernestolynch]

Thank you for the kind words Cde RAF.

Another hero...

http://www.zonezero.com/editorial/agosto01/images/siqueiros.jpg

Machine-gun attack on an anti-communist FBI informer. (http://revolutionarydemocracy.org/rdv6n1/trotsky.htm)

[ernestolynch]

I would like to add my thanks for all the PMs of support I have had from fellow Communists and true supporters of the beliefs of El Che.

Much appreciated, like.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

ernestoLynch,did you get my pm?

[ernestolynch]

Yes yes CC!

I am starting to warm to the idea of Guevarists and Communists being 'restricted' on these boards...quite ironic.

I like it in here!

[Ortega]

No true Guevarists have been restricted. This board was made for Guevarists. Stalinists posing as Guevarists are a different story...

[ernestolynch]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 12:26 AM
No true Guevarists have been restricted. This board was made for Guevarists. Stalinists posing as Guevarists are a different story...
Perhaps you would like to explain the difference between the two terms....

[Monty Cantsin]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 12:12 AM
Another hero...

Why he tried to kill someone and then got thrown into jail. Complete wast of time, his a real losers.

[ernestolynch]

Originally posted by euripidies+Jan 15 2004, 12:34 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (euripidies @ Jan 15 2004, 12:34 AM)
[email protected] 15 2004, 12:12 AM
Another hero...

Why he tried to kill someone and then got thrown into jail. Complete wast of time, his a real losers. [/b]
So other &#39;losers&#39; because they spent time in jail would include:

Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Josef Stalin, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Huey Newton, Bobby Seale....you get my drift?

Are all &#39;his a real losers&#39; as well?

[Ortega]

Originally posted by ernestolynch+Jan 14 2004, 07:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (ernestolynch @ Jan 14 2004, 07:36 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 12:34 AM

[email protected] 15 2004, 12:12 AM
Another hero...

Why he tried to kill someone and then got thrown into jail. Complete wast of time, his a real losers.
So other &#39;losers&#39; because they spent time in jail would include:

Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Josef Stalin, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Huey Newton, Bobby Seale....you get my drift?

Are all &#39;his a real losers&#39; as well? [/b]
They all had causes - and good ones too. The man you called a "hero" just didn&#39;t like Trotsky.

[ernestolynch]

Originally posted by ernestolynch+Jan 15 2004, 12:28 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (ernestolynch @ Jan 15 2004, 12:28 AM)
[email protected] 15 2004, 12:26 AM
No true Guevarists have been restricted. This board was made for Guevarists. Stalinists posing as Guevarists are a different story...
Perhaps you would like to explain the difference between the two terms.... [/b]
Shall I wait until you google frantically for 3 hours then PM one of the Tufty Club?

[Jesus Christ]

http://www.mccsc.edu/~lschmidt/baby.gif

[ernestolynch]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 12:39 AM

They all had causes - and good ones too. The man you called a "hero" just didn&#39;t like Trotsky.
Erm...he was actually a Mexican Communist who fought in the Spanish Civil War and tried to take out Trot because he was informing on Communists for the FBI. Francoists were also courting and recruiting Trotsyites in Mexico in 1938.

Shame his aim wasn&#39;t so good though.

[Ortega]

Shall I wait until you google frantically for 3 hours then PM one of the Tufty Club?

I think you can figure it out very well on your own. I have to go, anyway.

[Bolshevika]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 12:26 AM
No true Guevarists have been restricted. This board was made for Guevarists. Stalinists posing as Guevarists are a different story...
Are you sure about this?

Che - Was a communist, admired Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, was faithful and nice to friends but vicious to enemies, disliked Trots, disliked revisionist regimes, and was a Pan-Latin Americanist/Bolivarian.

I am almost exactly like this, so is Ceausescu, Ernesto, and others who&#39;ve been banned.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 06:51 PM
So what is this &#39;culture&#39; of which you speak, RS2000?
Well, it is clearly anti-authoritarian for one thing; I should think that would be obvious.

Yes, I know, you think we are "hypocrites" by virtue of exercising authority in the name of anti-authoritarianism.

But what else is there to do? We&#39;ll shoot fascists (when we get the chance), won&#39;t we?

Why? Because otherwise, they&#39;ll shoot us.

What would you do to us on this board, if you had the chance? Icepicks?

What did Lenin do to the Russian anarchists? What did Stalin&#39;s followers do to the Spanish anarcho-syndicalists?

Why should we expect you to behave any differently, if you had the chance?

Perhaps you&#39;ll appreciate this little witticism (sorry to those who&#39;ve heard it before): I was once referred to at a meeting as an "anarcho-stalinist" for merely suggesting that anyone who stands up and starts giving orders should be taken out and summarily shot. :D

Then again, perhaps you would not find that so amusing after all.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Bolshevika]

Redstar if I had a board like Che-Lives I would run it in a similar fashion as Joon does with ISF, I would allow everyone to put up a debate.

The only people who deserve bans are people like "Communist_Revolutionary" who went to a board where he heard "Stalinists" hung out and started spamming.

Everyone deserves to be heard in healthy debate. Even the civilized capitalists (these are a minority)&#33;

[Ortega]

Originally posted by Bolshevika+Jan 14 2004, 07:56 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bolshevika @ Jan 14 2004, 07:56 PM)
[email protected] 15 2004, 12:26 AM
No true Guevarists have been restricted. This board was made for Guevarists. Stalinists posing as Guevarists are a different story...
Are you sure about this?

Che - Was a communist, admired Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, was faithful and nice to friends but vicious to enemies, disliked Trots, disliked revisionist regimes, and was a Pan-Latin Americanist/Bolivarian.

I am almost exactly like this, so is Ceausescu, Ernesto, and others who&#39;ve been banned. [/b]
I can agree that you may be a Guevarist, and deserve to be unrestricted. I&#39;m fully in support of your unrestriction...

But as for the rest of them, I&#39;m not so sure <_<

[Bolshevika]

The other two comrades deserve unrestriction as well. Even Zeke, who is a Titoist does not deserve restricted status. This is my last post in this thread for the night.

[Ortega]

I agree that Zeke should be unrestricted as well - I forgot about him.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Ortega,what did I ever do to you?

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Hey Jesus Christ you wanna add something mildly useful to the thread or just be a prick?

[Pete]

Joon&#39;s board isn&#39;t going any where fast, and in my browsings of it, the theory presented by most of the members has the feel of nostaglia and the love of days long past. Just personal observation.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

I don&#39;t give a shit,really.He tolerates all other views,which is more then I can say for this site. <_<

[ernestolynch]

Who&#39;s complaining?

a) This is the busiest forum on the Che-Betrayed boards by miles.

b) This is the only forum where there is a majority of Communists - less Liberals, Hippies, Pot-heads and Ecologists&#33;

[synthesis]

This is the only forum where there is a majority of Communists - less Liberals, Hippies, Pot-heads and Ecologists&#33;

Ecologists? Are you implying that environmentalism is anti-Communist?


This is the busiest forum on the Che-Betrayed boards by miles.

Clever. Actually, no, no it isn&#39;t, because OI places third behind Politics and (sadly) Chit Chat. :)

[Comrade Zeke]

How are we supposed to go back into the other debats if were quoate "BANNDED"&#33;&#33; this is so unfair this is against are Communist princapals. Why do you supposed we were banned anyway??
And what is a Revsionist??? :D
Comments?

[ernestolynch]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 08:14 AM

This is the only forum where there is a majority of Communists - less Liberals, Hippies, Pot-heads and Ecologists&#33;

Ecologists? Are you implying that environmentalism is anti-Communist?


This is the busiest forum on the Che-Betrayed boards by miles.

Clever. Actually, no, no it isn&#39;t, because OI places third behind Politics and (sadly) Chit Chat. :)

the majority of Greens and Ecologists are pro-capitalism - most Fascists are Ecologists as well - your point is meaningless
The busiest fora on Che-Betrayed:

1. &#39;Chit-Chat&#39; (&#39;What is your favriote color&#39;?) 82464 posts
2. &#39;Opposing Ideologies&#39; 75015 posts
3. &#39;Politics&#39; 48401 posts



For a &#39;moderator&#39; you have surprisingly little knowledge of the board you &#39;moderate&#39;.

[redstar2000]

Redstar if I had a board like Che-Lives I would run it in a similar fashion as Joon does with ISF, I would allow everyone to put up a debate.

Then why aren&#39;t you there instead of here?

Were you banned at ISF? Or is there just "no action" there?

If you feel more comfortable with ISF&#39;s "culture"--which was the point I was trying to make--then why wouldn&#39;t you stay there where you feel welcomed instead of coming here where attitudes are...somewhat different?

Stay or go as you please--that applies to all of you, by the way--but understand that political necrophilia is never going to enjoy a warm welcome here.

Sorry about that. ;)

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Ortega]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 14 2004, 10:09 PM
Ortega,what did I ever do to you?
Nothing.

I just agree that your political views might neccesitate restriction.

[ernestolynch]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 11:40 AM



If you feel more comfortable with ISF&#39;s "culture"--which was the point I was trying to make--then why wouldn&#39;t you stay there where you feel welcomed instead of coming here where attitudes are...somewhat different?

Stay or go as you please--that applies to all of you, by the way--but understand that political necrophilia is never going to enjoy a warm welcome here.

Sorry about that. ;)

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas
Shall we take our &#39;smelly foreign food and customs&#39; with us as well?

Your point about &#39;political necrophilia&#39; - not welcome on a board called CHE-LIVES....

<_<

[Al Creed]

Hey, who came up with the clever "Che-Betrayed" line?[/sarcasm]

From my understanding, people are restricted to this forum because, long long ago, people with "opposing ideologies" would disrupt every thread, and turn it into a "Communism vs Capitalism" debate, and from what I have heard, "debate" is a nice way of saying "pointless, childish fighting."

As well, from my understanding, there are strict guidelines and rules Malte has to follow, or else the German government would be all over him like a blanket on a bed.

[ernestolynch]

Can someone direct me to the guidelines which rule out Guevarist thought in all fora bar the one reserved for &#39;Misguided Individuals&#39;?

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Nothing.

I just agree that your political views might neccesitate restriction.



You disgust me.Bolshevika and I have neraly the exact same beliefs.

[Ortega]

But Bolshevika has served his time in the OI, as will you probably. He&#39;s learned any lessons he was supposed to learn. He&#39;s probably been caged too long if you ask me...

[Comrade Zeke]

So No one ever answears my questions I aksed why do you supposed were are quoate "Banned" And why does everyone forget about me once I dont put up any messages........if I ever decide to leave are my fellow Comrades going to forget about me the Titoist???? :( :( :( :(

[Ortega]

I don&#39;t know why you were banned, Zeke. You never did anything wrong, or at least nothing that I could see.
If anyone deserves to be unrestricted, it&#39;s you.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Why should I have to serve time in the OI?I mean,anyway I&#39;m nearly dead from the irony of the situation.What you are doing here is exactly what you accuse the "Stalinists" of doing.

[RedComrade]

Originally posted by redstar2000+Jan 14 2004, 04:09 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (redstar2000 @ Jan 14 2004, 04:09 AM)
[email protected] 13 2004, 09:43 PM
The point is there are some fascists in red clothes on here who don&#39;t like the idea of intelligent opposition, they&#39;d rather ban people on the spur of the moment then vote or allow the defendants to explain themselves in an open trial of their peers, hypocrites and pseudo-comrades, the whole lot of em&#39;&#33;
Now that&#39;s what I call "comradely criticism". :lol:

Ok, "RedComrade", let&#39;s get specific.

Who got banned unjustly?

Just take your time, no hurry, but come up with some usernames or I, at least, will conclude that you are blowing smoke out of your ass.

The same offer applies to others...who are the "intelligent oppositionists" that we have banned?

Or is it restrictions that you are complaining about?

I can understand the cappies pissing and moaning; they would not be happy unless they could pollute the entire board with their nonsense...and the entire planet for that matter.

It ain&#39;t gonna happen here. Get over it&#33;

Malte, who is the owner of this board, established a policy almost from the beginning that "Stalinists" would be restricted to Opposing Ideologies.

For many reasons, he doesn&#39;t like "Stalinists"...especially teen-age "Stalinists". Currently, there are, I believe, three "grown-up" "Stalinists" who are allowed to post in all the other forums.

You may think this is "unfair"...and perhaps you are justified in that feeling.

But you will find, I think, that it is the universal practice among message boards that the owner calls the shots.

Message boards are not "soviets".

Having said that, it should also be noted that there is always considerable discussion in the private forum on bannings, restrictions, and other board policies...which, on occasion, have persuaded Malte to change his mind.

In that sense, I have been informed that Che-Lives is actually far more democratic than most message boards...in which the owners simply ban people without comment.

A "totally democratic" message board on the internet that would also be open to anyone who could do a google search is clearly a practical impossibility.

Consider what would happen to Che-Lives if our recent influx of Rand-cultists were "allowed to make policy"? Since there are normally less than 100 active members at any given time, it wouldn&#39;t take many to totally trash the whole board.

Malte will not permit that to happen. If I were in his position, I wouldn&#39;t either.

If you think this is "a fucking outrage" or that it makes us "red fascists", tough shit&#33;

From time to time, people who have been restricted are unrestricted...usually because their posts have shown that they have "grown up" a bit. It&#39;s always a possibility.

You might want to think about that before you post another "this is an outrage" epistle.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas [/b]
When I said banned I meant restricted, I dont typically frequent internet message boards so my apologies for the mix-up on jargon. It was restrictions I was talking about.

The red fascists shit was uncalled for, I apologize for saying it. I was not meaning for that comment to be directed at the mods or members in general, or even against whoever was responsible for the restrictions.

[Ortega]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 15 2004, 09:33 PM
Why should I have to serve time in the OI?I mean,anyway I&#39;m nearly dead from the irony of the situation.What you are doing here is exactly what you accuse the "Stalinists" of doing.
This is Malte&#39;s board, and he didn&#39;t make it for Stalinists. There are plenty of Stalinist boards all over the internet. If you want to stay here and keep posting, that&#39;s what OI is for, I guess.
If you can prove that you are capaple of calm, intelligent debate, then maybe you&#39;ll be let back into the rest of the board by the admins...

[Bolshevika]

If this board isn&#39;t for "Stalinists" than why is Che Guevara your poster boy? Is that to sell shirts?

[Comrade Zeke]

Ortega what do you beilive in???? What thergoy of Communism??? LIberal,Castroism,Titoism,Torkism,Stalinism,Libera l Socialism what?
:huh: