malte editing my posts? - come on malte, you are better than [Archive]

MEXCAN

30th January 2003, 03:56

http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...c=1489&start=20 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=22&topic=1489&start=20) for "SPIC"
and here for "CUBAN MUDS" http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...c=1489&start=30 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=22&topic=1489&start=30)

(Edited by MEXCAN at 3:58 am on Jan. 30, 2003)

Anonymous

30th January 2003, 03:56

Chavez Plans for Terrorist Regime (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=22&topic=1489)

Sasafrás

30th January 2003, 04:00

Fuck... Nateddi's a fucking hypocrite. And I've heard he's, like, damn near Stalinist as well.. Hmm.

MEXCAN

30th January 2003, 04:03

should take away NAteddi's avatar as well!!!It says "SOLIDARIDAD".I must ask,"solidaridad" for what ??

Sasafrás

30th January 2003, 04:08

Hey, MEXCAN, just in case you didn't notice... I just sent you a PM..

sin miedo

30th January 2003, 04:08

He always seemed kinda off to me. Sometimes he straight up pissed me off. I think he should apologize for using those terms, and if he's fuckin with posts, his admin. capabilities should be revoked.

(Edited by sin miedo at 9:22 am on Jan. 30, 2003)

Michael De Panama

30th January 2003, 04:35

Nateddi is a mod? Who the fuck is responsible for doing that? Nateddi's a Stalin apologist. Plus, he greatly abused his mod powers on the Phora.

Whoever is editing FV's posts is a complete coward. I understand the underlying humor of changing a person's avatar or signiture, the same as writing "Storming Moron" underneath a person's avatar, but changing the content of their arguments is absolute bullshit that should not be tolerated by any self-respecting member of either side of the political spectrum.

Michael De Panama

30th January 2003, 04:42

Seriously, Malte, RedCeltic, D Day, take away Nateddi's mod status as soon as fucking possible. Jesus Christ.

FreeVenezuela

30th January 2003, 17:03

Quote: from Michael De Panama on 4:35 am on Jan. 30, 2003

Whoever is editing FV's posts is a complete coward.

I agree.

Nateddi

30th January 2003, 17:27

Who the hell said I was a mod?

I am not a mod, and it was red celtic fucking with JoseM's signature not me.

The racial slurs are fucking laughable. I am one the most vehement supporters of the Bolivarian nationalist movements in Latin America, Fidel Castro, Lula, and Hugo Chavez on this board. Hugo Chavez is the first non-white president of Venezuela, pseudo-apartheid nation where whites are a minority.

I thank the leftists on this board for shitting on me, I guess I'm now a "stalinist apologist", such typical lefty rhetoric from depanama. Everyone here seems to insist I'm a mod, yet most know me as a bitter opponent of malte's totalitarianism and his croanies that he installed to rule the board by decree and ban all leftists who don't recall free weed as the opening line of the Manifesto.

Nateddi

30th January 2003, 17:46

Fuck this place. I shit on all of you cowards. JoseM, De Panama, Sol (until you take the Mexican liberator out of your avatar or adjust your views), all of you fuckers that believe the right-wing lies of the venezuela's elite-run commercial media that freely broadcasts anti-Chavez propaganda in place of soap ads. Mexcan, I apologize for my language, I've really tried to articulate my support for true Latin American struggles, I wish for you to not consider me as a racist. The real racists are the white motherfuckers in Caracas like Pinochet-style business leader Pedro Carmona, living in their militarized apartment complexes and dictating the people into marching against the first ever government led by a leader of mestizo and african decent.

This place is completely worthless and its only getting worse. The educated left should abandon this place, this means all of you folks that led the popular uprising against Malte's dictatorship in the last couple of months, mainly against his policy of ideology clensing and auto-bans of everyone on the disagreeing left. Leave idiots like depanama to try and use their minds in arguing against the capitalists, it'll give them somethign better to do than spew buzzwords on other leftists.

For those who know me, you know where to find me, but I won't be here thats for sure.

VIVA CHAVEZ Y VIVA LA REVOLUCION BOLIVARIANA

Hampton

30th January 2003, 17:47

Sooo, because you support Chavez you can use racial slurs? If you supported the Black Panthers would go around using the "N word"?

Edelweiss

30th January 2003, 18:02

"he educated left should abandon this place, this means all of you folks that led the popular uprising against Malte's dictatorship in the last couple of months, mainly against his policy of ideology clensing and auto-bans of everyone on the disagreeing left. "

This is highly exaggerated, you dickhead, and you now it! You are still here, right? And you have insulted me more than once, here and at thephora. I banned a very few Stalinists spammers (altogether 5!) to turn this place into Che-Lives agin, before it was "Stalin-Lives" cause all threads turned into flame wars beween Stalinists and leftists. And now I have even let the Stalinits come back within this reanamed forum, so what the hell is your problem?

timbaly

30th January 2003, 18:49

I'm just curious, would you mind telling us who those 5 people were?

Capitalist Imperial

30th January 2003, 19:16

Racism has no place here, but I must say I am almost as offended by La Rainbeaux's Barry Manilow Avatar

I feel violated.

mentalbunny

30th January 2003, 19:21

Nateddi, calm down.

Everyone else, I think you are being too quick to judge. It has come to light that Nateddi cannot edit posts, etc so obviously someone else is doing it. Please could someone post links to the edited posts.

I am not about to leave che-lives, I don't think it's bad that Malte banned a couple of those spammers. If they could actually say something worthwhile about their ideology then it would be different but there is a huge difference between healthy, constructive debate and what was happening here. It's bad enough having Mazdak teaming up with CI here, but with "stalinists" (notice inverted commas) running all over the place it was impossible to hold a decent discussion.

Everyone give nateddi a break, Nateddi, try to control your temper. I read this thread earlier today and wasn't sure what to make of it, I didn't want to point the finger but it is now clear that Nateddi isn't guilty of abusing his Mod status, so can we stop having a go at him now?

Thank you for your time, I'm jsut trying to keep the peace here.

Michael De Panama

30th January 2003, 19:58

What rightwing lies about Venezuela am I believing in? I don't know enough about Venezuela or Chavez to say I support or don't support the system there.

I've never once commented on Venezuela. I just don't like the idea of somebody editing the content of someone's posts, and I do recall from my experience on the Phora that you would close and delete topics you didn't like. When I asked you why you are disgracing the left by saying you support Osama bin Laden and his group of religiously psychotic capitalists, you deleted my posts.

Sorry for being so quick to judge, though.

Are you denying that you are a Stalin apologist? From what I saw on the Phora, you're a full blown Soviet reactionary. You made plenty of anti-semetic comments. You made plenty of pro-Stalin comments. You even made pro-Saddam Hussein and pro-Osama bin Laden comments. You aren't a leftist. You're a dumbass kid trying to piss people off.

EDIT: Just to add something. I honestly don't give a shit about the racial slurs. Words alone don't piss me off. I don't care about political correctness. I know exactly why you wanted you use racial slurs. It just further proves my earlier statement about you being a dumbass kid just trying to piss people off. Go ahead and use them all you want. You aren't pissing me off. Moron.

(Edited by Michael De Panama at 2:06 pm on Jan. 30, 2003)

Edelweiss

30th January 2003, 20:08

"I just don't like the idea of somebody editing the content of someone's posts, and I do recall from my experience on the Phora that you would close and delete topics you didn't like. "

I didn't knew that. Nateddi is such a fucking hypocrite, he's complaining about my "totalitarian regime" and when he gets some mod power he is going further than I ever went here at che-lives. How pathetic. (I never have eited posts, and I never have deleted or edited any stalinists posts!).

Anonymous

30th January 2003, 20:16

Why is his name red if he's not a mod?

Tkinter1

30th January 2003, 20:24

Nateddi,

are you black?

Anonymous

30th January 2003, 20:34

He's from the Ukraine.

Edelweiss

30th January 2003, 20:43

Quote: from Dark Capitalist on 8:16 pm on Jan. 30, 2003
Why is his name red if he's not a mod?

Because he has mod powers in the newswire forum, so he can post news there. But only in the newwire forum, in no other one.

mentalbunny

30th January 2003, 20:47

This is not about Nateddi, this is about who is editing FV's posts. Can we get back onto that subject please?

Moskitto

30th January 2003, 21:13

how many times have any of you ever used your moderator powers.

I deleted one of MaxB's topics after I saw the same article posted for the 5th time in a week and I deleted a double post by Larissa.

Mazdak

30th January 2003, 23:26

Stalin lives eh?

Malte there were about 5 stalinists here. i dont understand how 5 stalinists in a board with over 1000 members suddenly can suddnely get such a great say. We turned threads into stalin debates when he was bashed. What the hell did you expect us to do. You criticize stalin to death and we are supposed to accept this? This site is pretty full of shit. Nateddi made racist comments?ROFLMAO.

Get over your obsession with political correctness.
You oversensitive idiots. Stop crying and enter the real world.

Guest

31st January 2003, 00:01

I still don't understand how Mazdak spammed. He wasn't the one that started threads such as "Stalinists: ignorant bastards" or "Stalin fucked it for the rest of us" or any other threads which their only argument against Stalin is politicak necrophilia.

Edelweiss

31st January 2003, 00:05

. Stop crying and enter the real world.

Funny to hear that from YOU.

Edelweiss

31st January 2003, 00:14

Mazdak, although there were only 5 stalinists here, the board was full of deabats on Stalimism. members like vox, who always made high quality posts, invested all their energy on that silly debates, and finally even left the board frustrated. Since 1 vox is worth as 1000 Stalinists never could be for the quality of the board, something had to be done.

Mazdak

31st January 2003, 00:15

Well, i am not the one who puts such faith in human goodness. I think i have the real world figured out pretty well. My stay here is basically because i know i am not welcome. as long as that fact remains, i feel an obligation to maintain my presence.

Guest

31st January 2003, 00:16

He was forced to debate with them? And who started threads like "Stalin fucked it for the rest of us" and other political necrophilia?

Mazdak

31st January 2003, 00:20

not to question Vox's abilities, however i seriously doubt some of the stalinists are only worth 1/1000 of vox. Cassius Clay, Lenin, and quite a few others presented themselves quite well while they were here. I have no questioning vox's ability to debate, but belittling the others is a foolish idea. And once again, how is it the fault of the stalinists that they were consistently bashed. It would be like us continuosly bashing ghandi or marx here and expecting no complaints. If vox could have debated elsewhere, we didnt ask him to attempt to discredit stalin.

Saint-Just

31st January 2003, 16:14

If i'm only worth a 1/1000 of Vox, he must be some kind of god.

Red Revolution

31st January 2003, 21:46

Why the hell isnt Mazdak a mod. Hes been here since the days of Apache for craps sake

Mazdak

31st January 2003, 22:21

Very Well said chairman mao.

And RR, the fact is, its difficult to make me a moderator when most of my time here is spent dodging ip blocks and bans. I am barely able to post here. The last thing i or any stalinist has a chance for here is being mod. only the liberatarian side gets that privelege. ;)

Cassius Clay

31st January 2003, 23:00

Malte, while I appreciate the responsbility's, difficulties and above all I suppose a certain enjoyment you have in running this place, I still fail to see why I pacificly was banned?

I appreciate you letting me back and believe it or not I can understand you not wanting to have this whole board become mired in the 'Stalin saint or devil' debate. Afterall this place you set up as a forum for admirers of Che.

But it was one Peacenicked who continously set up threads full of insults, swearing and the theory 'If I shout the loudest that means I'm right', he was then met with a counter-argument and would then set up another such thread a few days later.

We felt obliged to offer at the least a counter-argument to the rather stupid threads that were allways started by someone else.

Why was I banned Malte? I made no anti-semitic, homophobic or rascist remarks on the contray infact, all the nice Register form says is 'Stalinists will not find many friends here' and as such I didn't but I broke none of the rules.

RedCeltic

31st January 2003, 23:10

I think Clay makes a good point. Perhaps the fault of every argument being a Stalinist vs Leftist shouldn't lay only with the Stalinists but us Leftists as well.

We need to work past this rift argument once and for all.

Mazdak

1st February 2003, 00:45

Finally! Finally someone sees. For example, To add insult to injury, Malte or a mod had a stalin bashing thread made a STICKY thread. How can one expect the stalinists to respond to such an insult?

Behind enemy lines

1st February 2003, 08:25

I have no problem with stalinists posting here. I don't think any of their rights should be restricted. As long as they don't break any rules they should be able to go where they please. If people don't like there posts, don't read or reply to them.

nz revolution

1st February 2003, 08:47

Hear Hear.

Let them roam free like the rest of us.

Democracy needs to be practiced, hear both sides of an arguement, how can progress be made otherwise?

Dhul Fiqar

1st February 2003, 09:57

Quote: from Mazdak on 8:15 am on Jan. 31, 2003
I think i have the real world figured out pretty well.

LOL, sorry dude, I have nothing personally against you... BUT... coming from a Stalin apologist, this is just about the most amusing comment I've seen in a long time :)

It would be interesting to see how you guys felt about the world-view you've constructed if you actually got sent to one of Stalin's gulags for no good reason. Authoritarianism is only fun if YOU are in power ;)

--- G.

(Edited by Dhul Fiqar at 5:59 pm on Feb. 1, 2003)

Stormin Norman

1st February 2003, 11:56

Vox is a Stalinist.

If you are looking for the fuckhead who edits other people's posts, look no further than James.

Red Revolution

1st February 2003, 14:23

Yo, Malte and mods we see how you deal with stalinists what then do you do with Maoists, are they commie enough or mabye they're too commie, i dunno...

ComradeJunichi

1st February 2003, 15:07

If you're banned here, why bother trying to come back? I don't see why anyone would take the time to try and talk to "liberal babies".

I say if you're banned and you know join my board! *clap clap*

guerrillaradio

1st February 2003, 15:13

Quote: from nz revolution on 8:47 am on Feb. 1, 2003
Hear Hear.

Let them roam free like the rest of us.

I disagree. Stalinists are caged for the same reason as Capitalists, that being that, either accidentally or deliberately, they alter the majority of threads they participate in into a Stalinist debate (the original photos thread in Chit Chat was hijacked by RSCCCP to row with Michael over Stalin). Of course, as RC says, there's two sides to it, but without the Stalinist presence throughout the board, it is much more constructive. I support the renamed Ideologies board.

Mazdak

1st February 2003, 17:19

RSCCCP isnt here anymore, and he doesnt represent all of us. Just because one or two times we "hijacked" threads shouldnt mean it is right to cage us here and continuously attack stalin every chance you get.

Mazdak

1st February 2003, 17:24

Quote: from Dhul Fiqar on 9:57 am on Feb. 1, 2003

Quote: from Mazdak on 8:15 am on Jan. 31, 2003
I think i have the real world figured out pretty well.

Its not meant to be fun. Its meant to be productive and effecient.

And to add to my reply to guerrillaradio, i dont see how banning/restricting/blocking the only source of debate is constructive. The stalinists were the only other leftists who were actually debated against here. One goes to a message board to debate others with different opinions, not simply to agree with everything said.

LOL, sorry dude, I have nothing personally against you... BUT... coming from a Stalin apologist, this is just about the most amusing comment I've seen in a long time :)

It would be interesting to see how you guys felt about the world-view you've constructed if you actually got sent to one of Stalin's gulags for no good reason. Authoritarianism is only fun if YOU are in power ;)

--- G.

(Edited by Dhul Fiqar at 5:59 pm on Feb. 1, 2003)

ComradeJunichi

1st February 2003, 17:33

Quote: from Mazdak on 5:19 pm on Feb. 1, 2003
RSCCCP isnt here anymore, and he doesnt represent all of us. Just because one or two times we "hijacked" threads shouldnt mean it is right to cage us here and continuously attack stalin every chance you get.

I strongly agree, but I'm not a stalinist. It wasn't only stalinists who were banned, I think some Marxist-Leninists were banned also. If they are going to ban stalinists, so be it - my boards open :P

guerrillaradio

1st February 2003, 22:25

Quote: from Mazdak on 5:19 pm on Feb. 1, 2003
...continuously attack stalin every chance you get.

That's precisely what we're (or whoever it is in charge of this) trying to avoid by doing this.

Mazdak

2nd February 2003, 01:29

No, you began with attacks on stalin. So we felt it our duty to defend him. So you in fact are defeating your own argument.

Dhul Fiqar

2nd February 2003, 09:47

LOL, now Stalinism is efficient? Spending half of every nickle you make on suppressing free speech and dissent is not my idea of efficiency, but I suppose it depends on what you want to get up to and how much the people you're oppressing want to stop you.

In all honesty, and I don't mean to be mean about this particular point, I think someone who sees himself as a Stalinist could really help himself with some therapy or anti-depressants or something to that effect. It makes about as much rational sense as being a "Hitlerist", basing your beliefs on the actions of a madman who would just as soon kill you and your whole family is not only contradictory, it's morally bankrupt. I just hope you all work these things out for yourselves...

I agree that no amount of namecalling and flame wars is going to help the situation.

--- G.

Cassius Clay

2nd February 2003, 11:42

''LOL, now Stalinism is efficient? Spending half of every nickle you make on suppressing free speech and dissent is not my idea of efficiency, but I suppose it depends on what you want to get up to and how much the people you're oppressing want to stop you.

In all honesty, and I don't mean to be mean about this particular point, I think someone who sees himself as a Stalinist could really help himself with some therapy or anti-depressants or something to that effect. It makes about as much rational sense as being a "Hitlerist", basing your beliefs on the actions of a madman who would just as soon kill you and your whole family is not only contradictory, it's morally bankrupt. I just hope you all work these things out for yourselves...''

First of all if you would like to tell where Stalin surpressed free speech I would greatly appreciate it? Infact the opposite is true, criticism and self criticism are all part of socialist democracy. If you would also like to give me a example of Stalin the 'madmen' killing somebody and their family for no reason then please do.

Rastafari

3rd February 2003, 01:50

Hmm...Several thousand authors being banned until Khruschev and later even, some mighty crafty airbrush work to remove Trotsky (who SHOULD have been the party leader, acc. to Lenin), and various agents of fear and subterfuge employed as well to quiet people. This, my Stalinist friend, is called censorship. I hate Stalin because he gives commies a bad name and he was, in fact, not a communist, but a monster.

Mazdak

3rd February 2003, 04:29

Stalin did not spend every half nickle on surpressing free speech.

Of course stalinism is more effecient. would trotsky's gradual changes have given the Soviet Union the same gain by 1940? Of course not. By all means, the stalinists system is definitly effecient.

Ian

3rd February 2003, 10:24

Originally posted by Cassius Clay--"First of all if you would like to tell where Stalin surpressed free speech I would greatly appreciate it? Infact the opposite is true, criticism and self criticism are all part of socialist democracy."

This from a man who once started a thread named 'We shall not allow criticism of Stalin'. Many of us have read the section in Das Kapital in which Marx suggests the best action a youth can do to become well rounded is to criticise, but have you?

Cassius Clay

3rd February 2003, 10:59

That was the title of the dam article and was what the Georgian prolertariat shouted in the uprising in 1956 against Khruschev's revisionism. Did you actually read the article, it's on page 6. The thread I believe is still there so why don't you go and respond to it?

Also Ian Rocks, you are ofcourse right to point out that Marx thought it right to criticise. If you fail to see that this happened in the Soviet Union under Stalin then you clearly haven't got a clue what you are talking about.

''Hmm...Several thousand authors being banned until Khruschev and later even, some mighty crafty airbrush work to remove Trotsky (who SHOULD have been the party leader, acc. to Lenin), and various agents of fear and subterfuge employed as well to quiet people. This, my Stalinist friend, is called censorship. I hate Stalin because he gives commies a bad name and he was, in fact, not a communist, but a monster.''

First of all nowhere does Lenin say that Trotsky should be the party leader, and even if he did what does it matter? Bolsheviks unlike Trotsky believe in democracy and it's not up to one man to decide who should lead the party but the rank and file who incidently gave Trotsky 2% of the vote. Ofcourse Lenin nominated Stalin originally anyway.

Thousands of authors? Name me one apart from Alexander Soljenistyn who was a Nazi. Oh and Khruschev realeased thousands of prisoners who had been fairly arrested and imprisoned for colloboration with the Nazis and used them to purge all the genuine Bolsheviks in a mafia style terror.

As for the airbrushing of photo's, why would the party wish to associate itself with a criminall and a traitor? Trotsky's role in the civil war is greatly exaggerated anyway, the man got replaced in 1920 by Marshall Frunze because him and his Tsarist goons kept on messing up.

Smoking Frog II

4th February 2003, 18:40

Quote: from Mazdak on 4:29 am on Feb. 3, 2003
Stalin did not spend every half nickle on surpressing free speech.

Of course stalinism is more effecient. would trotsky's gradual changes have given the Soviet Union the same gain by 1940? Of course not. By all means, the stalinists system is definitly effecient.

WEll said Mazdak...