Re: The crisis facing this site - Concerning it's integrity;

[American Kid]

I'm going to start this off by further beating a by-now-already-pretty-much-long-dead horse a little more, then, I promise, I'm going to get to the point.

The recent re-banning of a Stormin Norman "entity" was, in my opinion, a..."misuse" of power and clearly, as I've already stated, pretty much, I think, sentimental at it's core. Norm committed the cardinal sin of defiling the "coma moma" Larissa (who, last I saw, was a regular member, just like any other, with no eminities and/or benefits exceeding those of any other member, either).

I can totally understand how this would piss people off. Personally, I like Larissa a lot. She seems like a really sweet lady who takes good care of her kids, and who basically has her shit together. Whether or not politically you see eye-to-eye with her, when you hear her life story how she divorced young - with kids- and then picked herself up and got back on her feet again- you have to admit she's done well with her life down in Argentina. She's a good person.

All you have to do is witness a group chat in the IRC to see how revered she is. She's fucking Evita Peron.

And I'll admit I nearly winced when I saw that Norm had gone and, with his balls out, dared to go and start a thread challenging anything she had to say. Borderline suicidal.

Which is exactly what it ended up being in the end.

Unfortunate, as you'll see when you read the thread he started, because what Norm had to say was far less scatological and wantonly "flaming" than what Larissa wrote. Basically, Larissa's rant sounded like something I would write at 2 in the morning after comsuming enough booze to kill a baby elephant. Some of it's in caps, some of it's not. Some of it makes sense, some of it doesn't. Norman's not allowed to post in that forum, so he gave it a piggy-back over here. Soon after which he voiced a little dissent, and then it was batta-bing, batta-boom:

****Old Norman incarnation checked out, New Norman incarnation hung up his hat and checked in.****

And the New Norman was like Old Norman--- except Old Norman after he's been buried in the Pet Semetary. His name was "Commie ***** Slapper." A truly "created" monster. A self-fulfilling prophecy. As fucked up and angry as the act that was committed against him.

This is the part of the post where I start to feel like an ACLU lawyer. Politically, I'm not totally eye-to-eye with Stormin Norman (Ghost Writer etc...). This isn't late-breaking news. He's a right-wing conservative. I'm that "moderate" guy. I'm that guy. I'm like Robert Duvall in the Godfather movies. I'm a "part" of the family, but I'm not really a "part" of the family. It's complicated. Just like any familial relationship. :)

It's from this subjective view that I'm disturbed by what happened concerning Norm and his most recent banning(s?). And I'll reassert what I said earilier- what Norm said (toward Larissa) , wasn't even that bad.

That's what puts the fear in me. It isn't what he said, it's who he said it to. It's who he said it about. Suddenly, some members are more important than others. He's called members here much worse than what he called Larissa, but it seems there's an asterisk next to her name. For some reason she's sacred. Not to be fucked with. Which, to be quite honest, is fucked up.

Bottom line is he's banned and there's nothing I can do about that. He's come back. Which I'm happy about. I like reading what he has to say. The percentage of which I agree with is miniscule sometimes, but still he's entertaining. And if anything this at least gives credence to the claim he's made that his presence here "puts asses in the seats."

Everybody has to understand (maybe not everybody; I don't mean to be so condescending) that this is a FUCKING HOT-BUTTON SUBJECT WE'RE CARRYING ON ABOUT HERE. Communism. Socialism. Mostly communism. I know they're not the total sum of all this site is about. I know. I know. I know. But they're still very potent ideas which arise in people very passionate and heated words and actions. Particularly from Americans. Malte's chosen to give this site a forum to let out this steam. I think it was a good call to do so. But it's only reasonable to expect arguments to come from people as intense and inflammatory as the topic itself.

And frankly, in America, a lot of people fucking hate communism, socialism, ect... Not like they used to. McCarthy's long dead and buried. Thank God. But it's still about as popular as ebola over here. And it will inspire people to fight. And that's what Norman's been doing as long as I've been here. And yes, I respect that.

And so, and I truly, truly, truly regret this. You've no idea. And I never thought this day would come, but here I go:

.......................my first banning campaign.

If Norman can get banned for peripherally (in my opinion at best) "insulting" a beloved, holy member of this site, then surely other members should be immediately banned for outright FLAGRANT violations of the rules. Not for murky, gray-area, inconclusive, open-to-debate midemeanors. But specifically outlined rules which are openly disobeyed. Like the threatening of someone's life.

So, as a relatively-by-this-point senior member of the site, as someone speaking with total subjectivity and with an honest concern for the intregity of this site, which I love, and it's policies, I call for the immediate banning of the member called "DEFMARX" for this comment made against Stormin Norman aka Old Friend:

http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...c=1776&start=10 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=22&topic=1776&start=10)

If this isn't done, or some sort of disciplinary action isn't taken, I will interpert it as a double-standard, and therefore a serious threat to this board and it's integrity. This is a clear-cut, plain-as-day, obviously ignorant violation. I didn't like reading it the first time, and I don't like seeing it still there now.

As a "veteran" of a banning "witch-hunt" myself, I don't take this shit lightly. But fair is fair. Norman had to re-register as a new guy. Now let's see if DEFMARX has the same tenacity.

Maybe when he comes back he can be HEARINGMARX.

I just hope the right thing is done. I don't want to "win" anything. I'm not trying to "beat" anybody. And if things go my way, I won't have "come up on top." I'll just be glad, because I'll have felt that the right thing was done.

-AK

(Edited by American Kid at 6:03 pm on Mar. 19, 2003)

[mentalbunny]

I can see where you're going, but the thing about norman was that he trashed the rules ages ago as SN, then tried to come back and I doln't thnk you can do that, i'm not sure, I haven't looked at the rules properly. So that's whu Old Friend and Commie Botch Slapper got banned, although it took everyone a while.

True, everyone flames occasionally, but SN was being excessive. I'm all for unbanning SN, although not his other incarnations and giving him another chance, but I don't know what the others think of him. he defiintely seems to be the most intelligent of the big three (ie SN, dark capi and CI) but then, that's not saying much.

[redstar2000]

Well, AK, there is a double-standard, might as well admit it.

This is a "pro-left" board; righties are here at our pleasure and can be removed at our displeasure. They are, in a literal sense, guests and when guests behave badly, one shows them the door.

Larissa is widely admired on this board (1) for her contributions to the gathering of reliable information on Cuba, Argentina, and Latin America; (2) for her courage as a young revolutionary during the Argentinian military dictatorship; and (3) for the courage she has shown in her personal life.

But if you think that means that no one will ever criticze her on some political question...then you don't understand "lefties" at all. The 20th century communist experience was kind of misleading...what "lefties" are really like is different. We do not think anyone is above criticism...not even Marx himself.

As to the remarks of Defmarx and the others who echoed his sentiments, I think that simply shows the inevitable outcome of "discussion" with dogmatic pro-capitalists. Sooner or later, we find ourselves descending to their level of debate--e.g., "I'll piss on your grave"; "No, I'll piss on yours"; "I'll kill you"; "No, I'll kill you". It's stupid but it seems to always end up that way.

Perhaps because such "discussions" merely reflect the class struggle itself...where in the end, no compromise is really possible.

:cool:

(Edited by redstar2000 at 8:16 pm on Mar. 19, 2003)

[Ghost Writer]

There are only a few people who actually care about integrity, AK. It is refreshing to see that you fall in that category.

Apparently, my initial impression of you was the correct one. When I first met you in the thread where we analysized the meaning of "Fight Club", I knew we had much in common. Trust me, when it comes to things that do not pertain to politics, we are much the same. We are both decent human beings concerned with arriving at the truth. We are both philosophers in our own right. Both of us tend to hate the sophists who distort the truth and tried to alter perception.

Since you are a man of impeccable character, I can ignore the fact that we disagree on many things. In fact, I am glad you offer me a different perspective, because I can learn from you. Thanks again for your support. I reitterate the fact that I consider you a true friend. You didn't have to stick your neck out for me, and you did. That speaks volumes. You have earned my respect.

As for Larissa, I believe she is also a good person. I never took issue with that fact. I simply wanted to challenge somebody to produce something that was more concrete.

I thought her argument was weak so I used ridicule to spark the debate that she has proven to be capable of. She falls into the classification of people that I challenge, because I expect more from them. Sometimes it is hard to tell if I simply think you are an idiot. However, this is not the case with Larissa, as it is with the dopey looking gunslinger.

Trust me, I saw the picture of her, which she used as an avatar, and I thought she was attractive. I think I even mentioned that to her one time. The thought that I was attacking such a hotty did occur to me. However, I wanted to be fair in my delegation of ridicule. We are her to judge people's ideas, and mental strength, not their physical characteristics. This is why I considered her fair game. I too suspect that Larissa's sex appeal has everything to do with their decision to ban Old Friend.

Look, perhaps I could have been more charismatic in my disagreement with Larissa. I am sorry that I did not clearly make the distinction between her and some of the idiots that I target. Be assured that she was targeted because I believed in her ability to think, and I was concerned that she had sold herself short in the post that I ridiculed.

I think its disgraceful that we never fully had the opportunity to debate the ideas on their merits, since I was banned. That was my only intent, as always. Please end this ridiculous ban, let me have my original name, and let's start over, understanding that I am a contributor to this website, even though I can be harsh at times. Limiting the expression of ideas is never a good idea. Ak, is right to question the integrity of those who do.

If you still wish me banned, let's do it in a fair and just manner like I prescribed. Show me the infractions you think warrant my banning, and let me answer to them in a public manner.

(Edited by Ghost Writer at 2:16 am on Mar. 20, 2003)

[hawarameen]

"I guess I'll get this started off by saying that Che was a real son of a *****, and his grave is one of the few graves that I would actually piss on. Others being Stalin, Mao, Trotsky, Lenin, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Min, Castro, Mugabe (when he dies, hopefully soon), and most notably Hugo Chavez (I'm sure the intelligence community will expedite his timely death). "

this is a quote from GW from another thread

also this is a forum for Che Admirers and it is one thing saying that socialism doesnt work and another thing saying that you would piss on che's grave (amongst others)

Che for me was not a god or anything i think he was a great man and most people here agree to varying degrees.

by saying that he would piss on che's grave GW was looking for confrontation and indeed he got it, he knows many people are passionate about che. instead of discussing Larissa's post (which i cant find anything wrong with) he went for the weak spot.

DEFMARX should not be banned, it was clear provocation on GW's part he knew somebody would respond in that way.

[KRAZYKILLA]

there should only be one moderator. but many people to report problems...

[Anonymous]

It used be like that. Malte was the only moderator.

[sc4r]

Quote: from American Kid on 1:01 pm on Mar. 19, 2003
I'm going to start this off by further beating a by-now-already-pretty-much-long-dead horse a little more, then, I promise, I'm going to get to the point.



God you lot are whingers are you not. This is a privately owned forum. It belongs to an overtly pros ocialist group. Nobody , least of all you lot, have any rights here, all of us are here on sufferance and as guests.

Even in the Month I've been here I've seen both SN and You break the stated rules quite openly and undeniably (you post outside OI).

Your ideology has the quite nonsensical stated position of complete free speech (never actually allowed anywhere under control of capitalists mind but thats another story). Ours does not. You dont like Socialist attitudes ? Well there is a surpise. Frankly I'm amazed that the Mods here allow you as much lattitude to trash talk our views as they do.

[American Kid]

Free speech...I'm whiny...I'm allow to post anywhere I like...blah blah blah...but I don't like socialistic attitudes?

Since when?

Brah.

Since when?

Fuck it...lol, ban this guy too.

-AK

(ohhhhhhhh the responses on the way..............:) )

[Ghost Writer]

Don't you just love it when these gutless wonders with less than 50 posts criticize you? What have their contributions been, and why should they have a voice? Look f*ckers, I think you should have to prove yourself before you chip in your two-cents on such matters. Provide me a list of your notable works, like I have done for you.

[synthesis]

Quote: from Ghost Writer on 9:44 am on Mar. 21, 2003
Don't you just love it when these gutless wonders with less than 50 posts criticize you?:biggrin:

[Ghost Writer]

What are you smirking at?

[synthesis]

What am I smirking at indeed :biggrin: