About the Swastica image on sigs etc.

[GepperRankins]

you're actually putting effort into missing the point aren't you.

did you also put effort into making sure i can't quote your post out of context like you did mine?

No, I just see the point differently from you.

I find your use of the Swastika, now one of the most despised symbols in the western World, inappropriate. I find your justification for it's use insufficient to negate the offense it causes, to a great many people.

Please feel free to quote my posts in any way you see fit.

i used the most despised symbol in the western world simply because that's what it is. the symbol itself is not offensive, what it stands for is. do you even realise that, i'm not sure you do.

you think i'm desensitising it, which seems to worry you. i'm more worried about the fact that you refuse to see anything deeper than; anything with a swastika = evil. joke about people = evil.

to me it looks like you're scared you could be racist and rather than doing anything about it you just pent it up and deny it :freud:

[JPaul]

No, I just see the point differently from you.

I find your use of the Swastika, now one of the most despised symbols in the western World, inappropriate. I find your justification for it's use insufficient to negate the offense it causes, to a great many people.

Please feel free to quote my posts in any way you see fit.

i used the most despised symbol in the western world simply because that's what it is. the symbol itself is not offensive, what it stands for is. do you even realise that, i'm not sure you do.

you think i'm desensitising it, which seems to worry you. i'm more worried about the fact that you refuse to see anything deeper than; anything with a swastika = evil. joke about people = evil.

to me it looks like you're scared you could be racist and rather than doing anything about it you just pent it up and deny it :freud:

, please note I am laughing at you, not with you.

[GepperRankins]

w00t!

[Snee]

Captain azad had an ss-symbol as his avatar for quite some time. And now the Canuk had a swastika in his sig. Fashion-statement?

Anyway, I understood what the canuk was on about, and although it was a flawed comparison (made him look a bit silly or ignorant, really), I didn't really take offense to it. (It might actually have been a bit offensive to some nazis, actually, being compared to a bunch of incompetents who lack original thought, and who are thus using the thoughts and works of others to stay afloat, though come to think of it, that's sort of how I think of any nazis still around today)


It's good that this has come up though, and since you answered cheebus the way you did, re: chelsea, I take it a sig (or a post) won't be removed on the say of one, perhaps deluded, reporting individual (not in any way talking about zero btw), or a bunch of them, if they decide to gang up on someone. Which is very good

[Afronaut]

the symbol itself is not offensive

I have a bit different view on this.

If you'd say "the Image itself" but the meaning relys on the word symbol.

I think that the EA, as Evil corporate that it may be, should not be linked to the swastica,
which is seen most of the time as a symbol of Nazism. The "evil" between the 2 things are way off balance, imo.

Perhaps, you could choose another, more fit horse to ride the EA cause in these forums.

Perhaps we could be "less" personal about this also.

[GepperRankins]

the symbol itself is not offensive

I have a bit different view on this.

If you'd say "the Image itself" but the meaning relys on the word symbol.

I think that the EA, as Evil corporate that it may be, should not be linked to the swastica,
which is seen most of the time as a symbol of Nazism. The "evil" between the 2 things are way off balance, imo.

Perhaps, you could choose another, more fit horse to ride the EA cause in these forums.

Perhaps we could be "less" personal about this also.

that's what i meant: image



all it boils down to is us pointing out bad people by comparing them to the worst imaginable, that doesn't offend me. it's not about drawing direct comparisons. it's about saying EA are bad, though a sig saying "EA are bad" wouldn't be very prominent. clearly associating them with nazis does the job very well.

[JPaul]

I agree it makes the point, however the offence is caused by the trivialization of the real attrocities.

What you are doing (by using your own argument) is saying Nazis were bad, as bad as EA. Some would suggest they were a lot worse.

Have you done maths, of course you have.

EA = Nazis can also be written as Nazis = EA.

[GepperRankins]

i can't fathom how anybody would make the association like that. really, i've tried to but i can't.

[JPaul]

i can't fathom how anybody would make the association like that. really, i've tried to but i can't.

It's the one you made.

[GepperRankins]

everybody knows how bad the nazis were. not everybody knows about EA. even the people who know about both will make the association of EA being bad, nazis being worse - it's common sense to see it that way. who the fuck is going to see it and think "oh the nazis? only as bad as a videogames company, guess hitler wasn't so bad after all. let's re-elect them and burn some jews"? - no-one

one automatically thinks "oh, EA being compared to the nazis they must be really bad then"