What is this "Do not mention Nazis" thing?

[ricechickie]

I have seen the use of the word Nazi being used on people they don't agree with. It is a form of a personal attack that should be stopped cold as it a pernicious way of trying to attach a hostile label on someone they want to knock down.

In other places the Forum Boss simply censored the word, or have the mods treat as a name calling violation, As a Moderator at WUWT, I have seen the word Nazi be thrown around casually that had no relation to history, it is an attack that was declared a no no by the blog owner, it quickly vanished.

Calling people names is only useful when you can back it up, but the word Nazi isn't of them since that awful piece of history ran out in 1945, that should be clamped down.

Got it, you vote for censorship.

Boooooo, hisssssss!

Nope, I voted for keeping threads on topic without gratuitous personal attacks.

Well, that’s virtuous and all, but who decides what’s “gratuitous”?

There's a well known saying that "the Nazi calling comes out when the discussion stops". It's actually quite true. And for ME it's a white flag saying the person is done discussing or can't discuss and the gun is empty. So -- generally it is pretty obvious when it's gratuitous. The use of the word generally can't be backed up either.

I think you asked about a member advocating genocide. That's already not wanted on USMB. But in the context of THAT thread if the post is still there -- AND you reference the quote -- I would never ding anyone on that. But the post should not BE there in the 1st place. Not all genocides were Nazis. So it's not really necessary to even pull it then. Unless you're short of time or wit to come up with a more generic label.

The whole point is, “Nazi” can only be used in its most literal meaning?

I feel like when someone trots out the label “snowflake,” they have run out of argument. Or “libtard”. Or “welfare-sucking waste of space” (thanks BrokeLoser for that one).

All of those (except perhaps “libtard”) have literal meanings that only apply to specific definitions. But I’m not going to home about the unfairness of being called those things.

It’s about self-management.

 

[flacaltenn]

Never gonna be "censorship" here. We want spaces for EVERY issue and EVERY level of discussion. That way we don't have to CHOOSE between being an all Mary Poppins board whacking every emotional outburst and flame and a place where moderation = mod discretion on everything.

Reason I came here were that the Zone2/3 rules were brilliant after Cereal_Killer adopted us. As long as you remember youre on a DISCUSSION board and that there is a TOPIC -- you can say pretty much whatever you want.

Sad truth is -- that's not what is really happening. Don't read too much into this. But there's Prozac in the Mod Room vending machines right now. No big decisions to announce quite yet..

you're kidding yourself if you think there's no censorship here. just look at what winds up in the badlands and the rubber room.

if the very difficult and important job of moderating is too much stress, quit.

there's no bars on the doors.

Putting stuff into Badlands is not censorship. Badlands is an AWESOME forum -- like the FZ. There's a decision process to trash or put it in a much less moderated forum. And it USUALLY depends on whether there IS a topic and whether there IS a discussion. If there's a topic and a topical discussion, but the combatants are just too hot to moderate -- it's a very intelligent and rationale way to let them have at it.

Some of the best discussions I've ever read live in Badlands. That's why it's there. It's not there JUST for brawling. We're not in the same USMB Wild West days like when you moderated here. We've pretty much done away with the public lynchings and the epic brawling in the Mod Room. Civilization moves on..

 

[OldLady]

Seems to work fine..

The word was getting mod edited in another thread

One thing is for sure. Censorship is a good start on destroying liberty.

There's nothing wrong with taking responsibility for what comes out of your mouth. I never hear you using that kind of language. What is wrong with flushing it off the debating forums here?

Could it be the censorship and denying history thing? Yeah! I think it could.

No one is rewriting history on USMB. There are words that are really offensive to some people and in order not to offend them, I don't see the harm in limiting the use of those words in particular situations. With rights come responsibilities.

Now, I think it's really interesting that a conservative like FCT is the one advocating for this "No-nazi" rule. It doesn't bother me, though, since I don't use them anyway as "name calling."

 

[Marion Morrison]

Seems to work fine..

The word was getting mod edited in another thread

One thing is for sure. Censorship is a good start on destroying liberty.

There's nothing wrong with taking responsibility for what comes out of your mouth. I never hear you using that kind of language. What is wrong with flushing it off the debating forums here?

Could it be the censorship and denying history thing? Yeah! I think it could.

No one is rewriting history on USMB. There are words that are really offensive to some people and in order not to offend them, I don't see the harm in limiting the use of those words in particular situations. With rights come responsibilities.

Now, I think it's really interesting that a conservative like FCT is the one advocating for this "No-nazi" rule. It doesn't bother me, though, since I don't use them anyway as "name calling."

Of course you don't, you're a rational American liberal. Idk what else to say right now. I don't agree with everything that you do, but we agree to disagree on certain things.

Don't mention that certain 4-letter word now.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Ricechickie writes up a good question:

"The whole point is, “Nazi” can only be used in its most literal meaning?"

Since THAT word only have ONE specific meaning, it should be treated that way.

That is why I objected to it being applied to President Trump since he is a member of the Republican party. He doesn't round up citizens or create concentration camps or murder lots of people, promote bloodless diplomacy for territory or start a big war in the aim to take over the world. and so on.

Nazi is the NAME of a political party it has no other definable meaning.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Seriously, you can't post the word "Nazi" here anymore?

Test - Nazi

Looks like we can say Nazi.

But...I know for a fact that you can't say the names of certain psychotropic prescription drugs. I learned this when I was trying to post all of the psychotropic drugs that the mass shooters were prescribed. At the time, 35 shooters were prescribed them. Therefore, functional, relevant, debate was removed from possibility on my part. The means to debate functionally and relevantly was taken right out of my hands by rule.

On that topic, we're kind of forced to debate within the boundaries and terms set by the anti-2nd crowd by rule.

 

[OldLady]

The word was getting mod edited in another thread

One thing is for sure. Censorship is a good start on destroying liberty.

There's nothing wrong with taking responsibility for what comes out of your mouth. I never hear you using that kind of language. What is wrong with flushing it off the debating forums here?

Could it be the censorship and denying history thing? Yeah! I think it could.

No one is rewriting history on USMB. There are words that are really offensive to some people and in order not to offend them, I don't see the harm in limiting the use of those words in particular situations. With rights come responsibilities.

Now, I think it's really interesting that a conservative like FCT is the one advocating for this "No-nazi" rule. It doesn't bother me, though, since I don't use them anyway as "name calling."

Of course you don't, you're a rational American liberal. Idk what else to say right now.

So, Marion, how is not using "Nazi" as a perjorative against a lib in Politics or Current Events any different than not belching real loud in the middle of the pastor's sermon? Or saying fuck in a kindergarten classroom?

 

[saveliberty]

Seems to work fine..

The word was getting mod edited in another thread

One thing is for sure. Censorship is a good start on destroying liberty.

There's nothing wrong with taking responsibility for what comes out of your mouth. I never hear you using that kind of language. What is wrong with flushing it off the debating forums here?

I don't feel a need to use it. That doesn't remove it from my right to express myself that way if I choose. Censorship starts innocently, but grows into intolerance for many things that are good and right and true. That means you end up defending idiots who can't express themselves without using offensive language today.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Never gonna be "censorship" here. We want spaces for EVERY issue and EVERY level of discussion. That way we don't have to CHOOSE between being an all Mary Poppins board whacking every emotional outburst and flame and a place where moderation = mod discretion on everything.

Reason I came here were that the Zone2/3 rules were brilliant after Cereal_Killer adopted us. As long as you remember youre on a DISCUSSION board and that there is a TOPIC -- you can say pretty much whatever you want.

Sad truth is -- that's not what is really happening. Don't read too much into this. But there's Prozac in the Mod Room vending machines right now. No big decisions to announce quite yet..

you're kidding yourself if you think there's no censorship here. just look at what winds up in the badlands and the rubber room.

if the very difficult and important job of moderating is too much stress, quit.

there's no bars on the doors.

Putting stuff into Badlands is not censorship. Badlands is an AWESOME forum -- like the FZ. There's a decision process to trash or put it in a much less moderated forum. And it USUALLY depends on whether there IS a topic and whether there IS a discussion. If there's a topic and a topical discussion, but the combatants are just too hot to moderate -- it's a very intelligent and rationale way to let them have at it.

Some of the best discussions I've ever read live in Badlands. That's why it's there. It's not there JUST for brawling. We're not in the same USMB Wild West days like when you moderated here. We've pretty much done away with the public lynchings and the epic brawling in the Mod Room. Civilization moves on..

I avoid Badlands for the same reason why I avoided flame wars of a long dead forum, because stooping low with a lot of name calling anger is not my cup of tea. Seems weird to have a general set of rules to abide by, then create an out of sight from the public toxic forum that breaks them a lot.

Not going down that road, it has damaged forums I visited to where they wised up realizing that the animosity that grows unchecked in barely moderated dark places like Badlands spills out into the public area over time.

Right Nation forum had to shut it down to clean up the damage years ago, which pleased a lot of Moderators who had to contain the visible damage caused by the unseen cesspool that spawns it in the dark areas of the forum.

I have NEVER agreed with this idea of allowing people to be nice in public forums, then create a forum underground to allow us to trash most of the forum rules.

Better to make a SANDBOX forum (hidden from the public) to move threads getting out of hand there, to STOP the degeneration or shut it down. The same forum can be used for certain members who are deserving of limited shunning to calm the person down, one who doesn't quite deserve a banning.

I moderate such a forum that does this very thing, where only moderators and people who are in trouble can see and post in it. Too bad the forum is old and barely alive....

 

[OldLady]

Seems to work fine..

The word was getting mod edited in another thread

One thing is for sure. Censorship is a good start on destroying liberty.

There's nothing wrong with taking responsibility for what comes out of your mouth. I never hear you using that kind of language. What is wrong with flushing it off the debating forums here?

I don't feel a need to use it. That doesn't remove it from my right to express myself that way if I choose. Censorship starts innocently, but grows into intolerance for many things that are good and right and true. That means you end up defending idiots who can't express themselves without using offensive language today.

It's not making the word go away. It's not being expunged from Websters or the history books or -- fer goddsakes -- The History Channel.
I don't see the sense in banning "Nazi" when the fierce flaming that goes on here, even in Zones 2 and 3, makes Nazi look like a first grader's epithet. It sure isn't going to improve the "tone" of the board, by itself. But you would need to do a bit more explaining to move me toward your side on this one.

 

[Toro]

Tommy Tainant just started a thread, calling Himmler’s daughter a - and I quote - “Nazi Princess.”

Why isn’t he banned yet?

 

[Natural Citizen]

That's an annoying shade of red. Ban that shade of red, please. It's blinding.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Seems to work fine..

The word was getting mod edited in another thread

One thing is for sure. Censorship is a good start on destroying liberty.

There's nothing wrong with taking responsibility for what comes out of your mouth. I never hear you using that kind of language. What is wrong with flushing it off the debating forums here?

I don't feel a need to use it. That doesn't remove it from my right to express myself that way if I choose. Censorship starts innocently, but grows into intolerance for many things that are good and right and true. That means you end up defending idiots who can't express themselves without using offensive language today.

It's not making the word go away. It's not being expunged from Websters or the history books or -- fer goddsakes -- The History Channel.
I don't see the sense in banning "Nazi" when the fierce flaming that goes on here, even in Zones 2 and 3, makes Nazi look like a first grader's epithet. It sure isn't going to improve the "tone" of the board, by itself. But you would need to do a bit more explaining to move me toward your side on this one.

Here is the thing is most like you want to use a word like Nazi to describe those that disagree with you.

Many like you attempt to equate Trump handling of Illegal Immigrant children being seperated from their parents as being what Nazis did during World War II, but it is not.

You and those like you invoke the word so you can get a negative reaction that you are searching for and then complain that person is out of line when attacking.

Trump is more along the lines of Joe McCarthy than anything like Nazi, and no Hitler was not as smart as you claimed in another thread.

If you knew a sliver about American History then you would realize Trump is more like the old Isolationist of this country and yes they existed even though you believe they did not and some were Republicans.

So I can see why the Moderation team has deemed the usage of Nazi unfit because it is being used to troll those on the right for a negative reaponse which you seem to support for some reason.

Many Americans want stricter border access to prevent Illegal Immigrants from entering but does that give you the right to use the Nazi term?

You wrote in another thread that because Trump is bashing the media it is the same the Nazis would do, but it is the same Communists would also do, so is Trump a Communist?

Of course you would say no, but why couldn't he be just Stalin and be a Stalinist instead or Trotsky or some form of Marxist?

In the end the word Nazi is being used incorrectly when describing Trump and his people and if you wrote McCarthyist then by all means I would agree but you would not get the reaction you want when using Nazi which is very onsulting to a Jewish person like myself...

 

[Picaro]

Ricechickie writes up a good question:

"The whole point is, “Nazi” can only be used in its most literal meaning?"

Since THAT word only have ONE specific meaning, it should be treated that way.

That is why I objected to it being applied to President Trump since he is a member of the Republican party. He doesn't round up citizens or create concentration camps or murder lots of people, promote bloodless diplomacy for territory or start a big war in the aim to take over the world. and so on.

Nazi is the NAME of a political party it has no other definable meaning.

Actually it was the name of a para-military group, and still is under some groups' use of it, but yeah, mostly now a days it's just a bait word some people use because they can't spell 'fascist'.

 

[OldLady]

The word was getting mod edited in another thread

One thing is for sure. Censorship is a good start on destroying liberty.

There's nothing wrong with taking responsibility for what comes out of your mouth. I never hear you using that kind of language. What is wrong with flushing it off the debating forums here?

I don't feel a need to use it. That doesn't remove it from my right to express myself that way if I choose. Censorship starts innocently, but grows into intolerance for many things that are good and right and true. That means you end up defending idiots who can't express themselves without using offensive language today.

It's not making the word go away. It's not being expunged from Websters or the history books or -- fer goddsakes -- The History Channel.
I don't see the sense in banning "Nazi" when the fierce flaming that goes on here, even in Zones 2 and 3, makes Nazi look like a first grader's epithet. It sure isn't going to improve the "tone" of the board, by itself. But you would need to do a bit more explaining to move me toward your side on this one.

Here is the thing is most like you want to use a word like Nazi to describe those that disagree with you.

Many like you attempt to equate Trump handling of Illegal Immigrant children being seperated from their parents as being what Nazis did during World War II, but it is not.

You and those like you invoke the word so you can get a negative reaction that you are searching for and then complain that person is out of line when attacking.

Trump is more along the lines of Joe McCarthy than anything like Nazi, and no Hitler was not as smart as you claimed in another thread.

If you knew a sliver about American History then you would realize Trump is more like the old Isolationist of this country and yes they existed even though you believe they did not and some were Republicans.

So I can see why the Moderation team has deemed the usage of Nazi unfit because it is being used to troll those on the right for a negative reaponse which you seem to support for some reason.

Many Americans want stricter border access to prevent Illegal Immigrants from entering but does that give you the right to use the Nazi term?

You wrote in another thread that because Trump is bashing the media it is the same the Nazis would do, but it is the same Communists would also do, so is Trump a Communist?

Of course you would say no, but why couldn't he be just Stalin and be a Stalinist instead or Trotsky or some form of Marxist?

In the end the word Nazi is being used incorrectly when describing Trump and his people and if you wrote McCarthyist then by all means I would agree but you would not get the reaction you want when using Nazi which is very onsulting to a Jewish person like myself...

OMG Bruce. I have no idea what to say about your comprehension skills today.
Why I am suddenly your poster child for the liberal enemy, I don't know. But go for it. It makes you look pretty stupid, though.

 

[saveliberty]

You want to know why removing the word from debate won't change anything? Because there will not be better thought out responses than there are now. Because the frustration of the left will not decrease one bit. Because labeling people is what the left does. If not this label, then another will be used.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Ricechickie writes up a good question:

"The whole point is, “Nazi” can only be used in its most literal meaning?"

Since THAT word only have ONE specific meaning, it should be treated that way.

That is why I objected to it being applied to President Trump since he is a member of the Republican party. He doesn't round up citizens or create concentration camps or murder lots of people, promote bloodless diplomacy for territory or start a big war in the aim to take over the world. and so on.

Nazi is the NAME of a political party it has no other definable meaning.

Actually it was the name of a para-military group, and still is under some groups' use of it, but yeah, mostly now a days it's just a bait word some people use because they can't spell 'fascist'.

No it was a POLITICAL party as shown here:

"The National Socialist German Workers' Party (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (help·info), abbreviated NSDAP), commonly referred to in English as the Nazi Party (English: /ˈnɑːtsi, ˈnætsi/),[6] was a far-right political party in Germany that was active between 1920 and 1945 and supported the ideology of Nazism. Its precursor, the German Workers' Party (Deutsche Arbeiterpartei; DAP), existed from 1919 to 1920."

 

[Toro]

Ricechickie writes up a good question:

"The whole point is, “Nazi” can only be used in its most literal meaning?"

Since THAT word only have ONE specific meaning, it should be treated that way.

That is why I objected to it being applied to President Trump since he is a member of the Republican party. He doesn't round up citizens or create concentration camps or murder lots of people, promote bloodless diplomacy for territory or start a big war in the aim to take over the world. and so on.

Nazi is the NAME of a political party it has no other definable meaning.

Actually it was the name of a para-military group, and still is under some groups' use of it, but yeah, mostly now a days it's just a bait word some people use because they can't spell 'fascist'.

The Nazis were a political party. The paramilitary group was the SS.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

One thing is for sure. Censorship is a good start on destroying liberty.

There's nothing wrong with taking responsibility for what comes out of your mouth. I never hear you using that kind of language. What is wrong with flushing it off the debating forums here?

I don't feel a need to use it. That doesn't remove it from my right to express myself that way if I choose. Censorship starts innocently, but grows into intolerance for many things that are good and right and true. That means you end up defending idiots who can't express themselves without using offensive language today.

It's not making the word go away. It's not being expunged from Websters or the history books or -- fer goddsakes -- The History Channel.
I don't see the sense in banning "Nazi" when the fierce flaming that goes on here, even in Zones 2 and 3, makes Nazi look like a first grader's epithet. It sure isn't going to improve the "tone" of the board, by itself. But you would need to do a bit more explaining to move me toward your side on this one.

Here is the thing is most like you want to use a word like Nazi to describe those that disagree with you.

Many like you attempt to equate Trump handling of Illegal Immigrant children being seperated from their parents as being what Nazis did during World War II, but it is not.

You and those like you invoke the word so you can get a negative reaction that you are searching for and then complain that person is out of line when attacking.

Trump is more along the lines of Joe McCarthy than anything like Nazi, and no Hitler was not as smart as you claimed in another thread.

If you knew a sliver about American History then you would realize Trump is more like the old Isolationist of this country and yes they existed even though you believe they did not and some were Republicans.

So I can see why the Moderation team has deemed the usage of Nazi unfit because it is being used to troll those on the right for a negative reaponse which you seem to support for some reason.

Many Americans want stricter border access to prevent Illegal Immigrants from entering but does that give you the right to use the Nazi term?

You wrote in another thread that because Trump is bashing the media it is the same the Nazis would do, but it is the same Communists would also do, so is Trump a Communist?

Of course you would say no, but why couldn't he be just Stalin and be a Stalinist instead or Trotsky or some form of Marxist?

In the end the word Nazi is being used incorrectly when describing Trump and his people and if you wrote McCarthyist then by all means I would agree but you would not get the reaction you want when using Nazi which is very onsulting to a Jewish person like myself...

OMG Bruce. I have no idea what to say about your comprehension skills today.
Why I am suddenly your poster child for the liberal enemy, I don't know. But go for it. It makes you look pretty stupid, though.

I did not write anything isulting to you, so please reframe from doing the same to me upstairs.

It is your side calling posters Nazis on this board and it was you using Trump bashing of the media for your reason to support such usage of the word, so let remember that.

The fact is Communist leaders used the same tactic so I could as easily call Trump a typical Communist but you see that as being silly just like I see those like you using the term Nazi as foolish.

 

[ricechickie]

Ricechickie writes up a good question:

"The whole point is, “Nazi” can only be used in its most literal meaning?"

Since THAT word only have ONE specific meaning, it should be treated that way.

That is why I objected to it being applied to President Trump since he is a member of the Republican party. He doesn't round up citizens or create concentration camps or murder lots of people, promote bloodless diplomacy for territory or start a big war in the aim to take over the world. and so on.

Nazi is the NAME of a political party it has no other definable meaning.

Ever hear of a grammar Nazi? Soup Nazi?

Language evolves and changes.