Banned for use of Nazi symbols

Quote :

And?.... What makes international law just? I hardly think this is anything for someone here to be judged by.

what is and?

he is a spamming provocateur, who deserve to be banned, its unbelievable how you all trying to defend this pice of shit him, what will you all say naxt to defend this bastard "he is a strictly religious hindu" and just wanted to share with us his beliefs xD

oh man....

RS this is not about spamming, this is about the fact, that mattebesta has a swastika in his signature.
I think if the majorty says Yes, a new thread will open in tirals and he would be encountered with other "crimes".

RedSoviet wrote:

Quote :

And?.... What makes international law just? I hardly think this is anything for someone here to be judged by.

what is and?

It was an attempt to point out the lack of substance in your argument. My mistake was assuming you'd understand that.

Quote :

he is a spamming provocateur, who deserve to be banned, its unbelievable how you all trying to defend this pice of shit him, what will you all say naxt to defend this bastard "he is a strictly religious hindu" and just wanted to share with us his beliefs xD

Wow, i have to quote myself? Sad...

I wrote:

Apparently i missed all this, but if Matt's gone, i'm not going to question my blessings.

So as is plain to see, i would not think to defend Matt. I was merely pointing out that your argument for the upholding of international law was a poor one.

this was the drip from him that brought the barrel to overflow


you all know what he was meaning so stop this bullshit of excuses!

he is banned rightly, and it will stay so, zealot said it!

in some moments you cant continue ignoring

RedSoviet wrote:

he is banned rightly, and it will stay so, zealot said it!

When and were?
Link plz =3

damn it was the right choice to bann him!

CoolKidX wrote:

RedSoviet wrote:

he is banned rightly, and it will stay so, zealot said it!

When and were?
Link plz =3

private and not on this side

RedSoviet wrote:

CoolKidX wrote:

RedSoviet wrote:

he is banned rightly, and it will stay so, zealot said it!

When and were?
Link plz =3

private and not on this side

Well if that's private and not on this site i don't see that happening.
And so long this site is "democratic" the people will decide what will ahppen next.

But for now we got to wait for mattabesta's reply.

CoolKidX wrote:

RedSoviet wrote:

CoolKidX wrote:

RedSoviet wrote:

he is banned rightly, and it will stay so, zealot said it!

When and were?
Link plz =3

private and not on this side

Well if that's private and not on this site i don't see that happening.
And so long this site is "democratic" the people will decide what will ahppen next.

But for now we got to wait for mattabesta's reply.

have nothing to do with "democratic" he braked the rules and that haves consequences, this was not a poll question to bann him, and like you see this is just a "mind poll"

you can vote if somone got to a goup or is he right or wron or what ever but you cant polling out rules

he is banned, which reply? what should he say? im hindu for sure he will write somthing very .....imaginatively

Well maybe he has a other reason then being a "Hindu".

And with breaking the rules you mean spam?
Or the "nazi symbol"?

CoolKidX wrote:

Well maybe he has a other reason then being a "Hindu".

And with breaking the rules you mean spam?
Or the "nazi symbol"?

spam is one thing, the nazi symbol is 100times bigger, his provocativeness reched a highness were it was time to face consequences

Banning him has so far instilled more rejection than support.

RedSoviet, yeah the "international law" argument is pretty poor, to summarize it, most of us here don't give a damn about international law, most of our comrades don't do.

Now, the reason to ban him:

He used a symbol often linked to Nazism as a signature. Although that symbol doesn't represent Nazism per say, the context in which he is employing it (a predominantly left-wing forum) suggests he is not precisely symbolizing sunshine and Hindu happiness. This has been said in a more direct way by other comrades.


As a hateful provocateur, he was banned, pleasing his thirst for reaction.

Does this go against freedom of expression?

Yes, but, that's also why I'm subjecting this to debate, I want people to tell wether this expression is ban worthy or not and why.

so, you aren't being nice to Hindu people. the term "Hindu Happiness" could offend some one. I don't mind (since their are a lot of religions I don't like) but just pointing that out because I think intolerance is worse than what mattabesta did.

Quote :

RedSoviet, yeah the "international law" argument is pretty poor, to summarize it, most of us here don't give a damn about international law, most of our comrades don't do.

i just said it besides, the point is that i already said:

Quote :

spam is one thing, the nazi symbol is 100times bigger, his provocativeness reched a highness were it was time to face consequences

Liche wrote:

so, you aren't being nice to Hindu people. the term "Hindu Happiness" could offend some one. I don't mind (since their are a lot of religions I don't like) but just pointing that out because I think intolerance is worse than what mattabesta did.

That's misunderstanding. I don't see how "Hindu happiness" could offend anyone, specially in this context.

I don't think anyone should be banned for having a symbol in their signature, no matter how provocative.

I think a ban was a bit harsh unless you talked to him about it

this bitch gone to far... oh fucking damn I FUCKING NEW IT ! you would all protact this motherfucker affter all he said did and even now!

Damn right.

I actually didn't expect the approval rate for this action to get to such a high percentage, to be honest.

What happens if he has more no's?
When is this poll over?

And if he has a explanation about why he used it, besides free speech, i don't think you should bann someone with no reason.
This is for the fact he has a "nazi symbol" in his sginature, not fro the other one's.

it was right to bann him, this was a realy bad provocation, im against all nazis, they destroing the reputation of fascists

DarkSide wrote:

it was right to bann him, this was a realy bad provocation, im against all nazis, they destroing the reputation of fascists

So you vote yes because you THINK he had nazi belives in this?
That's rediclious.

But srsly we have to wait for mattbesta to awnser!

CoolKidX wrote:

DarkSide wrote:

it was right to bann him, this was a realy bad provocation, im against all nazis, they destroing the reputation of fascists

So you vote yes because you THINK he had nazi belives in this?
That's rediclious.

But srsly we have to wait for mattbesta to awnser!

your stuipid dude, can't you read

Quote :

this was a realy bad provocation

But this is about the fact he has a "nazi symbol" in his signature, NOT other things...