Author Topic: A potential rule modification.  (Read 2275 times)

Bad Penny II

  • Yields Not to Kalamity
  • ****
  • Posts: 1134
  • Nice Borderline Troll
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #45 on: March 24, 2018, 02:03:44 PM »
Or no wingers.

What about Debra Winger?
I think Debra Winger should always be allowed.
What about food extremist like, vegans?  :eyebrow:

Less people eating meat → cheaper meat = Vegans good
Certainty disturbs me


Bad Penny II

  • Yields Not to Kalamity
  • ****
  • Posts: 1134
  • Nice Borderline Troll
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #46 on: March 24, 2018, 02:09:01 PM »
Can we at least try to stay on topic please?

Cat herder [sneer emoticon hsssss)
« Last Edit: March 24, 2018, 02:22:18 PM by Bad Penny II »
Certainty disturbs me


Dave

  • Formerly known as Gloucester
  • Don't Pray in My School, and I Won't Think in Your Church
  • *****
  • Posts: 7105
  • Gender: Male
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #47 on: March 24, 2018, 02:20:31 PM »
Or no wingers.

What about Debra Winger?
I think Debra Winger should always be allowed.
What about food extremist like, vegans?  :eyebrow:

Less people eating meat → cheaper meat = Vegans good

You sure about that first part, Penny? The second part is judgment.

If the market for meat vollapses, because lots of people have stopped eating it, Farmer Giles has to reduce his beef herd of 200 to, ssy, 20. But he still needs to pay bills and taxes - which will not reduce by a factor of ten. So, no option but to charge more for what has now become a niche product!

Of course, if the change occurs slowly over a long period, like a generation, beef farmers will decline slowly, but betcha beef gets no cheaper! Same for all other meats.

I have to admit that I enjoy the taste of most Quorn products but had to get used to the texture. Just eaten some beef jerky, not found a veggie product to equal that texture.

However, the potential for nutrients per hectare certainly favour veggy stuff - and more so with GMOs - so long as they don't use aggro chemicals by the ton and poison the waterways.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Bad Penny II

  • Yields Not to Kalamity
  • ****
  • Posts: 1134
  • Nice Borderline Troll
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #48 on: March 24, 2018, 03:02:15 PM »
Or no wingers.

What about Debra Winger?
I think Debra Winger should always be allowed.
What about food extremist like, vegans?  :eyebrow:

Less people eating meat → cheaper meat = Vegans good

You sure about that first part, Penny? The second part is judgment.

If the market for meat vollapses, because lots of people have stopped eating it, Farmer Giles has to reduce his beef herd of 200 to, ssy, 20. But he still needs to pay bills and taxes - which will not reduce by a factor of ten. So, no option but to charge more for what has now become a niche product!

Of course, if the change occurs slowly over a long period, like a generation, beef farmers will decline slowly, but betcha beef gets no cheaper! Same for all other meats.

I have to admit that I enjoy the taste of most Quorn products but had to get used to the texture. Just eaten some beef jerky, not found a veggie product to equal that texture.

However, the potential for nutrients per hectare certainly favour veggy stuff - and more so with GMOs - so long as they don't use aggro chemicals by the ton and poison the waterways.

Why assume the market vollapses?
And I thought farmer Giles was a pig farmer anyway, isn't he of Ham?
Certainty disturbs me


Dave

  • Formerly known as Gloucester
  • Don't Pray in My School, and I Won't Think in Your Church
  • *****
  • Posts: 7105
  • Gender: Male
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #49 on: March 24, 2018, 04:59:16 PM »
Or no wingers.

What about Debra Winger?
I think Debra Winger should always be allowed.
What about food extremist like, vegans?  :eyebrow:

Less people eating meat → cheaper meat = Vegans good

You sure about that first part, Penny? The second part is judgment.

If the market for meat vollapses, because lots of people have stopped eating it, Farmer Giles has to reduce his beef herd of 200 to, ssy, 20. But he still needs to pay bills and taxes - which will not reduce by a factor of ten. So, no option but to charge more for what has now become a niche product!

Of course, if the change occurs slowly over a long period, like a generation, beef farmers will decline slowly, but betcha beef gets no cheaper! Same for all other meats.

I have to admit that I enjoy the taste of most Quorn products but had to get used to the texture. Just eaten some beef jerky, not found a veggie product to equal that texture.

However, the potential for nutrients per hectare certainly favour veggy stuff - and more so with GMOs - so long as they don't use aggro chemicals by the ton and poison the waterways.

Why assume the market vollapses?
And I thought farmer Giles was a pig farmer anyway, isn't he of Ham?

Nfewer people buying a product usualy causes a fall in price and thus market value. Ubtil it reaches a new level (maybe higher) as a luxury or niche product.

Anyway, had a 100% veggie tea: carrot, cuccumber, red pepper, sweet chillies, olives, tomatoes, celery with crusty olive bread spread with olive oil derived immitation butter.

To balance for stuffing myself with beef jerky earlier this aft!
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Papasito Bruno

  • Deranged Psychopathic Twinkle Toes
  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 5197
  • Gender: Male
  • Save water. Shower together!
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #50 on: March 27, 2018, 06:01:57 PM »
The recent events with Bretheren (he declared himself a Nazi) have led to discussions among the staff. The discussion led to the consideration of adding a new rule. In essence the rule would allow the staff to circumvent the existing 'three striles and you're out' for new members that support or are members of known racist, sexist or hate groups. The staff could effectivly ban on first offence.

What are your thoughts?

You have my vote...Fuck White Nationalists!
I'm truly sorry, but I can't keep explaining this simple thing to you over and over again hoping that you'll finally understand something so simple and obvious.
I'm not the "Dumb-Ass Whisperer".

I really, really hate anti-semantics.

Tom62

  • Global Moderator
  • Blessing Her Holy Hooves
  • *****
  • Posts: 4276
  • Gender: Male
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #51 on: March 28, 2018, 05:29:24 AM »
The recent events with Bretheren (he declared himself a Nazi) have led to discussions among the staff. The discussion led to the consideration of adding a new rule. In essence the rule would allow the staff to circumvent the existing 'three striles and you're out' for new members that support or are members of known racist, sexist or hate groups. The staff could effectivly ban on first offence.

What are your thoughts?

You have my vote...Fuck White Nationalists!

Fuck all extremists. I don't give a shit about their colour.
The universe never did make sense; I suspect it was built on government contract.
Robert A. Heinlein

hermes2015

  • Not Defeated by the Dark Night of the Soul
  • ****
  • Posts: 1655
  • Gender: Male
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #52 on: March 28, 2018, 05:33:49 AM »
The recent events with Bretheren (he declared himself a Nazi) have led to discussions among the staff. The discussion led to the consideration of adding a new rule. In essence the rule would allow the staff to circumvent the existing 'three striles and you're out' for new members that support or are members of known racist, sexist or hate groups. The staff could effectivly ban on first offence.

What are your thoughts?

You have my vote...Fuck White Nationalists!

Fuck all extremists. I don't give a shit about their colour.

One hundred percent agreement from me.
 :thumbsup:

Rift Zone

  • Not Sure About That Kool-Aid
  • **
  • Posts: 335
  • Mother Nature's little bitch; Proud Sagan Minion
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #53 on: March 28, 2018, 05:41:13 AM »
The way in which this was approached alone leaves the impression such power won't be abused.   So, I'd probably be on board with it even if my feelings about the situation wasn't along the lines of:  fuck all that; lose the lesser quality beings the moment they reveal themselves!    I simply won't have anything to do with hate groups/haters, including hang'n out in the same cyberspace.
In the last few millennia we have made the most astonishing and unexpected discoveries about the Cosmos and our place within it, explorations that are exhilarating to consider. They remind us that humans have evolved to wonder, that understanding is a joy, that knowledge is prerequisite to survival.   -Carl Sagan

Bad Penny II

  • Yields Not to Kalamity
  • ****
  • Posts: 1134
  • Nice Borderline Troll
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #54 on: March 28, 2018, 10:08:51 AM »
The recent events with Bretheren (he declared himself a Nazi) have led to discussions among the staff. The discussion led to the consideration of adding a new rule. In essence the rule would allow the staff to circumvent the existing 'three striles and you're out' for new members that support or are members of known racist, sexist or hate groups. The staff could effectivly ban on first offence.

What are your thoughts?

You have my vote...Fuck White Nationalists!

Fuck all extremists. I don't give a shit about their colour.

One hundred percent agreement from me.
 :thumbsup:

The A problem is extremists don't think they're extremists.
I think climate change is pretty scary and some definite if not drastic action is warranted.  I'm an extremist to some, though I think I'm prudent. It's messy, this human being business.
Certainty disturbs me


Tanksinatra

  • I did it my wayyyyyy!!!!
  • Administrator
  • Excellent and Indefatigable Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 30452
  • Gender: Male
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #55 on: March 28, 2018, 11:16:34 AM »
The recent events with Bretheren (he declared himself a Nazi) have led to discussions among the staff. The discussion led to the consideration of adding a new rule. In essence the rule would allow the staff to circumvent the existing 'three striles and you're out' for new members that support or are members of known racist, sexist or hate groups. The staff could effectivly ban on first offence.

What are your thoughts?

You have my vote...Fuck White Nationalists!

Fuck all extremists. I don't give a shit about their colour.

One hundred percent agreement from me.
 :thumbsup:

The A problem is extremists don't think they're extremists.
I think climate change is pretty scary and some definite if not drastic action is warranted.  I'm an extremist to some, though I think I'm prudent. It's messy, this human being business.

That is a fair point, in the sense that one persons terrorist is another persons freedom fighter. The reason for this rule addition was that we had never come up against a self confessed Nazi before. If he had just stated that inclination and not made a racist comment that member would probably still be here. But he did choose to make a racist comment. Now technically at the moment that should have been a first warning under the 'three strikes and you're out' mechanism. I took it upon myself to ban him at that point without giving the required two more warnings. But I don't like ignoring the rules of the forum (although it wouldn't be the first time I have done it). So if we get members of recognised extremist groups like the Nazi party or KKK I would like the staff to have the option to use the ban hammer on first offence if required. Does that make sense?
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
“Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.” ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

Bad Penny II

  • Yields Not to Kalamity
  • ****
  • Posts: 1134
  • Nice Borderline Troll
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #56 on: March 28, 2018, 11:47:40 AM »
So if we get members of recognised extremist groups like the Nazi party or KKK I would like the staff to have the option to use the ban hammer on first offence if required. Does that make sense?

Of course it does.
 
Certainty disturbs me


Papasito Bruno

  • Deranged Psychopathic Twinkle Toes
  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 5197
  • Gender: Male
  • Save water. Shower together!
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #57 on: March 28, 2018, 12:57:33 PM »
The recent events with Bretheren (he declared himself a Nazi) have led to discussions among the staff. The discussion led to the consideration of adding a new rule. In essence the rule would allow the staff to circumvent the existing 'three striles and you're out' for new members that support or are members of known racist, sexist or hate groups. The staff could effectivly ban on first offence.

What are your thoughts?

You have my vote...Fuck White Nationalists!

Fuck all extremists. I don't give a shit about their colour.

One hundred percent agreement from me.
 :thumbsup:

The A problem is extremists don't think they're extremists.
I think climate change is pretty scary and some definite if not drastic action is warranted.  I'm an extremist to some, though I think I'm prudent. It's messy, this human being business.

That is a fair point, in the sense that one persons terrorist is another persons freedom fighter. The reason for this rule addition was that we had never come up against a self confessed Nazi before. If he had just stated that inclination and not made a racist comment that member would probably still be here. But he did choose to make a racist comment. Now technically at the moment that should have been a first warning under the 'three strikes and you're out' mechanism. I took it upon myself to ban him at that point without giving the required two more warnings. But I don't like ignoring the rules of the forum (although it wouldn't be the first time I have done it). So if we get members of recognised extremist groups like the Nazi party or KKK I would like the staff to have the option to use the ban hammer on first offence if required. Does that make sense?

Absolutely it does, and I'm behind you 110 percent on this one Tank 8)
I'm truly sorry, but I can't keep explaining this simple thing to you over and over again hoping that you'll finally understand something so simple and obvious.
I'm not the "Dumb-Ass Whisperer".

I really, really hate anti-semantics.

Tanksinatra

  • I did it my wayyyyyy!!!!
  • Administrator
  • Excellent and Indefatigable Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 30452
  • Gender: Male
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #58 on: March 28, 2018, 01:03:11 PM »
Here's a proposed addition to the rules of the site, intended to address this issue. It isn't necessarily a final draft. Suggestions or discussion by the members may produce improvements to the wording.




New members who espouse support for extremist ideologies or known hate groups may not receive the full benefit of the Rule Enforcement Process, and may be summarily banned at the discretion of the staff of the site.

So would any body like to comment on the proposed wording of the additional rule?
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
“Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.” ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

Bad Penny II

  • Yields Not to Kalamity
  • ****
  • Posts: 1134
  • Nice Borderline Troll
Re: A potential rule modification.
« Reply #59 on: March 28, 2018, 01:28:50 PM »
Here's a proposed addition to the rules of the site, intended to address this issue. It isn't necessarily a final draft. Suggestions or discussion by the members may produce improvements to the wording.




New members who espouse support for extremist ideologies or known hate groups may not receive the full benefit of the Rule Enforcement Process, and may be summarily banned at the discretion of the staff of the site.

So would any body like to comment on the proposed wording of the additional rule?

New members who espouse support for extremist ideologies or known hate groups,
May be:
Summarily banned because they support extremist ideologies or known hate groups or
Sold for use in medical and or behavioural experiments to finance this forum or
Otherwise disposed of at whim of members
Certainty disturbs me