Drmies involved block and censorship

[rhinoroars]

:Again, NPOV must be maintained and your views of motivation behind two different rioting mobs do not decide whether it constitutes terrorism.[[User:ExplosiveResults|ExplosiveResults]] ([[User talk:ExplosiveResults|talk]]) 01:44, 8 January 2021 (UTC)link
Drmies Reverts this Undid revision 999006492 by ExplosiveResults (talk) not going to let you equate mostly peaceful protests with "riotous mobs")
link
PailSimon (T-C-L) reverts him with Undid revision 999006768 by Drmies (talk) not allowed to censor
link Drmies (talk | contribs)
(Reverted 1 edit by PailSimon (talk): Yes i am
link(Undid revision 999007156 by Drmies (talk) Your not allowed to delete coments just ebcause you disagree. grow up and read wiki policy.)
linkDrmies (talk | contribs)
(Undid revision 999007243 by PailSimon (talk))
Then Drmies (T-C-L) blocks PailSimon (T-C-L) clearly violating WP:INVOLVED (T-H-L)
and comment Again, NPOV must be maintained and your views of motivation behind two different rioting mobs do not decide whether it constitutes terrorism.The comment by ExplosiveResults (T-C-L) Is not a BLP Violation.

[C&B]

Drmies might Be An Ass. It's an ass, but What's He gonna Do.!

[MadManz]

Tbf ExplosiveResults should have just been blocked for being a far right weirdo none of this would have happened

[AndyTheGrump]

Keeping Fascist garbage off Wikipedia isn't 'censorship'. It is an entirely normal procedure, carried out by anyone with any sense, on any publicly-accessible website, anywhere. If doing so constitutes a technical breach of the websites own rules, so fucking what?

[Vigilant]

Keeping Fascist garbage off Wikipedia isn't 'censorship'. It is an entirely normal procedure, carried out by anyone with any sense, on any publicly-accessible website, anywhere. If doing so constitutes a technical breach of the websites own rules, so fucking what?

But why does it have to be that shitstain doing it and lending ammunition to the opposition.
Drmies has been a canker on these articles for such a long time and he only makes shit worse there.

[AndyTheGrump]

Keeping Fascist garbage off Wikipedia isn't 'censorship'. It is an entirely normal procedure, carried out by anyone with any sense, on any publicly-accessible website, anywhere. If doing so constitutes a technical breach of the websites own rules, so fucking what?

But why does it have to be that shitstain doing it and lending ammunition to the opposition.
Drmies has been a canker on these articles for such a long time and he only makes shit worse there.

I was responding to the thread title, rather than discussing the finer points of who did what. Yes, in an ideal world, Wikipedia would have better admins than Drmies to do the garbage-tossing, but that doesn't affect the point I was trying to make.

I sincerely hope that the thread title was just trolling, or based on sheer ignorance.

[Vigilant]

Keeping Fascist garbage off Wikipedia isn't 'censorship'. It is an entirely normal procedure, carried out by anyone with any sense, on any publicly-accessible website, anywhere. If doing so constitutes a technical breach of the websites own rules, so fucking what?

But why does it have to be that shitstain doing it and lending ammunition to the opposition.
Drmies has been a canker on these articles for such a long time and he only makes shit worse there.

I was responding to the thread title, rather than discussing the finer points of who did what. Yes, in an ideal world, Wikipedia would have better admins than Drmies to do the garbage-tossing, but that doesn't affect the point I was trying to make.

I sincerely hope that the thread title was just trolling, or based on sheer ignorance.

I get you.

[rhinoroars]

Drmies (T-C-L) 's block of PailSimon (T-C-L) is clearly involved .
He himself states that he will dragged to the ANI by most likely PailSimon for his block is over.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk ... ie_for_you!

Hey, I appreciate that. In fact, I expect to be dragged to ANI at any moment, haha, for that very incident you're thinking of, and I appreciate your kind words. One of the things that not all editors understand is that our talk pages are not free-speech zones, and that talk about BLM activists is really a BLP violation, besides a horrible equivocation. Drmies (talk) 22:52, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

This comment made by ExplosiveResults (T-C-L) is General one and not specific to anybody in particular, not a Textbook BLP Violation ( 99 out of 100 admins would have done nothing) for this comment

Again, NPOV must be maintained and your views of motivation behind two different rioting mobs do not decide whether it constitutes terrorism.

is not a BLP Violation for sure and one is allowed to controversial statements unless violate policy.

[AndyTheGrump]

Yeah, admins break Wikipedia rules frequently. This isn't news here. But why is this example so important?

[BijBolszewika]

Keeping Fascist garbage off Wikipedia isn't 'censorship'. It is an entirely normal procedure, carried out by anyone with any sense, on any publicly-accessible website, anywhere. If doing so constitutes a technical breach of the websites own rules, so fucking what?

Where the hell did you see "Fascism" involved? Just because you disagree with someone's word choice makes him a fascist? As I understand, there was just a minor dispute whether to use "insurrectionists" or "rioters" to describe Trump's mob.

[Midsize Jake]

Where the hell did you see "Fascism" involved? Just because you disagree with someone's word choice makes him a fascist? As I understand, there was just a minor dispute whether to use "insurrectionists" or "rioters" to describe Trump's mob.

My impression was that the guy insisted that if the word "terrorists" was used to describe the Capitol Building rioters, then they'd have to also describe "BLM rioters" as "terrorists" too, which is an argument only a fascist would make.

[AndyTheGrump]

^ This.

[orangepi]

PailSimon is clearly an ass and a troll, but I don't see the disruption to justify an INVOLVED block. It may be an interesting ANI thread to watch.

[rhinoroars]

I am not an American
But this comment may be politically incorrect or even if the comparison was wrong ex calling BLM protests as "BLM riots".It was made in general terms as a one-off comment.
This is not a policy violation. The comment should not be removed even a warning is not necessary and is surely is not a block.
Drmies may get away with it as an admin.But it is clear censorship

No, you may not refer to the mostly peaceful BLM protests as "BLM riots", and certainly not to those protesters as "riotous mobs". Please consider this a warning, and please look higher up on this very talk page for the Discretionary sanctions alert. Drmies (talk) 01:49, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

link

[Poetlister]

Keeping Fascist garbage off Wikipedia isn't 'censorship'. It is an entirely normal procedure, carried out by anyone with any sense, on any publicly-accessible website, anywhere. If doing so constitutes a technical breach of the websites own rules, so fucking what?

That is precisely why we have WP:IAR. Whenever the convoluted and often self-contradictory maze of WP rules and guidelines produce a nonsense result, common sense is needed.

[BijBolszewika]

Where the hell did you see "Fascism" involved? Just because you disagree with someone's word choice makes him a fascist? As I understand, there was just a minor dispute whether to use "insurrectionists" or "rioters" to describe Trump's mob.

My impression was that the guy insisted that if the word "terrorists" was used to describe the Capitol Building rioters, then they'd have to also describe "BLM rioters" as "terrorists" too, which is an argument only a fascist would make.

You don't see yourself just how laughable you make yourself? It doesn't take a "Fascist", just any moderate Conservative would equate far-left violence and Trumpeteer violence. In sheer size of property damage, the Capitol events were no match to the BLM/Antifa riots. Also, the BLM riots had more human victims, though admittedly they lasted much longer than this one-time event by Trump mob.

[AndyTheGrump]

[rhinoroars]

link
ANI thread

The context here is that User:Drmies took it upon himself to remove a talk page comment simply because he did not like what was being said. I personally did not agree with the sentiments expressed in said users comment but found the violation of WP:TPO particularly perturbing.

User:Drmies continued to edit war in violation of WP:TPO and eventually stopped after three reverts. He then proceeded to block me, without a hint of irony, for edit warring. Now regardless of whether or not you agree or disagree with my actions (I’ve already been blocked for it so it’s settled at this stage), this is a clear violation of WP:INVOLVED which stipulates that Admins involved in a conflict cannot take administrative action in such a situation and that if they were to this would be administrative abuse of powers.

WP:TOOLMISUSE clearly outlines this as a serious issue - “Misusing the administrative tools is considered a serious issue. The administrative tools are provided to trusted users for maintenance and other tasks, and should always be used with thought. Serious misuse may result in sanctions or even their removal.”

User:Drmies cannot claim to be ignorant of WP:TOOLMISUSE or WP:INVOLVED due to the fact that one would expect an admin of all people to be aware of Wikipedia’s own administrative policies but also due to the fact that I informed him that blocking a user you are involved in a dispute with is a clear abuse of administrative powers per the above policies. This was 22 minutes before he blocked me so he cannot claim not to have seen it.

User:Drmies therefore has blatantly and knowingly committed administrative abuse by breaching WP:INVOVLED and WP:TOOLMISUSE. In my opinion this seems like a clear cut case and I would respectfully suggest some form of punitive or remedial action should be pursued per WP:TOOLMISUSE.

PailSimon (talk) 13:24, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

[C&B]

See How the Oaf Deepfriedokra (T-C-L) defends drmies on solely Ideological Grounds

[BijBolszewika]

link
ANI thread

The context here is that User:Drmies took it upon himself to remove a talk page comment simply because he did not like what was being said. I personally did not agree with the sentiments expressed in said users comment but found the violation of WP:TPO particularly perturbing.

User:Drmies continued to edit war in violation of WP:TPO and eventually stopped after three reverts. He then proceeded to block me, without a hint of irony, for edit warring. Now regardless of whether or not you agree or disagree with my actions (I’ve already been blocked for it so it’s settled at this stage), this is a clear violation of WP:INVOLVED which stipulates that Admins involved in a conflict cannot take administrative action in such a situation and that if they were to this would be administrative abuse of powers.

WP:TOOLMISUSE clearly outlines this as a serious issue - “Misusing the administrative tools is considered a serious issue. The administrative tools are provided to trusted users for maintenance and other tasks, and should always be used with thought. Serious misuse may result in sanctions or even their removal.”

User:Drmies cannot claim to be ignorant of WP:TOOLMISUSE or WP:INVOLVED due to the fact that one would expect an admin of all people to be aware of Wikipedia’s own administrative policies but also due to the fact that I informed him that blocking a user you are involved in a dispute with is a clear abuse of administrative powers per the above policies. This was 22 minutes before he blocked me so he cannot claim not to have seen it.

User:Drmies therefore has blatantly and knowingly committed administrative abuse by breaching WP:INVOVLED and WP:TOOLMISUSE. In my opinion this seems like a clear cut case and I would respectfully suggest some form of punitive or remedial action should be pursued per WP:TOOLMISUSE.

PailSimon (talk) 13:24, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

My bet here is that mr. PailSimon will get permabanned. He has only 561 edits and challenging abusive admins like Drmies will cost him his account. What do you think, gentlemen?

[rhinoroars]

My bet here is that mr. PailSimon will get permabanned. He has only 561 edits and challenging abusive admins like Drmies will cost him his account. What do you think, gentlemen?

I agree even though it is clear-cut violation by Drmies is getting support here.Do not think that PailSimon (T-C-L) will be blocked here but he will be a marked man and can be indef blocked in the future.

[BijBolszewika]

My bet here is that mr. PailSimon will get permabanned. He has only 561 edits and challenging abusive admins like Drmies will cost him his account. What do you think, gentlemen?

I agree even though it is clear-cut violation by Drmies is getting support here.Do not think that PailSimon (T-C-L) will be blocked here but he will be a marked man and can be indef blocked in the future.

It's just incredible how ideologically blind can someone be in the West these days. Drmies' comment in the Incidents thread: " Equating mostly peaceful BLM protests with the seditious, violent behavior of a riotous mob [...]". ( Drmies (talk) 15:42, 9 January 2021 (UTC))

Now let us look at just some random images from this horrible summer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-qYbE1o5Pc "protesters looted stores ... ransacking shops, smahing windows" etc. (CBS News)

A "mostly" peaceful thing. Continuing for week after week after week. No match for Trump's mob's siege (that actually lasted only a couple of hours). According to Drmies.

[Midsize Jake]

You don't see yourself just how laughable you make yourself? It doesn't take a "Fascist", just any moderate Conservative would equate far-left violence and Trumpeteer violence. In sheer size of property damage, the Capitol events were no match to the BLM/Antifa riots. Also, the BLM riots had more human victims, though admittedly they lasted much longer than this one-time event by Trump mob.

This just means that you and I use different definitions of the word "terrorism." I take the more conventional view that terrorism is a tactic, in so far as violence is deliberately used in service of a political or quasi-military agenda, usually to overthrow and/or destroy a popular (or at least legitimate) government. You, on the other hand, appear to take the view that terrorism is something only black people do.

[BijBolszewika]

You don't see yourself just how laughable you make yourself? It doesn't take a "Fascist", just any moderate Conservative would equate far-left violence and Trumpeteer violence. In sheer size of property damage, the Capitol events were no match to the BLM/Antifa riots. Also, the BLM riots had more human victims, though admittedly they lasted much longer than this one-time event by Trump mob.

You, on the other hand, appear to take the view that terrorism is something only black people do.

Don't make yourself laughable mate. You're not so stupid as to construct such straw men. Most BLM/Antifa thugs are white. I never said only black people can do something heinous. Why do you claim I did? I was not even denying the heinousness of this bizarre 18th Bro-Maire of Donald Trump. For some reason for lefties, it always works only one way.

"Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" [burning cars and other property in the background]

[Ada Sinn]

Lot of people nowadays (particularly Americans) don't really understand what real fascism is. As Robert Paxton, scholar of fascism, said "Everyone is someone's fascist." The term is criminally overused out of context, probably even more than labelling someone as "socialist" in the U.S and A.

[Midsize Jake]

Don't make yourself laughable mate. You're not so stupid as to construct such straw men. Most BLM/Antifa thugs are white. I never said only black people can do something heinous. Why do you claim I did? I was not even denying the heinousness of this bizarre 18th Bro-Maire of Donald Trump.

First, you have no idea as to how stupid I am. I always strive to do what's right, so that should tell you something right there.

Second, what you laughably call "BLM riots" were, in fact, police riots. In virtually every case, peaceful protesters were violently attacked by armed, aggressive police and other agents of authority, for no good reason. If a few of their flash-bang grenades and other incendiaries landed under peoples' cars, that's unfortunate, but the fact remains, most of the property damage actually done by the protesters was (and still is) in the form of graffiti, not arson. The fact that the damage has been blamed on the quasi-mythical "antifa" is even more laughable, but regardless, that is simply propaganda — and if you believe that propaganda, you're a lot stupider than I am. (I suspect you don't believe it, if only because you're apparently smart enough to be able to use the word "heinous" in a sentence.)

Third, the BLM protests are, at their core, about black people getting shot by police at traffic stops for no good reason. This has been going on for decades. There is no excuse for it. And to compare this in any way to organized Trumpist domestic-terror groups literally trying to occupy the US Capitol to try and abduct elected officials is absurd. Let me be clear on that: That comparison is completely fucking absurd. And for you to say "I wasn't even denying the heinousness" of this, as if it even could be seriously denied, particularly after you've already used the term "events" to describe them instead of "riot," well, that's absurd too.

Having said all that, I actually agree with the basic premise of this thread: User:Drmies (T-C-L) overreacted by blocking User:PailSimon (T-C-L) for 31 hours, as did User:Primefac (T-C-L) for blocking User:ExplosiveResults (T-C-L) for 31 hours. I don't believe "WP:BOOMERANG" should be applied to PailSimon for reporting it to WP:ANI, either. Just because those two people are wrong doesn't mean they should be removed from the field. Presumably this is "just what happens" in times of extremist-driven political instability, at least when a heavily-trafficked website purporting to be an "encyclopedia" is controlled by whoever happens to show up that day.

Wikipedia has lots of objectionable users, and they're not going to stop them by handing out 31-hour blocks whenever they say something objectionable. That's only going to piss them off. Unfortunately, trying to reason with them takes time, and time is a valuable commodity. Blocks only take a few seconds. That's why these things happen.

[BijBolszewika]

Copypasta:

The house at the center of the autonomous zone was occupied by members of the Kinney family and their allies. The Kinneys, who haven’t paid their mortgage since 2017, were evicted after a tortuous legal process. The fact that they own a second house nearby didn’t prevent the mixed-race Kinneys and their allies from claiming victimization by — you guessed it — “racism.”

Soon after last week’s raid on the occupied house, some 100 Antifa comrades mobilized through social media to retake the space. “There is an active call for numbers, defensive gear and supplies and change of clothes,” tweeted Antifa group Youth Liberation Front.

Within a few hours, the entire street was blocked off with stolen fencing, wood and junk taken from nearby homes. Some brought in power tools to reinforce the barriers. The militants laid out piles of rocks, metal spikes and glass bottles at strategic points to act as supply points for projectile weapons. They lined the road with impromptu “booby traps” — upward-facing nail strips, caltrops and more.

Portland police officers tried to shut down the RHAZ early on, but they were attacked and chased away. Their police cruisers were smashed up; they didn’t return.

“Those present at the barricades should leave it behind, put down your weapons and allow the neighborhood to return to peace and order,” Portland Police Chief Chuck Lovell asked the militants, who ignored his polite request.

To protect their autonomous zone, the militants had their own team of roving “security,” like at the CHAZ. They openly carried rifles and pistols. Neighborhood families felt terrorized; some have left.

Source: https://nypost.com/2020/12/15/portland- ... big-again/

I think the police should have just left everywhere and let the "protesters" take over, because, as Midsize Jake explains us, it was the POLICE that caused violence, smashed windows, indulged in arson, looted shops (yes, the CBS report specifically mentioned LOOTING SHOPS).

[AndyTheGrump]

It was decades of endemic racism and police violence that caused the BLM protests. So yes, there was property damage. And yes, there was sometimes violent resistance. Why the heck shouldn't people fight back against oppression, Mr 'Beat Bolshivism'? It that something only the Poles should do?

[Ada Sinn]

It was decades of endemic racism and police violence that caused the BLM protests. So yes, there was property damage. And yes, there was sometimes violent resistance. Why the heck shouldn't people fight back against oppression, Mr 'Beat Bolshivism'? It that something only the Poles should do?

[Zoloft]

We've got a nice left-right progressive-repressive divide going here.

I'm only interested in one thing at the moment:

BijBolszewika (aka Beat the Bolshevik), what is your avatar image? Currency of some sort? Or a mashup of stuff... if a mashup, please identify the components.

Thanks!

[BijBolszewika]

We've got a nice left-right progressive-repressive divide going here.

I'm only interested in one thing at the moment:

BijBolszewika (aka Beat the Bolshevik), what is your avatar image? Currency of some sort? Or a mashup of stuff... if a mashup, please identify the components.

Thanks!

"A nice left-right progressive-repressive divide " - can you leftists make one post that wouldn't be dishonest nor misrepresent something? Why not just "left-right progressive-conservative". Was Pence nasty for being "repressive" when he asked the national guard to intervene urgently?

As to your question about my avatar, it is a mock "banknote" from Poland under Jaruzelski's dictatorship (when these were produced as an act of protest). It reads "Thirty pieces of silver" in Polish, i.e. compares the dictator with Judas. I don't see anything controversial here, and no, I only added it as a funny image, it really doesn't signify anything.

[AndyTheGrump]

...Why not just "left-right progressive-conservative"...

Because (failed) Fascist coup. I see no reason why anyone should pussy-foot around this. Wikipedia should be treating those that try to equate BLM with the deranged scum who invaded the Capitol with the intention of subverting the election the same way it does pro-paedophile 'contributors'. Ban them on sight. If this upsets conservatives who would rather not be reminded of who they've been getting chummy with, tough.

[Midsize Jake]

Why not just "left-right progressive-conservative".

We're in the United States — real (or "more traditional") conservatives don't like being lumped in with the Trump folks. Whatever we might think of that privately, in public threads we mostly try to accommodate them in that regard. (As for Pike Mence, wasn't he really just trying to save his own ass there?)

As to your question about my avatar, it is a mock "banknote" from Poland under Jaruzelski's dictatorship (when these were produced as an act of protest).

Here's an example... I can't imagine anyone being offended by it really, though of course I'm not Polish myself.

[BijBolszewika]

...Why not just "left-right progressive-conservative"...

Because (failed) Fascist coup. I see no reason why anyone should pussy-foot around this. Wikipedia should be treating those that try to equate BLM with the deranged scum who invaded the Capitol with the intention of subverting the election the same way it does pro-paedophile 'contributors'. Ban them on sight. If this upsets conservatives who would rather not be reminded of who they've been getting chummy with, tough.

*yawn*

[Zoloft]

We've got a nice left-right progressive-repressive divide going here.

I'm only interested in one thing at the moment:

BijBolszewika (aka Beat the Bolshevik), what is your avatar image? Currency of some sort? Or a mashup of stuff... if a mashup, please identify the components.

Thanks!

"A nice left-right progressive-repressive divide " - can you leftists make one post that wouldn't be dishonest nor misrepresent something? Why not just "left-right progressive-conservative". Was Pence nasty for being "repressive" when he asked the national guard to intervene urgently?

As to your question about my avatar, it is a mock "banknote" from Poland under Jaruzelski's dictatorship (when these were produced as an act of protest). It reads "Thirty pieces of silver" in Polish, i.e. compares the dictator with Judas. I don't see anything controversial here, and no, I only added it as a funny image, it really doesn't signify anything.

Ok, I checked your temperament. You lather quite easily. I do remember Jaruzelski. He was quite the dictator. As far as being a leftist, you're incorrect. I am looking right now at a citation from Donald Rumsfeld for my work in the Cold War. Rummy wasn't a good reference for a resume.

[AndyTheGrump]

Yeah, regarding the banknote, I can't imagine there are any supporters of Jaruzelski on this forum (or that many anywhere else?). Maybe some might see the '30 pieces of silver' thing as potentially antisemitic (there is actually a history of this, though it only really makes sense if you understand the context), but I see no reason to see it that way. Political humour can sometimes be the most effective form of subversion available. Until you can get the shipyard workers out on strike...

[Vigilant]

...Why not just "left-right progressive-conservative"...

Because (failed) Fascist coup. I see no reason why anyone should pussy-foot around this. Wikipedia should be treating those that try to equate BLM with the deranged scum who invaded the Capitol with the intention of subverting the election the same way it does pro-paedophile 'contributors'. Ban them on sight. If this upsets conservatives who would rather not be reminded of who they've been getting chummy with, tough.

[Beeblebrox]

It's funny to watch those who have tried so hard to make the US a dictatorship whine and cry about censorship when one of them is kicked off a privately owned website.
On Wednesday, your pals at the Capitol attacked a crew from AP, broke their equipment, and used their cables to fashion a noose. At one point a man addressing the crowd on the steps yelled that when they kicked off the Capitol steps they needed to go fine the mainstream media and kill them, and everyone was fine with that, thought it was great.
Ya'll aint't the victims here, America is. Fuck off.

[Randy from Boise]

Keeping Fascist garbage off Wikipedia isn't 'censorship'. It is an entirely normal procedure, carried out by anyone with any sense, on any publicly-accessible website, anywhere. If doing so constitutes a technical breach of the websites own rules, so fucking what?

Excellent use of IAR.

t

[Randy from Boise]

Lot of people nowadays (particularly Americans) don't really understand what real fascism is. As Robert Paxton, scholar of fascism, said "Everyone is someone's fascist." The term is criminally overused out of context, probably even more than labelling someone as "socialist" in the U.S and A.

I use my own definition of fascism. It is pretty good.

"Fascism is nationalism + militarism + capitalism, unbounded by the rule of law."

t

[greyed.out.fields]

Lot of people nowadays (particularly Americans) don't really understand what real fascism is. As Robert Paxton, scholar of fascism, said "Everyone is someone's fascist." The term is criminally overused out of context, probably even more than labelling someone as "socialist" in the U.S and A.

I use my own definition of fascism. It is pretty good.

"Fascism is nationalism + militarism + capitalism, unbounded by the rule of law."

t

Nice use of "criminally" to mean "in a way I don't like" rather than "in a way that is an actual criminal offence" there, btw.

[C&B]

I use my own definition of fascism. It is pretty good.

It's already been defined.

Some Presumably think that, it too, is pretty good

[The Garbage Scow]

Donald Trump is a demagogue and a wannabe Fascist dictator who, frankly, has committed Treason. Is someone really coming here suddenly to complain about "leftists"? The world has plenty of authoritarian dictatorships to choose from, pick one.

[BijBolszewika]

Donald Trump is a demagogue and a wannabe Fascist dictator who, frankly, has committed Treason. Is someone really coming here suddenly to complain about "leftists"? The world has plenty of authoritarian dictatorships to choose from, pick one.

Two wrongs don't make one right. The fact that Trump is an idiot does not justify the BLM/Antifa thugs' wanton violence in any way.

[Midsize Jake]

The fact that Trump is an idiot does not justify the BLM/Antifa thugs' wanton violence in any way.

Good thing it doesn't have to, then.

[BijBolszewika]

Lot of people nowadays (particularly Americans) don't really understand what real fascism is. As Robert Paxton, scholar of fascism, said "Everyone is someone's fascist." The term is criminally overused out of context, probably even more than labelling someone as "socialist" in the U.S and A.

I use my own definition of fascism. It is pretty good.

"Fascism is nationalism + militarism + capitalism, unbounded by the rule of law."

t

Yes, capitalism is the root cause of all evils. Capitalism coupled with "racism" and "islamophobia".

[Bezdomni]

Lot of people nowadays (particularly Americans) don't really understand what real fascism is. As Robert Paxton, scholar of fascism, said "Everyone is someone's fascist." The term is criminally overused out of context, probably even more than labelling someone as "socialist" in the U.S and A.

I use my own definition of fascism. It is pretty good.

"Fascism is nationalism + militarism + capitalism, unbounded by the rule of law."

t

Yes, capitalism is the root cause of all evils. Capitalism coupled with "racism" and "islamophobia".

I take it this is meant to be irony. Still, there is no denying that "interest" (which is -- in principle -- haram in Islam as it used to be in Christianity) and the amassing of capital has been a major point of contention over the years, despite the rising tide that raises all the battleships & grounds them 5km inland.

ps: yes, I know that some Saudis/Kuwaitis/Qatari/etc. are very rich and that the Dubai Investment Authority owns much of the prime real estate downtown in my nearest big city. (The Church still has some prime properties too, though their influence has waned somewhat...)

[The Garbage Scow]

Two wrongs don't make one right. The fact that Trump is an idiot does not justify the BLM/Antifa thugs' wanton violence in any way.

Typical whataboutism.

[Poetlister]

Two wrongs don't make one right. The fact that Trump is an idiot does not justify the BLM/Antifa thugs' wanton violence in any way.

Typical whataboutism.

Trump is of course (for a few more days anyway) the president of the world's second biggest democracy. We're entitled to expect rather more from him than from a bunch of thugs.

[rhinoroars]

My bet here is that mr. PailSimon will get permabanned. He has only 561 edits and challenging abusive admins like Drmies will cost him his account. What do you think, gentlemen?

It is turning people against are asking for topic ban through it will not come through. I can only think that most editors commenting here are not looking at the diffs and basing it on the reputation of the involved editors.

Comment I know that Drmies deservedly carries a lot of respect around here, but am I reading a different set of diffs to everyone else? This is not even close to the worst comment I have seen ignored on a talk page. Removing it makes no sense either as they were esentially repeating their first comment which was left alone. This was unnecessarily dismissive and quite conceited. The comment still stands as of my typing this so no other editor has deemed it bad enough to remove; in fact as far as I can tell apart from the original commentator no one else had been involved in this edit war. The fact that Drmies blocked them for disruptive editing is not okay. An admin blocking an editor they are involved with in a content dispute is clearly inappropriate and has lead to harsh sanctions in the past. I can only think that most editors commenting here are not looking at the diffs and basing it on the reputation of the involved editors. This is a valid report and should be treated like one. AIRcorn (talk) 07:37, 13 January 2021 (UTC)