Forum
plz ban the nazi stuff
|
WILenin wrote
at 7:53 AM, Thursday August 26, 2010 EDT
the Marcinus1002 player shows a nazi flag. do something? or is such offensive shit allowed at kdice?
|
« First
‹ Previous
Replies 11 - 20 of 20
|
Leo Dice wrote
at 1:02 PM, Thursday August 26, 2010 EDT I got your point that's for sharing and correcting me.
|
|
DeathToGiladShal wrote
at 1:30 PM, Thursday August 26, 2010 EDT as stated above kehoe, no need to suoblepost
|
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 3:35 PM, Thursday August 26, 2010 EDT The likeness of someone, like Mao Xedong or Adolph Hitler, who committed atrocities, is not bannable, as it is not the likeness through which the atrocities were committed. Furthermore, the person having the likeness may have repented at the last minute.
The symbol of the philosophy or movement that committed the atrocities is bannable if the person posting it "claims" the underlying philsophy, or there is no reasonable possiblity that the symbol is being used for something else. There is no reasonable possibility that a Nazi flag would be used here other than to represent the atrocities that the Nazis did; on the other hand, a flag of Communist China could be used to represent things other than atrocities committed by one of its former rulers; for example,any kdice player from China can display a Chinese flag. |
|
leeeroy jenkins wrote
at 3:48 PM, Thursday August 26, 2010 EDT freedom of speech also doesn't apply to hate speech or offensive images
|
|
noamlang1 wrote
at 4:21 PM, Thursday August 26, 2010 EDT what about offensive names?
Deathtogiladshal is offensive to israeli's since it calls to kill a soldier of the israeli army in captivity |
|
CriticalDog wrote
at 4:22 PM, Thursday August 26, 2010 EDT Freedom of speech absolutely applies to offensive and controversial speech.
"I may not agree with what you say, but I defend to the death your right to say it." |
|
Vermont wrote
at 7:49 PM, Thursday August 26, 2010 EDT The U.S. Constitution:
Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Freedom of speech from the first amendment can be summed up this way: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech Bottom line: Ryan is not Congress. The Constitution does not say that a privately owned website must guarantee that members can say whatever they want on the forums. It simply states that CONGRESS must not abridge the freedom of speech. People have rights to say whatever they want, whenever they want, wherever they want: on their own property, within the confines of their own space in accordance with the laws of the land. However, you do not have freedom of speech on privately owned websites or privately owned forums. |
|
Leo Dice wrote
at 7:59 PM, Thursday August 26, 2010 EDT Okay for the last time I WAS PROVEN WRONG STOP POINTING IT OUT. Quite annoying.
|
|
Contador wrote
at 5:05 PM, Monday August 30, 2010 EDT you're a fucking nazi for trying to get people banned via forums
|
|
Contador wrote
at 5:08 PM, Monday August 30, 2010 EDT edit: vermont cut through the bullshit with your united states consTITution business and get a life instead of trying to sound intelligent on a game where everyone plays 15 mins a day to unwind after work - no one wants to read your bullshit kthxbi
|