Gautum wrote: <<If someone chooses to call Jeroen a Nazi, that's their business, and it's not okay to censor them for it. Ever. Etiquette is etiquette – one of the things that is implied by etiquette is that it is enforceable only through social sanction. No one arrests you for using the wrong fork. Banning someone from the list is not social sanction. So I'm going to maintain my previous stance on this.>>
No. I completely disagree with this. Civilized people do not name-call and they at least make an attempt to remain polite. They attack the argument and not the attacker. Furthermore, the rules of the list say you shouldn’t or else risk banishment by the list-owners. Those rules are not arbitrary; they were put in place as a mild form of requested self-censorship that ensures that even the nastiest of debates remains civilized. State your opinions, yes, but don’t name-call. And if you’re concerned about whether or not etiquette really does apply, consider that this list is a social forum where there are rules of discourse among list participants. Banishment from a social forum is a social sanction by definition. I’m repeating myself here for your benefit. I posted this earlier today: The name Jeroen was called was “Fucking Nazi.” This puts him in the same category as a group of people who murdered 18 million innocents as casually as you or I would blow out a candle. This is wrong and reprehensible. I disagree with his politics, but that certainly doesn’t make him deserve the comparison. Completely for the sake of argument and with absolutely no offense intended to other subscribers, by your comments I would assume that if someone on the list called a Black man a “fucking nigger” or a Jew a “fucking Kike” you would have no qualms with that? You also would not condemn, criticize or “ding” the poster? <<For an absentee list-owner to abruptly step in with a context free admonition of one of the list's most active and (imo) respected posters is simply wrong. Since it was clearly prompted by an argument with another list-owner, it smacks of intimidation.>> Yes it does, and the people involved need to explain themselves – preferably quickly. Jeroen, you offered to share the relevant posts with the list. Please do so. I have seen nothing that warrants John G being publicly threatened by a list-owner. Jon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
