On Sun, 03 May 2015 21:48:12 +0200, DAN <dan@no.spam.thanks> wrote:
>Charles Lindbergh wrote:
>
>>Thanks for your attempted diversion Dan.
>>I am afraid all of your speculation and guilt by association has been wasted.
>
>
>>my real last name is Lindbergh, my middle name is Charles and I have been
>>known as "Chuck" for many decades.
>I assumed it was a pseudo. My bad.
>My message was neither diversion nor guilt trip. Only based on the (false)
>assumption that the handle was a pseudo chosen in admiration of Charles Augustus
>Lindbergh, I was de-bunking his fame.
>Of course if it is your real name then this point is moot.
>
>>Additionally, you have never and will never see anything posted by me that is in
>>anyway racist or supportive of fascism.
>I did not insinuate anything like this. My comments were definitely not directed
>at you, but at Charles Augustus who I see as despicable bastard. Which of course
>has nothing to do with your person if you happen to have the same name.
>
>>On the other hand, Byker's "nigger" posts were blatantly racist, vulgar and, in
>>my humble opinion, devoid of humor.
>>I am wondering what your opinion is of Byker's "nigger" posts?
>>Do you have the courage to take a stand and be honest?
>Courage, on the usenet? meh.
>
>About those posts: English is not my 1st language and I can't quite tell whether
>it is simple racism, or some kind of attempt at 2nd degree humor by challenging
>the heavily political correctness ambient culture.
>
>If it is such an attempt, then IMO it is not in the best taste, and very dubious
>execution at minimum. But to a small extent I can see the point of poking the
>politikorrect Gestapo in the eye. Better taste wouldn't hurt, though. (being
>understood that I am nobody's nanny...)
>
>
>If it was simple racism, then of course it would be despicable. But somehow I am
>not convinced that this is all there is to it. I hope I'm not completely wrong.
>
>Some of Byker's posts in 2005 on the civil war in Liberia where quite hilarious.
>
>
>Now I can fully see why other people would not want to look beyond the face
>value and stop there, even be offended. Plonk filters are their friend.
>
You are entitled to offer your explanations, rationalizations and
justifications.
As for kill filters, thank you, until now, I never understood their purpose.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
|