A question about a report I sent in.

He's asking a question, based upon your own statements. Does the question make you uncomfortable? Why?

A more important question is if it's an example of trolling or not.

It's not. Trolling is saying beginning an engagement with the intent of provoking the other person. In the second case, Chup as a question to a statement initiated by Dinner.

Sure looks like El Chup was trying to provoke Dinner, which would fit the definition of trolling. But it's pretty obvious this is being ignored because a lot of you don't like Dinner. This is Castle all over again.

So is it your opinion that it's not a legitimate question? We have a person on record expressing a negative point of view about the people who prepare halal meats, who is also on record as eating those meats. It's a valid question, though it certainly might cause Dinner some discomfort, having to reflect on the hypocrisy. What next, no discussion of Dayton's employment outside of the Red Room? No mention that Liet and Chup are lawyers?

The funny thing, and it's really extremely funny, is the extent to which Captain X and Dinner's position resembles that of the college kids complaining about triggers and demanding safe spaces. Yeah, you sure that's what you want?

What's the troll? Halal is for Muslims. You hate Muslims. Why would you therefore eat and enjoy their food if you don't like Muslims, want them banned from entering your country and regard them as "subhumans"? Perfectly valid question, and not against the rules. I never flamed you, and the question was termed using your own choice of description, not mine. Or are you saying that anything one says in the Red Room shouldn't be referenced elsewhere? Where does it say that in the rules? Perhaps even more to the point, where does it say in the rules that the Red Room is somewhere you can express bigoted and racist views and the rest of the board somewhere where people have to pretend as if you didn't? If you can't see that having the hypocrisy and audacity to partake in and enjoy things from Islamic culture when you regard Muslims as animals at the very least raises legitimate questions over your double standards, then you amaze me. I put it to you that if there was a good answer to the question you would have just answered and not regarded it as trolling.

You're now on record as a bigot and racist. That's going to follow you around this board for as long as you post here. Much like Dayton you don't seem to grasp that your actions have consequences. An intelligent man, even if he held such views, might have considered that many wouldn't likely agree and dialed it back, or just kept quiet. But not you, you thought you were being the big man with your racist bile. You didn't think that anyone would hold you to account for your views and, now, your demonstrable hypocrisy.

You wanted to be racist. Act like a grown up and lie in the bed you made. If anything, the very fact of you classing my question as trolling tells me you know subconsciously how disgraceful labels like "savages, "animals" and "subhumans" truly are, and how wrong it is to be enjoying the very things the people you use these labels against produce for you.

Yes, I was trying to provoke him...

...into answering a legitimate question. The horror!!!!!!!!!

Hm.

My original opinion was that if you open a thread about the holocaust outside of the Red Room for some reason, you are basically inviting political statements.

However, if this is now expanded to say that any question that exists on reasonable grounds is welcomed in the Green Room, even if it is clearly expected and intended to antagonise and disrupt an otherwise Green topic, as @gul seems to be suggesting, then I fail to see the point of the Green Room. If we were able to clearly distinguish heated debate from trolling, the Red Room wouldn't serve political debate at all.

The main point has always been discussion of lighter topics -- food, sports, etc. But that doesn't mean there is protection from being offended. I agree, though, that there is some (not well defined) line that people can cross in the Red Room but probably should not cross in the Green. If, for example, the food thread became nothing but sniping and derailment, I'd move those posts in to another thread, which I'd place in the Red Room. But I think Chup's question was on topic and reasonable.

The very concept of Halal isn't even possible for somebody with Dinner's views on Islam. So how can he embrace eating such food? It's not even necessarily a question that singles him out, because more broadly, do people eat things that compromise their moral convictions? I know of vegans who eat oysters, for example. If one can rationalize doing so, we should be able to critique and question the choice. And if anybody brings up buffalo chicken pizza, I'll question their credentials as a human being.

Egads, sir. You go too far.

This strikes me as right. An honest, topical, non-vulgar assessment of a poster's content fits in the Green Room even if it makes that poster look bad and draws a bad reaction. Bad faith, derailment, and gratuitous vulgarity are the markers of trolling that should be kept in the Red Room.

It's a loaded political question in a Green Room thread about food. If he wanted to give him shit about it, that's what the Red Room is for, is it not?

Do you know what Halal means?

Pretty much the same as "kosher" only with an islamic slant.

Yes, it means you can taste the fear that much more.

(Not for the faint of heart)


But what does that have to do with whether El Chup was trolling in the Green Room or not?

What's political about halal, or, for that matter, overt bigotry?

Jesus, you guys have got such butthurt over me it's unreal. Yet the only way you'll score any points against me is with an intelligent set of reponses or counter arguments. If none of you have that within your book iof tricks that's not my fault.

I'm not interested in countering your arguments here, I'm interested in pointing out that you were trolling Dinner outside of the Red Room and the hypocrisy of the mod staff in allowing it.

And there we go, a neg rep instead of an articulate response. Oh Xy, you wound me!!

Nope, sorry. I simply asked a question of him. You butthurt boys insisting it was something more doesn't make it so.

It was more than a simple question and you know it.

Once again, you demonstrate that you can't envision multiple opinions regarding a topic. Everything is either the CaptainX way or wrong. Well, that's simply not the case. So far, you haven't even demonstrated that you understand the point of the question Chup asked. This really is about micro-aggression, triggers, and the need for a safe space, isn't it?

You keep trying to construct this strawman to attack, and it just isn't working. No, it's not my way, it's what your own goddamn rules say and how you're selectively enforcing them.

More channelling of Kirk, I see. Laughing smileys in an attempt to show he hasn't just been slapped down. Neg repping - oh, my bad, disagree repping anyone with a valid point. Coming up next, calling garamet names - just because.

Anything to avoid equally applying the rules, huh? You are transparent.

That is the question he will never answer because he knows the answer and he knows El Chup is in violation. With Gul it all comes down to if he likes a poster or not and if he does then the rules are ignored. He is the poster child for selective enforcement.

Rightforge had him pegged from the beginning. He is a hypocrite.

You are not the first person to complain about "trolling" outside the red room. This place is what it is, it exists, because the members allow it. Sometimes, people get called to the carpet outside the red room. You either put your big girl panties on and deal with it, or you whine like a baby in the shelter.

The choice is yours.

It is, isn't it? They did the same thing to Dayton. They did not like him so they ignored the rules when ever Dayton was the target. John Castle was an asshole, but his onitial ban was complete bull shit because Gul didn't like him. The rules do not apply to Gul's pets and they are only weapons to be used against posters he does not like. It is perfectly obvious.

This is why so many posters have left. Because they had no faith in your abilities to impartially enforce the rules and every time you post you seem to prove they were right.

So, it's whining in the shelter, then. and "dumb"repping. It's too bad. I thought you were made of sterner stuff.

You know where the door is.

And, btw, it was way worse with previous management.