LogFAQs > #901906568

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, Database 3 ( 02.21.2018-07.23.2018 ), DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Literally modded for insulting murderers and rapists.
MelzezDoor 05/24/18 11:57:54 AM #49:	Slip-N-Slide posted... MelzezDoor posted... Maybe because CE has a tendency to prematurely label people and subsequently bully them for it? Just maybe?? Pretty sure witch hunting is not allowed. Much less baseless witch hunting. The topic I responded to was of a convicted sex offender who sexually abused two brothers and didn't deny it. I specified in my post that only people capable of cold blooded violent murder, and rapists who willingly did it of their own accord, specifically child rapists immediately [redacted] once they commit the act of doing it. I never mentioned anyone specific, I only meant people who have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as guilty and are truly what they are accused of are inherently [redacted]. Didn't realize that was an offensive stance to take that someone who chooses to do something like that of their own accord is immediately [redacted] and is only good for psychological profiling and preventing future crimes. Didn't realize that was a bold stance to take. "Didn't deny" is not enough especially for someone who is not directly involved. Besides, it's a behavioral thing. Like devolving AMA topics. Sensitive subjects like these are prone to witch hunting and thus merits harsher mods. It's about setting a precedent. Imagine if this kind of talk was allowed it'd be easy to egg people on and on and would inevitably be abused. Conflict posted... Don't use "witch hunting" if you don't know the context TC was saying this about a poster's coworker. How you can "witch hunt" someone you have zero information about Oh he was talking about a poster's coworker? I see. Yes, how can you witch hunt just from that? lmao --- https://imgur.com/ARaZB2G https://imgur.com/LvEUiSl <cite>MelzezDoor posted [p:901906568] in Literally ... [t:76637490]...</cite> <quote><cite>Slip-N-Slide posted...</cite> <quote><cite>MelzezDoor posted...</cite> <quote>Maybe because CE has a tendency to prematurely label people and subsequently bully them for it? Just maybe?? Pretty sure witch hunting is not allowed. Much less baseless witch hunting.</quote> The topic I responded to was of a convicted sex offender who sexually abused two brothers and didn't deny it. I specified in my post that only people capable of cold blooded violent murder, and rapists who willingly did it of their own accord, specifically child rapists immediately [redacted] once they commit the act of doing it. I never mentioned anyone specific, I only meant people who have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as guilty and are truly what they are accused of are inherently [redacted]. Didn't realize that was an offensive stance to take that someone who chooses to do something like that of their own accord is immediately [redacted] and is only good for psychological profiling and preventing future crimes. Didn't realize that was a bold stance to take.</quote> "Didn't deny" is not enough especially for someone who is not directly involved. Besides, it's a behavioral thing. Like devolving AMA topics. Sensitive subjects like these are prone to witch hunting and thus merits harsher mods. It's about setting a precedent. Imagine if this kind of talk was allowed it'd be easy to egg people on and on and would inevitably be abused. <cite>Conflict posted...</cite> <quote>Don't use "witch hunting" if you don't know the context TC was saying this about a poster's coworker. How you can "witch hunt" someone you have zero information about</quote> Oh he was talking about a poster's coworker? I see. Yes, how can you witch hunt just from that? lmao --- https://imgur.com/ARaZB2G https://imgur.com/LvEUiSl</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1