Articles & Happening Meta Discussion

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Articles & Happenings is the third attempt at a news board on the Kiwi Farms. It is a cursed place. Every moderator who has been assigned here has resigned within a year. During 2016, the political crossfire was so bad it spread to different boards and culminated in me banning American news discussion entirely for several months. It has been deleted in its entirety twice. There is no actual discussion here, it's people posting garbage. It leans much further right than the rest of the site and doesn't particularly conduct discussion because dissenting opinions are dogpiled by a thousand memelords posting shit they read on /pol/ without any critical analysis.

The only rules that can be enforced are empirical ones with boolean violation answers. New threads must cite a real source directly and must use the headline of the article as a thread title without any editorializing. Articles must be archived in some way and must link to the original article. Replies that are one word or a reaction images are automatic one-month bans from the board.

I'm creating this now because it seems like this place is here to stay and is one of the largest areas of the entire site. I might as well throw in bare minimum effort to improve it. I don't even try to find mods for here because they will quit, without exception. I've added new prefixes ("Business" and "Crime") just now.

Discuss.


New threads should be made like this.
1570266734258.png
 
Last edited:
Click to expand...
It's HK-47 said:
Any and all rationality flies out of the window as soon as it's brought up and then every reply there-after is just a variation on gas the war, race Kikes now.
Click to expand...

It's not though. Mike Godwin is a guy who invented a dictum about Internet arguments, back before the web, named after him "Godwin's Law," that as the length of a discussion thread increase, the odds of someone bringing up Nazis or Hitler approach 1. This was soon generalized into a rule that if you were the one responsible, you lost. Godwin himself among others explained the general rule as being that any comparison to what the Nazis did and what is being discussed in an Internet thread is almost invariably completely idiotic.

That was true then and is true now.

Now Godwin himself is nearly continually making this utterly idiotic comparison, and of course, backing off his equally famous support of free speech in favor of one particular group.

The fact that he just happens to belong to that specific group highlights his hypocrisy and I'm not sure how you can discuss it without that context. Maybe some who insist on bringing it up are anti-Semitic and I'm sure a few are even "neo-Nazis," one of the few groups one can actually reasonably compare to actual Nazis.

That said, he's hypocritical because he's making an exception in a general rule out of pure self interest because he belongs to the group he wants to make an exception in favor of, and he supports this exception using arguments containing a fallacy he himself is so famous for mocking there's a law about it named specifically after him.

Dissected like that it's a bit dull but it's still funny that this Jew does this shit.
 
AnOminous said:
It's not though. Mike Godwin is a guy who invented a dictum about Internet arguments, back before the web, named after him "Godwin's Law," that as the length of a discussion thread increase, the odds of someone bringing up Nazis or Hitler approach 1. This was soon generalized into a rule that if you were the one responsible, you lost. Godwin himself among others explained the general rule as being that any comparison to what the Nazis did and what is being discussed in an Internet thread is almost invariably completely idiotic.

That was true then and is true now.

Now Godwin himself is nearly continually making this utterly idiotic comparison, and of course, backing off his equally famous support of free speech in favor of one particular group.

The fact that he just happens to belong to that specific group highlights his hypocrisy and I'm not sure how you can discuss it without that context. Maybe some who insist on bringing it up are anti-Semitic and I'm sure a few are even "neo-Nazis," one of the few groups one can actually reasonably compare to actual Nazis.

That said, he's hypocritical because he's making an exception in a general rule out of pure self interest because he belongs to the group he wants to make an exception in favor of, and he supports this exception using arguments containing a fallacy he himself is so famous for mocking there's a law about it named specifically after him.

Dissected like that it's a bit dull but it's still funny that this Jew does this shit.
Click to expand...
That's more to my point, though. If it was laid out and contextualized like that, I don't think that the post would have been deleted or even noticed. Instead, the post was framed as a fairly run-of-the-mill, "Look at this Zionist Jew" and that's undoubtedly what provoked the deletion. A huge text-wall to explain the history behind Godwin's arguments wouldn't have caused anyone to bat an eyelash.

I don't believe that it was the underlying argument that caught the staff's attention, I think it was just the way it was presented.
 
AnOminous said:
The fact that he just happens to belong to that specific group highlights his hypocrisy and I'm not sure how you can discuss it without that context. Maybe some who insist on bringing it up are anti-Semitic and I'm sure a few are even "neo-Nazis," one of the few groups one can actually reasonably compare to actual Nazis.

That said, he's hypocritical because he's making an exception in a general rule out of pure self interest because he belongs to the group he wants to make an exception in favor of, and he supports this exception using arguments containing a fallacy he himself is so famous for mocking there's a law about it named specifically after him.
Click to expand...

Wait, I read the article. I didn't see Godwin advocating for an exception for particular people. Did that happen somewhere else?
 
X Prime said:
Wait, I read the article. I didn't see Godwin advocating for an exception for particular people. Did that happen somewhere else?
Click to expand...

I've seen him be obnoxiously Zionist and compare criticism of Israel to Nazism. I'm not sure if that happened in this case but people seemed to be arguing that.
 
AnOminous said:
I've seen him be obnoxiously Zionist and compare criticism of Israel to Nazism. I'm not sure if that happened in this case but people seemed to be arguing that.
Click to expand...

That's incredible, I didn't know that part.

Unfortunately, it is sounding like @3119967d0c's post got deleted despite being completely factual and pertinent, considering Godwin has expressed a desire for government and "multistakeholder" (read: NGO) oversight over Internet speech.
 
Your Weird Fetish said:
Ashkenazim are white and based. Maybe the whitest of us all, the whitest ever. I unironically welcome our Hebrew overlords.


I don't like the guy LARPing as a sand nigger either but consistency in rules is good. We post in a society
Click to expand...

But this is Trump's america, so society is now controlled by jewish overlords and all criticism of the new rulers will be met with extreme censorship on the Kiwifarms.

He tried to warn us, but we did not listen.

First they came for Corbin Dallas Multipass, and I did not speak out -
Because it was funny
 
It's HK-47 said:
Instead, the post was framed as a fairly run-of-the-mill, "Look at this Zionist Jew" and that's undoubtedly what provoked the deletion. A huge text-wall to explain the history behind Godwin's arguments wouldn't have caused anyone to bat an eyelash.
Click to expand...
I'm not a mod, but IMO, if you use the word Zionist multiple times in a thread, you deserve to have that removed.

All it does is attract the usual "1488, gas the Jews" /pol/ crap. I'm quite surprised the N word is unregulated here.
 
The Last Stand said:
I'm not a mod, but IMO, if you use the word Zionist multiple times in a thread, you deserve to have that removed.

All it does is attract the usual "1488, gas the Jews" /pol/ crap. I'm quite surprised the N word is unregulated here.
Click to expand...
No, those posts get deleted all the time, too. Granted this kind of thing isn't set in stone anywhere, there's not some sort of hidden rule-book that we're supposed to follow, but the way it's enforced seems to be on the context, not the content. People make Jew jokes and nigger jokes and chink jokes all the time here, but nobody cares because it's a joke. That's why it's fun to call your friends faggots, but it takes on an entirely different feeling when the Westboro Baptists Church starts screaming about God hating the fags.

When it ceases to be a joke and it's obvious that the person just wants to throw all these slurs out there because they are legitimately big-mad, it's no longer a joke and that is what will wind up pulling in the 8Chan types. The context is infinitely more important than just the word itself, and up until fairly recently the context was all that mattered, hence why George Carlin had entire stand-ups dedicated to shitting out as many "bad words" as possible.

Nobody cared because it was a joke. I fall into the same camp, myself. I don't particularly care about the word being used, I only care about the context of its usage.
 
It's HK-47 said:
No, those posts get deleted all the time, too. Granted this kind of thing isn't set in stone anywhere, there's not some sort of hidden rule-book that we're supposed to follow, but the way it's enforced seems to be on the context, not the content. People make Jew jokes and nigger jokes and chink jokes all the time here, but nobody cares because it's a joke. That's why it's fun to call your friends faggots, but it takes on an entirely different feeling when the Westboro Baptists Church starts screaming about God hating the fags.

When it ceases to be a joke and it's obvious that the person just wants to throw all these slurs out there because they are legitimately big-mad, it's no longer a joke and that is what will wind up pulling in the 8Chan types. The context is infinitely more important than just the word itself, and up until fairly recently the context was all that mattered, hence why George Carlin had entire stand-ups dedicated to shitting out as many "bad words" as possible.

Nobody cared because it was a joke. I fall into the same camp, myself. I don't particularly care about the word being used, I only care about the context of its usage.
Click to expand...

That is the lamest shit I've seen in this thread.
 
Unog said:
That is the lamest shit I've seen in this thread.
Click to expand...
Your [post] has been read fully, and your thoughts have been inputed and accepted for better improvement.

Thank you for your time and efforts.
 
It's HK-47 said:
Your [post] has been read fully, and your thoughts have been inputed and accepted for better improvement.

Thank you for your time and efforts.
Click to expand...
It's HK-47 said:
No, those posts get deleted all the time, too. Granted this kind of thing isn't set in stone anywhere, there's not some sort of hidden rule-book that we're supposed to follow, but the way it's enforced seems to be on the context, not the content. People make Transsexual jokes and Gay jokes and Lesbian jokes all the time here, but nobody cares because it's a joke. That's why it's fun to call your friends faggots, but it takes on an entirely different feeling when the Westboro Baptists Church starts screaming about God hating the fags.

When it ceases to be a joke and it's obvious that the person just wants to throw all these slurs out there because they are legitimately big-mad, it's no longer a joke and that is what will wind up pulling in the 8Chan types. The context is infinitely more important than just the word itself, and up until fairly recently the context was all that mattered, hence why George Carlin had entire stand-ups dedicated to shitting out as many "bad words" as possible.

Nobody cared because it was a joke. I fall into the same camp, myself. I don't particularly care about the word being used, I only care about the context of its usage.
Click to expand...

Reads the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom