Bad Taste

[ThaiPauly]

There is a post by Aughie that i find most offensive (and I am sure others will too) in the HLK section, I for one am appalled that pictures of AH can be touted as possible Avitars

[Thomas_Merton]

There is a post by Aughie that i find most offensive (and I am sure others will too) in the HLK section, I for one am appalled that pictures of AH can be touted as possible Avitars

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Which reminds me, I wrote a PM to Meadish the new Mod, asking for some clarification of the Forum's policy concerning posting on, or containing reference to, Hitler - this was primarily because a whole thread had been deleted. A thread that was only questioning the references to Hitler in another thread. The other thread has remained.

Meadish replied to me that he had sent my PM on to the responsible Mod who would reply with an explanation and a clarification of Thaivisa's policy with regard to references to Hitler.

I have not received this reply yet.

My main point in my PM was that Thaivisa needs to make it clear if they have a policy in this matter and if it is as stringent as resulting in automatic deletion of threads that refer to Hitler in the subject, then this ought to be clearly spelled out in the Forum Rules.

[penzman]

I have removed the picture gents.

Penz

[bkkmadness]

So following up on Tom's query, what are the actual rules regarding this?

I understand we should all use a bit of discretion with avatars but is there any particular rules forbidding the mention or image of political figures or any other famous figures that might cause offence on the board?

To some an image of Hitler is offensive and I dare say some people may find George Bush offensive, or Charles Manson, where is the line?

[The Gentleman Scamp]

To some an image of Hitler is offensive and I dare say some people may find George Bush offensive, or Charles Manson, where is the line?

There's already an image of George W as an avatar but it isn't a complimentary one and the one I saw of Hitler was a mockery of Hitler which would highly offend his supporters if there were any around to see it.

I would understand if it was a celebration of Hitler, Mugabe, Pol Pot or any other infmous germ who had blighted humankind, but my point is that there are other ways of viewing it.

[Thetyim]

My main point in my PM was that Thaivisa needs to make it clear if they have a policy in this matter and if it is as stringent as resulting in automatic deletion of threads that refer to Hitler in the subject, then this ought to be clearly spelled out in the Forum Rules.

I did try to warn you Tom.

[Thomas_Merton]

My main point in my PM was that Thaivisa needs to make it clear if they have a policy in this matter and if it is as stringent as resulting in automatic deletion of threads that refer to Hitler in the subject, then this ought to be clearly spelled out in the Forum Rules.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I did try to warn you Tom.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You did, but without any reasoning.

But that is academic now - the tread is deleted.

What I do not understand is that the thread I was criticising - where Hitler is named as a chosen dinner guest - is allowed to remain (or at least those particular postings).

It is the apparent inconsistency that creates uncertainty as to where the limits are.

I accept that we as posters are expected to use our discretion and common sense in these matters, however the actions taken, make it difficult to find a yard stick on which to measure our successes or failures in this area.

[Thetyim]

Tom,

Scampy's thread was not about AH

This one is about AH and moderation.

I think you can guess what will happen .

[Thomas_Merton]

Tom,

Scampy's thread was not about AH

This one is about AH and moderation.

I think you can guess what will happen .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I seriously do not see your logic.

It seems to me you are saying that a thread albeit criticising AH but with AH in the title is forbidden...

But that a thread entitled something else but including sympathetic references to AH is perfectly in order...

Where is the reasoning?

If you are also implying that this thread will be closed because it is discussing a moderation issue - I can accept that.

All I am humbly and politely requesting is that the responsible Mods reply, as promised by Meadish, to the PM I sent to Meadish asking for clarification last week.

Edited June 22, 2005 by Thomas_Merton

[ThaiPauly]

This is the way I see it Tom.

I was the first one to complain about Aughie putting up a picture, ready sized to go into an Aviatr spot.

I posted to Aughie that I thought it was wrong and he appologised that he had offended me. I cannot imagine for one moment that anybody in their right mind would addopt it. They would not last 5 mins.

The mods agreed and the Pic removed.

However Aughie put this up of his own accord. If someone posts a thread about asking 6 people round for a Fantasy Dinner Party, then if AH is included on this list then that to me is a person's choice and they have a right to it, Mods should not involve themselves in this.

I would LOVE to have AH round to dinner (Strickening Stew with Dumplings) but before he ate it I would LOVE to ask him WHY is his OWN words he ordered the KILLING of 6 million Jews, and WHY he was so ###### bent on world dominance and many other questions that we can only find answers to in veiled books. To hear it from the Horse's Mouth is what I would want.

But It aint gonna happen, lets face it , how many of us WOULD want to interview AH to get the answers to these questions if we could?

TP

[Thomas_Merton]

This is the way I see it Tom.

I was the first one to complain about Aughie putting up a picture, ready sized to go into an Aviatr spot.

I posted to Aughie that I thought it was wrong and he appologised that he had offended me. I cannot imagine for one moment that anybody in their right mind would addopt it. They would not last 5 mins.

The mods agreed and the Pic removed.

However Aughie put this up of his own accord. If someone posts a thread about asking 6 people round for a Fantasy Dinner Party, then if AH is included on this list then that to me is a person's choice and they have a right to it, Mods should not involve themselves in this.

I would LOVE to have AH round to dinner (Strickening Stew with Dumplings) but before he ate it I would LOVE to ask him WHY is his OWN words he ordered the KILLING of 6 million Jews, and WHY he was so ###### bent on world dominance and many other questions that we can only find answers to in veiled books. To hear it from the Horse's Mouth is what I would want.

But It aint gonna happen, lets face it , how many of us WOULD want to interview AH to get the answers to these questions if we could?

TP

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can accept that.

What I did was I started a thread because I was amazed at the fact that over 25% of the replies to the dinner party thread had named AH as a chosen guest.

I was asking, what was the fascination with AH, as I could not understand. Was it as you have explained a need to dish out your own retribution, or perhaps, was there a more sinister motive.

Or, as I implied in my opening sentence in the thread, was it a choice that unfortunately was reflecting contributeres lack of education about the real evil of the man.

It was this thread that was deleted.

Edited June 22, 2005 by Thomas_Merton