• Hey guys, I had to upgrade the VLJ software because the old one is being phased out. Please let me know of any issues in the SITE UPDATE THREAD. Thanks!

Rotenhahn deactivated

ButteMT61

Well-Known Member
Until the legal system catches up with technology and the government gets it's mitts on the 'net, it's pretty much not in the picture. For the issue at hand, it's an admin decision, not a gov't one. But no doubt, the day is coming. And I do not look forward to that. Some countries have already done this with social-networking getting in the way of dictators and their regimes. Oh to be a lawyer in the technology/information fields. It is an untapped never-ending mess that will provide lawyers and politicians many years of paychecks...
But make no mistake - our government will try and probably succeed in taxing and controlling the web in the near future.
 

Atticus

Well-Known Member
ButteMT61 said:
Until the legal system catches up with technology and the government gets it's mitts on the 'net, it's pretty much not in the picture. For the issue at hand, it's an admin decision, not a gov't one. But no doubt, the day is coming. And I do not look forward to that. Some countries have already done this with social-networking getting in the way of dictators and their regimes. Oh to be a lawyer in the technology/information fields. It is an untapped never-ending mess that will provide lawyers and politicians many years of paychecks...
But make no mistake - our government will try and probably succeed in taxing and controlling the web in the near future.
This may be true, but the 1st Amendment has always been easily triggered...especially when it comes to the most protected forms of speech, such as political and religious speech. Thankfully for Bill and Chris, I can't remember reading any Supreme Court opinions that recgonized jacket babble as being protected speech.

By the way, I'm both a lawyer and a politician. Do you think I can maybe get double never-ending mess paychecks? :D

AF
 

grommet

Member
JDAM said:
ButteMT61 said:
Just try it out and see for yourself.
Ah, now I see what you mean. As for trying it out, I have, several times, and still do. It's rather easy. There are ways and means of moderating online forums. Some like to micro-manage, others let it all go. The worst are unclear in their own minds and inconsistent.

VLJ mods have determined that 'politics' is forbidden. In the context of VLJ, it seems to me that 'politics' means any opinion or content that messes with a simple, provincial mindset. Smutty posts about tits and arse are OK, as are jingoistic / political comments that do not offend the Shire. If it's appropriate for a tired, no-nonsense club-house, it's generally OK here on VLJ.

VLJ is OK for technical info only. Lively conversation, debate, argument, 'politics!'? No. If that's what you're after, then there are much better online forums.
I very much enjoy participating in this forum, which is the only one I am currently active in. Up until now I have avoided controversy partly because I am not by nature contentious and partly because I think the tone of the forum is meant to be light hearted and constructive. To paraphrase someone, we are, afterall, basically talking jackets! After reading the thread and reading a number of Jeff Thurston's book reviews, courtesy of David, and because Bill invited us to vent, I feel justified in throwing in my 2 deutschmarks to wit:

I think there is a special problem in discussing almost anything relating to WW II given the strong emotions the memory of the Nazis evoke in many people. It is a very thin line between admiring the Wehrmacht or the Luftwaffe and being a Nazi apologist which, to be perfectly honest, I think Mr. Thurston is.

I don't believe the political content of Mr. Thurston's posts was the principle reason for Bill's action, but I think it is a mistake to equate the politics of Nazi Germany with those of the United States or Great Britain, either during or after the war. Mr. Thurston's contention that the U.S. is on a moral level close to Nazi Germany by virtue of waging "wars of aggression" is disingenous. Hitler's war was launched on the flimsiest of pretexts that even a Hitler Youth member would find incredible. I, personally, do not believe the U.S. should have invaded Iraq, but I do not think the motivation behind this was to control the country, exact booty or exterminate its ciitizens. There is a difference between preemptive war, war initiated for muddled reasons, and war of aggression.

I am a bit sorry to say these things about someone who cannot respond, but I think they needed to be said. I, for one, will be happy to continue reading the more collegial posts even if they are sometimes inane or "smutty". I also think there is enough expertise left within the forum to make time spent on the site worthwhile.
 

Atticus

Well-Known Member
grommet said:
I very much enjoy participating in this forum, which is the only one I am currently active in. Up until now I have avoided controversy partly because I am not by nature contentious and partly because I think the tone of the forum is meant to be light hearted and constructive. To paraphrase someone, we are, afterall, basically talking jackets! After reading the thread and reading a number of Jeff Thurston's book reviews, courtesy of David, and because Bill invited us to vent, I feel justified in throwing in my 2 deutschmarks to wit:

I think there is a special problem in discussing almost anything relating to WW II given the strong emotions the memory of the Nazis evoke in many people. It is a very thin line between admiring the Wehrmacht or the Luftwaffe and being a Nazi apologist which, to be perfectly honest, I think Mr. Thurston is.

I don't believe the political content of Mr. Thurston's posts was the principle reason for Bill's action, but I think it is a mistake to equate the politics of Nazi Germany with those of the United States or Great Britain, either during or after the war. Mr. Thurston's contention that the U.S. is on a moral level close to Nazi Germany by virtue of waging "wars of aggression" is disingenous. Hitler's war was launched on the flimsiest of pretexts that even a Hitler Youth member would find incredible. I, personally, do not believe the U.S. should have invaded Iraq, but I do not think the motivation behind this was to control the country, exact booty or exterminate its ciitizens. There is a difference between preemptive war, war initiated for muddled reasons, and war of aggression.

I am a bit sorry to say these things about someone who cannot respond, but I think they needed to be said. I, for one, will be happy to continue reading the more collegial posts even if they are sometimes inane or "smutty". I also think there is enough expertise left within the forum to make time spent on the site worthwhile.
Very well said.

AF
 

ButteMT61

Well-Known Member
Atticus said:
grommet said:
I very much enjoy participating in this forum, which is the only one I am currently active in. Up until now I have avoided controversy partly because I am not by nature contentious and partly because I think the tone of the forum is meant to be light hearted and constructive. To paraphrase someone, we are, afterall, basically talking jackets! After reading the thread and reading a number of Jeff Thurston's book reviews, courtesy of David, and because Bill invited us to vent, I feel justified in throwing in my 2 deutschmarks to wit:

I think there is a special problem in discussing almost anything relating to WW II given the strong emotions the memory of the Nazis evoke in many people. It is a very thin line between admiring the Wehrmacht or the Luftwaffe and being a Nazi apologist which, to be perfectly honest, I think Mr. Thurston is.

I don't believe the political content of Mr. Thurston's posts was the principle reason for Bill's action, but I think it is a mistake to equate the politics of Nazi Germany with those of the United States or Great Britain, either during or after the war. Mr. Thurston's contention that the U.S. is on a moral level close to Nazi Germany by virtue of waging "wars of aggression" is disingenous. Hitler's war was launched on the flimsiest of pretexts that even a Hitler Youth member would find incredible. I, personally, do not believe the U.S. should have invaded Iraq, but I do not think the motivation behind this was to control the country, exact booty or exterminate its ciitizens. There is a difference between preemptive war, war initiated for muddled reasons, and war of aggression.

I am a bit sorry to say these things about someone who cannot respond, but I think they needed to be said. I, for one, will be happy to continue reading the more collegial posts even if they are sometimes inane or "smutty". I also think there is enough expertise left within the forum to make time spent on the site worthwhile.
Very well said.

AF

X2!
 

Persimmon

Well-Known Member
ButteMT61 said:
Atticus said:
grommet said:
I very much enjoy participating in this forum, which is the only one I am currently active in. Up until now I have avoided controversy partly because I am not by nature contentious and partly because I think the tone of the forum is meant to be light hearted and constructive. To paraphrase someone, we are, afterall, basically talking jackets! After reading the thread and reading a number of Jeff Thurston's book reviews, courtesy of David, and because Bill invited us to vent, I feel justified in throwing in my 2 deutschmarks to wit:

I think there is a special problem in discussing almost anything relating to WW II given the strong emotions the memory of the Nazis evoke in many people. It is a very thin line between admiring the Wehrmacht or the Luftwaffe and being a Nazi apologist which, to be perfectly honest, I think Mr. Thurston is.

I don't believe the political content of Mr. Thurston's posts was the principle reason for Bill's action, but I think it is a mistake to equate the politics of Nazi Germany with those of the United States or Great Britain, either during or after the war. Mr. Thurston's contention that the U.S. is on a moral level close to Nazi Germany by virtue of waging "wars of aggression" is disingenous. Hitler's war was launched on the flimsiest of pretexts that even a Hitler Youth member would find incredible. I, personally, do not believe the U.S. should have invaded Iraq, but I do not think the motivation behind this was to control the country, exact booty or exterminate its ciitizens. There is a difference between preemptive war, war initiated for muddled reasons, and war of aggression.

I am a bit sorry to say these things about someone who cannot respond, but I think they needed to be said. I, for one, will be happy to continue reading the more collegial posts even if they are sometimes inane or "smutty". I also think there is enough expertise left within the forum to make time spent on the site worthwhile.
Very well said.

AF

X2!
I am sorry that Jeff has been forced out of VLJ.
Of course there is a hefty membership of jacket Expertise left on the forum..
Its just a pity for me that we have lost a knowledgable member.
One who was prepared to have a say and in my opinion was far more right than wrong.

Forums including this one need light and shade, views from the left and the right and occasionally a good kick up the rear to stimulate debate.

You do not have to agree with every "fact", "statement",opinion etc of another member to appreciate what they can offer to a Forum.
If you don't agree you can either ignore it or reply with an alternative thought.

I guess for me closing that channel and terminating his membership is just plain wrong

So having read and read again the post detailed I will have to say not very well said.
But I respect your opinion to say it
Original , Plus 1 and Plus 2
 

JDAM

Member
grommet said:
Mr. Thurston's contention that the U.S. is on a moral level close to Nazi Germany by virtue of waging "wars of aggression" is disingenous. Hitler's war was launched on the flimsiest of pretexts that even a Hitler Youth member would find incredible. I, personally, do not believe the U.S. should have invaded Iraq, but I do not think the motivation behind this was to control the country, exact booty or exterminate its ciitizens. There is a difference between preemptive war, war initiated for muddled reasons, and war of aggression.
Unfortunately there is nobody left here to contest your opinions and assumptions (I will not say fact). And that is the crux of the matter.
 

deeb7

New Member
Rutger said:


crap, not working, apparently I'm no good at HTML. But I will succeed. In the end. I would like an unlimited editing mode, until I've figured it out.
Just use Preview, and click Quote on my post to see how it's done.
 

ButteMT61

Well-Known Member
At the end of the day, even an internet forum is like any other group of people we associate with. Whether it's a riding group, church, work, or neighbors. For me, I try to not be part of anything that I would be ashamed of in front of my family and friends. I've had to end relationships because of that. I'm not talking about differences of opinion, politics, religion. I'm talking about fundamental differences in what I see as right and wrong. I have problems reenacting with guys that identify way too much with their roles.
There's probably others here that share his views on Nazis and other bits, but as long as I don't know/hear about them, I'm fine. There's just a line, and for me, it crosses it. Whether one can ignore threads is inconsequential. The group as a whole has and will have a reputation based on it's members and content. There's many people that have knowledge and intelligence that I would not associate with. Always sad to lose a member/friend who has such knowledge, but for me, it's hasta la vista baby when certain lines get crossed. If he as just taking a piss, he screwed up.
 

Rutger

Well-Known Member
deeb7 said:
Ian C said:
... so how can I use or get that yawning smiley? It's just the job.
Here's the mother-load ...

http://www.abestweb.com/smilies/


Ah, yep, simple really

Need someone to hack the site and insert another 225 emoticons to choose from, even though some will
.

Would have liked to read the reasoning behind rottenmans opinions. I don't believe him a nazi apologizer or admirer.
Can anyone show me he is? Enlighten me and I will stand corrected.

If you admire the German Wehrmacht, does that make you a nazi admirer as well?
Does he approve of the actions of the Wehrmacht in service of the nazi's?
Does he trivialize KZ-Lager and the holocaust?

Unfo, he's no longer here.
 

rich

New Member
Rutger said:
Would have liked to read the reasoning behind rottenmans opinions. I don't believe him a nazi apologizer or admirer.
Like you, I don't believe Jeff was a nazi admirer at all. He really didn't like his government though! I often disagreed with him but I thought he was an intelligent and articulate debater, and I admired his tenacity. However, I'm not directly in line for any possible fall-out over his more acerbic remarks, so it's easy for me to say that ....... I just don't know what the ramifications are, does anyone?

The nazi comparison thing is called Godwin's law, there's a little about it here.............

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

If he were able to read this post, I know that I would now be told I was 'in denial' (it's possible!) and that I was 'corn-pone' (an American insult which missed the mark because I never really understood it - which may have been the point)

Peace and goodwill!
 
Top