DehumanizationFollow

I got the sense that it was more of what BT directed at Kao was the final straw. I understand where Kao's position is. Kao's actions were part of employment duties. Due to the intertwining of social media sites, what used to thought of as anonymous posting now can be traced rather easily. And even if accusing someone in jest can be actionable. It would be up to the trier of fact in a lawsuit to decide whether that jest caused damages or not.

I'm pretty sure varrus is banned at the moment.

"Bans" are usually indefinite mutes, IIRC. Actual bans where they delete the user and the content s/he has posted are pretty rare.

Sure, but that's like saying BT was punished for being smart. Smarter than Varus, which is admittedly a low, low bar.

Generally posters with any kind of significant post count don't actually get banned because with a ban comes a removal, at least as far as users are concerned, of all their posts. that creates weird holes in threads.

Typically users are just muted, and if it's a permanent no turning back kind of situation, their password and email are changed, because I believe muted posters can still use pm's.

Frankly, this.

Happens all the time.

Only liberal women are sluts and whores. Change your voter registration to (R) and your virginity will be restored to you - in tact.

I don't know how I quoted both of you...

So what was his ban actually for--calling gbaji a rapist or angering the admins?

So you don't think that Barkingturtle brings a better level of discussion than Varus?

The ban itself was issued because an Administrator said "Do this and you will be banned" and he did that thing on top of all the other historical things that warnings had been issued for. The reason he probably won't ever be unbanned is a combination of all those historical warnings and the fact that he pissed all the other admins off as well.



I really don't care to be honest. Varus tended to have slightly less objectionable content overall, which is really not saying that his content was not objectionable, but more a commentary on how bad some of the other stuff from Barkingturtle was. With varus gone now, unless others step into that niche more, there will be fewer response posts in asylum and people who came there to watch him get yelled at won't as much. Maybe he was keeping others away, so it will balance out? I don't know. From experiance I suspect we'll see a slight drop in posts in there overall, but sometimes you just have to cull the stupid.

This. Bring Back BT!!!
and for the record; I tend to view Varus like I would Dwight Schrute.. but yeah; saying words that obviously are there just to get a simply rise is just foolish..

As for killing people..
I read the book Generation Kill which seems to go nicely into the notion of desensitization of taking lives. Granted he was writing about US Marines and not your everyday person.. but I recall in one section, when he asked one 19 year old Marine how it felt after he got his first kill how it felt he said something like "It was just like Grand Theft Auto".
There surely is a vast difference between those that have been put in the situation to kill others now and those in times past.. such as WW2 or even the US Civil War...
When you read letters and memoirs from people in those wars you either find that people really suppress their emotions in different ways.. So I guess it is just a matter how compartmentalization. Even in the 1800s you read about people expressing the horror of what they have witnessed..
In WW2 it seems to have been a bit different.. as I think that for a man to show his emotions was a huge taboo and so as a result no one really talked about their experiences as much which lead to a lot of misconceptions about war after that.. in which future generations didn't really think much (to a degree) about how horrible killing is.. I think it was somewhat similar to Vietnam vets.. They were trapped in a time between trying to emulate the stoic bravery that they saw in their fathers' generation while at the same time coming to grips with the horrible reality of the situation..

Fast forward to todays generation of warrior and I think you will find things to be somewhat different (to a degree). Due to media and collective memory their views seem to take into account the emotional states of past generations.. because I think in those collective memories we have more of an opportunity to more fully explore the reflection of veterans from wars past in books, memoirs, and movies.. Do these things provide a full view of the realities of killing and combat? Not at all but they still allow for more emotional padding that I feel was not so available to warriors in past generations.
That being said; I still do not think that one can pad themselves enough to deal with killing another person. While I have certainly heard about people feeling absolutely nothing after taking another life for whatever reason; name of duty, self-defense, et al; I could not be convinced that the memories of these events would not act as planted seeds that cannot grow and bud later in life.. no matter how many video games and war movies that people have seen.

As far as myself.. I think that in the moment of need that I would be able to do it; though I pray that I will never be tested on this.
I know that there were times in school and childhood where I have sort of just snapped (with reason, such as someone consistently messing with me) and have attacked people regardless of their size or stature. It seems like the more thought that you can actually put into it; the harder that it would become. However, there is something to be said about being guided by your principles.. it is not easy but if you know where you stand and where your enemy stands then I think that it does not take much to just from one side of the fence to the other.. that is from pondering what the right thing to do it and to simply making the decision to kill..
If someone invaded my home; I would like to think that I would have enough discernment to be able to not simply shoot first but to actually be able to properly contemplate the situation and determine if any steps in-between are possible such as holding them at bay without pulling the trigger..
I know people who claim that they would LOVE to have someone break into their house just so they have the chance to shoot someone.. I do not share this sentiment but I understand it.. I don't think that it is out of the pure want to murder (in most cases) but more out of wanting to have a chance to test themselves emotionally and to add to their experience.
I would ask those people what they think they are testing themselves for.


TL;DR= In a combat situation or if my home/family were being attacked I would not hesitate to start pulling the trigger; but I hope I never have to find out..