[Danny]

	Originally Posted by MrFox
	Opinions have to be endured, Danny - criminal actions inspired by those opinions doesn't.

Sure. Ask a criminal lawyer. Conspiring to commit murder isn't a crime; only the murder. And then, the guilty party isn't the party that conspired and cheered on the murderer; only the weapon weilder that struck the fatal blow.

[MrFox]

	Originally Posted by Danny
	Sure. Ask a criminal lawyer. Conspiring to commit murder isn't a crime; only the murder. And then, the guilty party isn't the party that conspired and cheered on the murderer; only the weapon weilder that struck the fatal blow.

In the US, conspiracy to commit any offense is itself a felony.

[Danny]

	Originally Posted by MrFox
	In the US, conspiracy to commit any offense is itself a felony.

Precisely.

And for good reason.

[thod]

	In the US, conspiracy to commit any offense is itself a felony.

Is conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor a felony?

[Danny]

	Originally Posted by thod
	Is conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor a felony?

Oh brother.

*looks for snips*

*redirects thod to MrFox's post for closer examination*

*offers thod www.lmgtfy.com*

[MrFox]

	Originally Posted by thod
	Is conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor a felony?

Generally, yes. (Add the qualifier only because there might be an exception or two, but I am aware of none.)

[Monte314]

If a particular member's post bother you, put them on IGNORE so that you can't see them. But asking the Admins to BAN them so that NO ONE can see them? No.

If you are honest in your desire to overcome an idea, then confront it, don't just drive it away to fester someplace else. None of us thinks BL's views can be changed, but consider this: there are those watching silently from the sidelines who are still trying to make up their minds. It is for them that you contend.

[Storm]

It's interesting to me. Sexism and other "isms" is common in the world. Remember, this is a global forum, and so the variety of opinions here will be much broader than the ones you see in your local region, amongst presumably the similar type of people you hang out with. There have been many posters similar to BL. But never has been there such an uproar about it. I wonder why? Perhaps because the forum is bigger, perhaps because there are even less people who agree with him. Either way, suppressing an idea does not make it go away. It does not make the person change their mind. They will just go somewhere else to talk about it. The only way to defeat an idea is more talk. If BL's arguments really don't have any value to them, then no one will be swayed by them except people who already agree. So don't worry.

[MrFox]

	Originally Posted by Storm
	*** Either way, suppressing an idea does not make it go away. It does not make the person change their mind. They will just go somewhere else to talk about it. ***

Personally, I don't think it's at all undesirable that certain individuals be exiled from Forum. Forum will the better if they are. That said, it seems impossible to ask management to undertake this effort on the basis of opinions only. Undesirable individuals should be shunned and ignored by other members until they get the message. IMO Forum members are under no obligation to welcome everyone all the time.

[Seriously]

Originally Posted by Monte314

If a particular member's post bother you, put them on IGNORE so that you can't see them. But asking the Admins to BAN them so that NO ONE can see them? No. If you are honest in your desire to overcome an idea, then confront it, don't just drive it away to fester someplace else. None of us thinks BL's views can be changed, but consider this: there are those watching silently from the sidelines who are still trying to make up their minds. It is for them that you contend.

I suppose the same could be applied to the threads about religion, yes?

IMO BL is a troll pure and simple which is why I generally ignore him. He is not here for discussion, all you have to do is read his canned responses a fews times to garner that, he is here to stir people up and provoke. It's unfortunate more people don't ignore him because then he might go away on his own accord.

I find it interesting the things that are and aren't moverated on this forum though.

[JustMel]

	Originally Posted by Danny
	Conspiring to commit murder isn't a crime

Actually it is in the majority of states in the US. I don't know about outside the US.

	Originally Posted by MrFox
	Generally, yes. (Add the qualifier only because there might be an exception or two, but I am aware of none.)

Depends on the conspiracy. We've prosecuted conspiracy on misdemeanor cases. Depends on the charge, crime, level of involvement, the judge, prosecutor and what end the actual person committing the crime was charged with. In fact, we just had a felony conspiracy to manufacture and distribute charge knocked down to a misdemeanor conspiracy charge because the woman only touched the money, not the drugs, and only touched the money after the other defendant who was being prosecuted handed the money to her.

____

As for BL, I agree with the rinse and repeat as explained by Shadizar. His views cannot be swayed regardless of actual data to the contrary. People who truly wish to debate must be willing to at least consider that their stance could be wrong. That doesn't mean you have to actually change your stance but all views must be put under the same microscope and considered on their merits. BL prefers to say "this is what I believe and you cannot change my mind, the moon is purple. I don't care that the astronauts who have actually been there say it's yellow, they're wrong." There is no debate if the people involved don't at least look at the other sides' arguments. We've all seen BLs arguments about making women baby factories then "allowing" them to contribute to society by getting a job, that men will always be superior and that women who work are not feminine, that men who are stay at home fathers are pussies and not "real" men, etc. I've stopped reading his threads because they're a waste of time.

IMO, since we're all throwing them out there, his sole intention in threads is to troll and try to get someone to say something that will earn them an infraction. This does not facilitate debate. Granted we are all responsible for allowing someone to bait us, but there is not a person here who can honestly say they've never been baited nor baited someone else and there are times when you lose your patience in a thread.

[MrFox]

Originally Posted by JustMel

*** IMO, since we're all throwing them out there, his sole intention in threads is to troll and try to get someone to say something that will earn them an infraction. This does not facilitate debate. Granted we are all responsible for allowing someone to bait us, but there is not a person here who can honestly say they've never been baited nor baited someone else and there are times when you lose your patience in a thread.

OK, assuming all of that is true, what is the proper response of management and members to someone like this?

[AnaK]

I'm pretty much the exact type of woman that BL criticizes, but I actually like him. He seems very laid back and unemotional. He has traditional views I don't agree with, but he seems like a nice person. I don't think he mandates that everyone agree with him. In fact, I almost think he is trying to do some women a favor by telling us why more men aren't interested in us? I've worked with a lot of men who were 1000 times more sexist, and I had to get along and work with them every day. I couldn't just ignore their posts, like you can on here.

[Danny]

	Originally Posted by MrFox
	OK, assuming all of that is true, what is the proper response of management and members to someone like this?

One would hope it would be to fairly and impartially adhere to the forum rules and penalties--but it seems this is an area where this forum is weak and could stand significant improvement.

[thebrainpolice]

	Originally Posted by JustMel
	As for BL, I agree with the rinse and repeat as explained by Shadizar. His views cannot be swayed regardless of actual data to the contrary.

If being close minded is grounds for being banned then half of the regulars in the politics sub forum should be gone.

[nowt]

I've changed my mind. More racism/sexism/bigotry. It's braver and best to validate apathetically--

Bigots had to've learned bigotry magically. Certainly no words were used--

Fucking cowards.

[Danny]

	Originally Posted by thebrainpolice
	If being close minded is grounds for being banned then half of the regulars in the politics sub forum should be gone.

So you wanted facetime in this thread, but you couldn't be bothered with reading it in its entirety with links--or are you merely closed-minded?

[thebrainpolice]

	Originally Posted by Danny
	So you wanted facetime in this thread, but you couldn't be bothered with reading it in its entirety with links--or are you merely closed-minded?

I did read the thread and I still don't hate BL. I've seen people on this forum compare government employees to child rapists. I've seen people brag about wanting to gun down union members. I've seen people call others with different political beliefs sub human. I haven't seen BL post stuff like that. The main criticism I've seen with regards to BL seem to fall into two categories. The first is that his opinions are repugnant, and the second is that he is close minded and repeats the same stuff over and over. Well I don't agree with most of his opinions either, but there are plenty of others with opinions that are just as repugnant and I don't see them getting as much criticism as BL. As far as his opinions being racist, sexist, and anti-Semitic I think his Jews and World politics thread went a bit too far, but the rest of his stuff just seems like garden variety political incorrectness. As far as being closed minded and repeating the same stuff, maybe. But I see plenty of other posters who are just as bad or worse, so again, I don't see why BL is being singled out.

[JustMel]

	Originally Posted by MrFox
	OK, assuming all of that is true, what is the proper response of management and members to someone like this?

Long term suspensions have worked in the past. Personally, I ignore them after I realize they make zero sense and aren't willing to concede that they might be looking at something through a narrow lens vs a wide range one. I don't click the ignore button, I just skip over them. We all have people we dislike here just like we do in real life, however, BL crosses a lot of lines that shouldn't be crossed and does things that would have landed other people in suspension land.

	Originally Posted by thebrainpolice
	If being close minded is grounds for being banned then half of the regulars in the politics sub forum should be gone.

I rarely wade into that particular part of the forum, I prefer to argue politics in person.

However, my point was not to ban someone for being close minded but to ban them for repeatedly breaking a rule... or several... as has already been pointed out and explained by others, banning or even a long suspension would be a response to the flagrant breaking of the forum rules.

The object is to facilitate debate. Subjects often are repeated, especially when you've been here a long time. Often times the same groups of people argue the same argument but even when we disagree we look at the other sides opinion/information, etc and even concede on certain points if not the entire premise of our argument but BL is not even willing to look at certain data that is reliable and credible and instead prefers whatever google's top choice tells him for a search parameter or wiki. While wiki is often useful it's not the best, credible source for everything when not supported by other credible sources. BL's argument is "that's what I believe and you can't change my mind so nananana". He's 20. At 20 most of us thought we were set in our beliefs but those of us hitting the 40 and older mark have seen just how much your ideals and beliefs change as you age and gain experience. BL is unwilling to even consider that he is wrong and just spouts the same inane drivel each time which is not facilitating debate.

---------- Post added 12-29-2011 at 11:08 AM ----------

Originally Posted by thebrainpolice

I did read the thread and I still don't hate BL. I've seen people on this forum compare government employees to child rapists. I've seen people brag about wanting to gun down union members. I've seen people call others with different political beliefs sub human. I haven't seen BL post stuff like that. The main criticism I've seen with regards to BL seem to fall into two categories. The first is that his opinions are repugnant, and the second is that he is close minded and repeats the same stuff over and over. Well I don't agree with most of his opinions either, but there are plenty of others with opinions that are just as repugnant and I don't see them getting as much criticism as BL. As far as his opinions being racist, sexist, and anti-Semitic I think his Jews and World politics thread went a bit too far, but the rest of his stuff just seems like garden variety political incorrectness. As far as being closed minded and repeating the same stuff, maybe. But I see plenty of other posters who are just as bad or worse, so again, I don't see why BL is being singled out.

You can have different viewpoints and still have a healthy debate and exchange of ideas. This thread is representative of what I consider a good debate on a sensitive topic which some considered sexist. These are not:

Jews and World politics
Too many immigrants... A worldwide opinion ?
Racist British woman hate on Black people in a tram
"Too many blacks" in France national football team

Continually lowering overall forum quality with flagrant sexism--

Decline of men = decline of society ?
French feminists call for 'Mademoiselle' ban
INTJ Women: Rigid?
How to keep your man ?
Madonna/Whore dichotomy
Women: Birth 3 children and then you can be free, for the good of society
Poll: What kind of women do men want ?
Another white racist British woman hate on a black man
Do career women lose all their femininity ?
Poll: Are most men turned off by independent & successful women ?
Sexualization of little girls
Women's Sexuality Is Meaningless Without Men
Game of Thrones : Feminist propaganda ?
Crazy Feminist : Little girls flirt with their dads when they kiss
Slutwalks or modern feminism
Daddy issues and misandry : The source of feminism ?

There are no true exchanges of ideas, not matter how we rephrased things, offered information that often wasn't even recognized just disregarded, attempted to reason with BL or even showed examples of where his position was flawed he refuses to even offer up reliable, credible proof from a decent source or debate our posted links to information and instead chooses to say "it's my belief and I don't have to change my mind regardless of how many reams of data you throw at me because I get more attention making my arguments look like fine examples of asshattery"

[Bevan]

Forum Rule 1: Do Not Make Personal Attacks

Posts that serve no purpose other than to flame users annihilate the quality of discussion. Do not make personal attacks. You may critique or disdain argument and opinion posted by users, but you may not extend that method to maligning the users themselves.

Forum Terms of Use 2: You understand that by using INTJ Forum you may expose yourself to offensive, indecent, interpersonally or ideologically disparaging, emotionally or psychologically disturbing, and otherwise objectionable material. You hereby claim sole and exclusive responsibility for your exposure to the aforementioned material should such exposure occur, and you agree to indemnify and hold immune the owners of INTJ Forum against any legal action regarding hardship or maladies emotional, psychological, professional or financial, directly or indirectly consequent to that exposure.

Forum rule 1 is not legally binding and can be enforced or not enforced. It can be enforced by subjective opinion, or not enforced by same, at the whim of the moderators and administrators. Terms of use 2 protects the owner, administrators, moderators or whomever from any liabilities that could be construed from violations of rule 1.

I'll admit that INTJforum is not as benign an experience as I expected when I joined, but there are some reasonable people here. Seek them out! I came to the forum looking for useful information, and there is much to be found. There is also an abundance of useless and odious fluff. The forum can also be quite entertaining and fun. I like to smile and laugh.

[thebrainpolice]

	Originally Posted by nowt
	I've changed my mind. More racism/sexism/bigotry. It's braver and best to validate apathetically-- Bigots had to've learned bigotry magically. Certainly no words were used-- Fucking cowards.

Since this post appeared under mine I assume It was addressed to me. Look no one likes bigotry (except bigots) but we don't (or at least I don't) want to stifle discussion either. With the possible exception of the Jews in World politics thread, I haven't seen BL post anything that's bad enough to violate rule 7. Granted, I haven't read everything he has posted, but in my opinion its better to err on the side of letting questionable content stand. Even dumb comments can spark useful debate.

Also whats with the "Fucking cowards" comment. Lots of people hate BL and I'll probably be added to people's shit lists for defending him. Just look at how pissed Danny is at me right now. If you think I'm wrong fine, but there is nothing cowardly about my posts.

@Just Mel.
Okay, I'll go back and read a few of the threads I haven't seen before. Just give me some time.

[Danny]

	Originally Posted by thebrainpolice
	I don't see why BL is being singled out.

Good point. Please see my previous post about improving moderation. Rules should be enforced fairly and consistently. Additionally, member specific rules should not be created.

BTW, I don't know where you get the idea that BL should be hated; I feel sorry for him, but his crap warrants being appropriately addressed.

---------- Post added 12-29-2011 at 09:27 AM ----------

	Originally Posted by thebrainpolice
	. Just look at how pissed Danny is at me right now.

*Note to self: F's an S's infer emotion*

Note to tBP--I think you've merely witnessed INTJ candor. A skill that is underappreciated.

[stasis]

	Originally Posted by Danny
	...black lieutenant is a member in good standing

He regularly generates a great deal of discussion.

	Originally Posted by Danny
	Additionally, member specific rules should not be created.

You are making stuff up.

	Originally Posted by Distance
	A link to the anti-semitic thread: http://intjforum.com/showthread.php?t=71058

Infraction issued.

[vern]

	Originally Posted by thebrainpolice
	The main criticism I've seen with regards to BL seem to fall into two categories. The first is that his opinions are repugnant, and the second is that he is close minded and repeats the same stuff over and over.

Like Google ads...

	Originally Posted by thebrainpolice
	As far as being closed minded and repeating the same stuff, maybe. But I see plenty of other posters who are just as bad or worse, so again, I don't see why BL is being singled out.

Because it gets annoying that is why...like advertising, shallow and attention getting.

[nowt]

Assume whatever you like. Links are there for the clicking. Black women without makeup look like [chewbacca.jpg], doncha know--

How does any bigotry spread? Osmosis? Genetic disposition? Via medium, pulpit provided?--

That last seems particularly relevant. The content is bigotry, promoting bigotry, which is one of the lowest forms of thought, unquestionably--

In what world, would bigotry be -right-?--

There is much cowardice here, both with rules held in abeyance [oh, stasis; you've rearrived-- did the jew thread get enough hits?]--

And that of otherwise ethical people silently validating what is known to harm--

Err the fuck away.

Originally Posted by thebrainpolice

Since this post appeared under mine I assume It was addressed to me. Look no one likes bigotry (except bigots) but we don't (or at least I don't) want to stifle discussion either. With the possible exception of the Jews in World politics thread, I haven't seen BL post anything that's bad enough to violate rule 7. Granted, I haven't read everything he has posted, but in my opinion its better to err on the side of letting questionable content stand. Even dumb comments can spark useful debate. Also whats with the "Fucking cowards" comment. Lots of people hate BL and I'll probably be added to people's shit lists for defending him. Just look at how pissed Danny is at me right now. If you think I'm wrong fine, but there is nothing cowardly about my posts.