From what I understand, sifters gave up their rights to siftquisitions and handed over all power to our glorious supreme leader. I don't know why people thought that was a good idea, but I rarely understand people at all.

If we do have them, they shouldn't be in an anonymous poll.

Polls aren't binding... just guidelines or looks into what people want.

I vote no, reprimand, and act nice.

"Might as well run a poll, instead of just battling it out in the comments. This is what these are for, yes?"

No, it's not for us to decide. We chose dictatorship over democracy when it comes to these type decisions.

I voted "no, just drop it". I no longer feel like getting offended for a group of people that I am not a part of. And westy, I suppose I could forgive you if you at least try to abstain from remarks like that on this site in the future.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Like Burdy and Eric says.

As your supreme sift chancellor, I will certainly look at the results of this poll - but will probably come to my own decision.

In that case, I'll vote.
errm well I voted temporary but really meant reprimand .. send a couple pm reprimands to be respectful and keep the racist remarks out of comments would be fine, with a warning of a possible ban in the future if it keeps up.

Hello, my name is burdturgler and I pretend that any vote for or against a ban of westy doesn't affect me one iota, but my commenting history to the contrary proves otherwise.

I've gone out of my way to say this site affects me and the people here matter to me .. probably more than they should ..
at least I feel that way lately with the way you have been trying to climb up into my ass.
But no, I don't care if westy is banned or not. I do care if racism or other hate speech will be tolerated on this site.

Where's the "What the fuck ever..." option?

drop it

like it's hot

Even if you were to cast his comment in the worst of light, westy is a contributing beneficiary to the sift. We need him. Eracism.

Yes, forever. (1 vote)


[giggle]

I'm surprised anyone is voting given the collective wish to drop the Siftquisition feature.

westy, you're hotter than the fucking sun right now, you got a poll and everything. i'm voting 'yes, forever' just to keep you trending.

send me some jokes. bad ones.

what i've personally concluded after reading through all the discussion, is that we here at the sift, and elsewhere on the internet, have a bit too much time on our hands to be having such lengthy discussions as we do on relatively insignificant matters

http://www.videosift.com/video/In-honor-of-westy-s-recent-Siftquisition

Haha.

I think you're missing the point of why it was dropped. It was dropped, because we need to have someone protect the minority from the majority. Now that is our Glorious Leader, who can choose to ignore the majority if he wishes. As long as he completely uncorruptable, then we're good.

>> ^Deano:
I'm surprised anyone is voting given the collective wish to drop the Siftquisition feature.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

^Yes, I'm completely uncorruptable. Except with regard to money. Does that count?

Polls for Siftquisitions and benevolent dictators just feels right to me. Westy gets hobbled for trash talk and we get our precious drama. I love your madness VideoSift.

>> ^MrFisk:
Even if you were to cast his comment in the worst of light, westy is a contributing beneficiary to the sift. We need him. Eracism.

I disagree. We don't need any one individual on this site more than we need to maintain communal standards. Those standards are hard to determine sometimes, but that's why we have these processes set up.

Can we drop this already? This is ridiculous and petty. I vote no.

If Westy want's to be a racist then by all means, downvote him, by all means, respond to his bigotry (or misunderstood satire) but do NOT ban him.

>> ^JiggaJonson:
If Westy want's to be a racist then by all means, downvote him, by all means, respond to his bigotry (or misunderstood satire) but do NOT ban him.


So what is a bannable offense to you? If outright racism doesn't cut it - what does?

Crackers.

I just don't think I can vote either way here...
I'm not racist and I don't like racism but the same time I know that if someone made a post about my White, Honky, Cracker Ass using racist jargon, I don't think I would care.

If I read "Kill Whitey!", I just wouldn't care, I'd move on...

Now if I kept getting messages like that posted to my profile, I'd know it was directed at me personally and I may start to sweat a little and fire of a quick note to Dag.

I personally find this a non-issue but then I'm not the target here.

I don't think Westy has attacked anyone personally (via keyboard), has he?

... I mean in a racist way...

>> ^Throbbin:
>> ^JiggaJonson:
If Westy want's to be a racist then by all means, downvote him, by all means, respond to his bigotry (or misunderstood satire) but do NOT ban him.

So what is a bannable offense to you? If outright racism doesn't cut it - what does?

I guarantee you if he made fun of gays or cats he would be gone right now

Eric: What do you call a black guy who flies a plane?
Westy: I don't know, what?
Eric: A pilot, you racist piece of shit!

Q: a black guy and a mexican are in the car together, who's driving?
A: the police officer

note: the police officer is a lesbian, latin-american female, so that makes the joke Ok

This reminds me of the sad AMC broadcast of "Blazing Saddles" last night. They bleeped out every single racial or ethnic slur in the movie. The irony was just too much.

so, 28 people so far think that this is complete bs and 26 people think it's probably bs, but we should nevertheless torture the bugger for a while to see if he confesses. sift's own guantanamo bay...

why do gays meow? it's cause they are part cat. they don't like it when you mess their hair.

Observation:
Those arguing for a ban are against racism but okay with personal attacks.

Hypothesis:
Those arguing for a ban don't understand the fundamental problem with racism in a civilized society.

Feel free to discredit my hypothesis by explaining yourself...

Why are you always so vindictive?

Imstellar, if you are a target of the racist attack, then it becomes personal. Racist attacks are like blanket personal attacks. Since it doesn't impact you, you don't care.

Westy isn't a racist, he just likes treading the line. I think it turns him on.

Not that it matters, but I voted for hobble/reprimand, not because I think that westy deserves that really, but because it's a compromise on what everyone wants and I think compromising is important

But yeah, I think the fact it's brought up is a good thing, as always it gives us a way of thrashing stuff out and getting to see everyone's stance on things. It'd be nice not to get too personal with each other, eh?

>> ^longde:
Imstellar, if you are a target of the racist attack, then it becomes personal. Racist attacks are like blanket personal attacks. Since it doesn't impact you, you don't care.


If you are a target of the racist personal attack, then it becomes personal. Racist Personal attacks are like blanket direct personal attacks.

Fixed. Any of the anti-racists here care to explain themselves? Its pretty obvious now...

Personal attacks are okay here but racist attacks are not yet they are two symptoms of the same problem (not respecting others)!

Logical WTF?

Heres a example display of "anti-racism" aka "respect for others"
>> ^Throbbin:
You know what? Fuck all y'all.

If you think racism is wrong but personal attacks are not, you are saying that we only have to respect certain people based on their skin color, and if you say that you are a fucking racist!

Dude, what you wrote makes no sense. Come back when you have a coherent thing to say.

>> ^imstellar28:
>> ^longde:
Imstellar, if you are a target of the racist attack, then it becomes personal. Racist attacks are like blanket personal attacks. Since it doesn't impact you, you don't care.

If you are a target of the racist personal attack, then it becomes personal. Racist Personal attacks are like blanket direct personal attacks.
Fixed. Any of the anti-racists here care to explain themselves? Its pretty obvious now...
Personal attacks are okay here but racist attacks are not yet they are two symptoms of the same problem (not respecting others)!
Logical WTF?
Heres a example display of "anti-racism" aka "respect for others"
>> ^Throbbin:
You know what? Fuck all y'all.
If you think racism is wrong but personal attacks are not, you are saying that we only have to respect certain people based on their skin color, and if you say that you are a fucking racist!


Prejudice:
an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.

Failure. If we're talking racism, we're talking about prejudice. That is, prejudice for one person either without foundation or based on limited experience with a person of the same ilk (ilk taking the form of race or creed).

There are probably exceptions, but i can't think of any right now. Something such as "Go cut your wrists, emo-kid!" might come close, but again you're prejudiced against 1 person because of your belief of what their "type" are like. Regardless, you can't just lay a blanket down like you did.

For example, i personally attack you because you don't understand the difference between racism and personal attacks - and that is not a prejudice, it's based on my experience of you, and therefore is fair enough.

Your 'logic' of "Personal attacks are okay here but racist attacks are not yet they are two symptoms of the same problem" is misleading. They both show a lack of respect for others, but in the case of racism, the lack of respect is prejudiced. And it goes without saying that the case of personal attack is one based on experience with you and your beliefs, which i end up disliking.

I wish i could not get involved but i hate seeing stuff like this getting upvoted. It's like intelligent design arguments, to me. I HAVE to bite.

^and why is prejudice a bad thing in a civilized society...? Prejudice, racism, bigotry, intolerance...we all seem to know these are bad things - but shouldn't we also be able to express why?

I'll walk you through this but you have to bear with me...

Racism is not bad because of prejudice, its bad because its a display of disrespect towards another person. Whether you disrespect someone because they are gay, black, stupid, female, short, fat, ugly etc. is irrelevant. Disrespect is the base problem, not racism. Racism is just one of one million ways to disrespect another person.

Why would you bother to individually condemn all the millions of ways to disrespect someone, when all you have to condemn is the base problem - disrespect? To do so is to completely fail to understand what you are even trying to condemn.

This is why it is completely illogical (and hypocritical) to complain about racism (disrespect) at the same time you are disrespecting others.

Your position, as illustrated here:

"For example, i personally attack you because you don't understand the difference between racism and personal attacks - and that is not a prejudice, it's based on my experience of you, and therefore is fair enough."

Demonstrates that you have no problem disrespecting others, going so far as to view it as "acceptable" if you believe what you say to be true. Two hundred years ago many people literally thought blacks couldn't breed with whites - that they were a different species. That is racist and it is completely in line with your way of thinking. (read: No I'm not calling you a racist, I'm saying both ideas are related in their motivation)

Thus, you are philosophically on par with a racist, and similarly detrimental to the society you live in. The most ironically entertaining part about it is, just like the honest racist 200 years ago, you don't even realize your beliefs are a problem!

That doesn't make sense. You're just obfuscating everything with lots and lots of words. So all disrespect is equivalent? Wha? Please, stop speaking like a post-modern philosopher.

All disrespect is fundamentally equivalent in that it falls under the category of "disrespect" just like dogwoods, pine trees, oak trees, and maple trees all fall under the category of "trees" despite being different manifestations of the same thing.

The problem with "black people are monkeys" is that it is disrespectful
The problem with "everyone who eats at mcdonalds is a fatass" is that it is disrespectful
The problem with "fuck all of yall" is that it is disrespectful.

All of them are different yet all of them can be labeled disrespect.

hard concept?

All asians are good at math... disrespectful?

>> ^imstellar28:
This is why it is completely illogical (and hypocritical) to complain about racism (disrespect) at the same time you are disrespecting others.

To use your logic w/regard to trees, if I don't want a poison oak tree in my backyard, I must cut down all of my trees, or live with the poison oak, otherwise imstellar will call me illogical and hypocritical.

The real short explanation of why racism is not tolerated, while personal attacks are is that generally society has decided that judging people on their words and deeds is okay, while judging people on the color of their skin (or religious beliefs, or sexual orientation, or any other group classification) is not.

The problem with "black people are monkeys" is that it is disrespectful
The problem with "everyone who eats at mcdonalds is a fatass" is that it is disrespectful
The problem with "fuck all of yall" is that it is disrespectful.

None are polite, but I only think the first one crosses the line. "Everyone who eats at McDonald's is a fatass" sounds like a colorful way of saying McDonald's has fatty food. If that was something like "Fat people are all lazy and stupid", I'd say that crosses the line.

"Fuck all y'all" might even be an appropriate response, if "y'all" mistreated the speaker in some way.

@imstellar

"You're a fucking nigger!"
"You're a fucking asshole!"

There's a big difference between these two statements, though they may both be disrespectful. If you can't understand that, there's really no point in talking to you.

>> ^NetRunner said...

The problem with that analogy is whether Videosift is like your backyard or not. I guess it could be considered a kind of gated community with bylaws, as opposed to a completely public place where all human rights must be respected.

It depends on whether we want to cultivate the community by manually pruning it, or rather think we benefit more from leaving it a little feral and organic.

Voting for this poll ended in a tie between No, but hobble/reprimand him. and No, just drop the matter..

>> ^Crake:
The problem with that analogy is whether Videosift is like your backyard or not.

Good point. Assume it's a metro park instead, or perhaps a privately owned, but publicly accessible park where all the plants and gardening is done by volunteers...

My main point is that it's possible to differentiate between minor infractions (say, slapping someone), and major ones (say, stabbing someone), even if the action in both cases share a common basic root (they're both violent), without being illogical or hypocritical.

In the specific case of westy, I think all we need to do is tell him we don't like what he said, but I do think what he said was a bit more than merely being disrespectful.