Are we to accept blatant racism on AB?

[acw]

I refer not to the interesting (if a little heated) debates in news today, but to this thread. 

I'm not Muslim myself, but I am still hugely offended by what's been said. 

There's no racism option when it comes to reporting posts, or questions - so I plumped for "abusive".

I realise everyone's entitled to a view on here.  But where is the line?

Ed - I look forward to hearing your views in a nice little pink box! 

[jno]

Can't get anything with your link acw but I think Abusive is probably ok as a reason (unless it implies only personal abuse of other AB users... does it?). Outright racist comments do appear here once in a while, but they've always been reported and removed, so I'm sure AB Ed is alive to the problem. Let civil discourse be our goal.

[acw]

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/ChatterBank/Question126590.html

I hope this link works!

I always thought that abusive did mean "personal attack against another user".  ABE - could u also clarify this please!? :-)

[VINNY100_2]

We all know that clarion street is a bit ..shall we say nieve in the extreme! but to be honest acw you do tend to bring out the worse in people with your constant  . aggressive attitude  ..why not take a breather sometimes..and count to 10..".methinks the lady protests too much"sometimes a more softly-softly approach would perhaps make people like clarion take a more respectful view of the world and its people.Not constant nagging verging on out- right war(:)Have a nice day!!

[manilow]

Without wanting to cause an argument I agree with Vinny100_2. acw does rather leap in with harsh words.  Lighten up a bit love. But she posts well and is probably the most prolific member we have.

[acw]

Right - having counted to 10, slowly, I am posting my answer.  I am rather confused I must confess.  It woulkd appear that the latter two posters here (posts 3 and 4) are suggesting that it's my fault that 10ClarionSt thinks all muslims agree with the bombings.  Or at least that it's my fault he decided to say that.

I do understand that a lot of you want me off this site - and again I say this: report me until I get banned - every day until ABE kicks me off.  If you really have that big a problem with me - that is fine.  

However gobby and lairy I get at times, I have never suggested something as racist and offensive as that.  I don't see why my arguementative attitude should give a green light to others to make horrendous accusations about at least 1.5 million citizens of this country. 

Please please clarify - I'm confused.

[ICEMANSAV]

all I could see there was support for you acw , I think what Vinny meant was that your tone can sometimes provoke people to say things that they might not necessarily mean. I don't mind whatever tone people try to implement in their posts but some users will and by your own admission you have " red rag to a bull " syndrome. I don't think people want you off this site, maybe just wish your responses did not appear like rants.

[tinaL]

I avoid a lot of questions acw is involved in because I find her replies too aggressive as well. I have to say I think acw is properly a nice person. As VINNY100_2 has said, acw take a step back and count to 10, it is better to discus issues in a calm way and beat any racist post with positive answers and constructive debate.Well done VINNY100_2, the voice of reason!::-)

[acw]

First of all a polite request - please do not talk about me as if I am not here.  I started this thread and am reading every response.  Please address comments about me to me please - then I won't feel like I'm being talked about!  Thanks! :-)

Second - let's not turn this into a people who like me vs people who hate me type debate - this was meant to be about racism.

Third - I get aggressive on here (I confess) when people wind me up.  I posted on an ICEMANSAV post the other day about this - the post he refers to now.  If people sling mud at me - I sling it back.  I've always been a bit more "eye for an eye" than "turn the other cheek".  Beleive me - I've spent my whole life paying for that attitude and I am softening in my old age. 

Fourth - seriously please folks, back to the point.  In a forum for free discussion where a lot of us like a good debate, are we to accept racism in the name of free speech?

[jno]

oh, that one... I thought it was religionist rather than racist (I know, not even a word). I suspect 10ClarionSt was wanting an audience for his/her views rather than a debate on them, and presumably hasn't changed them at all; but by posting them, other people were able to respond and disagree with them, as I did myself (and as you did); so he/she will not now imagine those views are universally agreed with.

I suppose in the present climate some anti-Muslim feeling is inevitable, and argument about it seems to me to be the sort of thing AB is for. But I have also noticed today's news stories about the sharp rise in hate crimes, and it may be that threads like 10ClarionSt's encourage that sort of reaction, which worries me. Anyway, over to AB Ed on this one.

And acw please do not take everything so personally. Just because someone disagrees with you, even frequently, does not mean they want you banned. It's not all about you!

[acw]

I know I know jno (poetry! :-p )  But I wish people would disagree with my views rather than me.  I do often get personal attacks.  I try very hard to word things as  I mean then - I presume others do the same.  That is why I took the dig at my genetics so personally - because I presumed it was deliberate.  And yes - when I am angry I give thought out nasty responses.  I admit it. 

I think religionist = racist.  It's all confusing anyway isn't it.  I have to say I thought there was a (proposed) law against Inciting (sp) Racial Hatred.  IT's all since my time as a UG student so I don't know.  However, if there is, and the internet were covered (which it wouldn't be probably), then the post I refer to would surely be illegal.  Especially in light of the news to which you refer!

[IWANOWENS743]

Here we go again acw trying to force her views on everyone else and stifle debate! Let�s rename the site acwbank! acw get out find a partner, you post like a lonely old spinster! Smile and the world smiles with you!!!! :-)

[mfewell]

Hello acw, I'd just like to say how much I look forward to your turning up in any thread because I know it's going to be interesting, and I mean that as a compliment. You only need to have your tongue in your cheek occasionally and imagine the other person's there too. It is a thoroughly good thing that you do get agitated because it shows you have spirit and are a thinker. For courtroom battles you just need a slightly thicker skin :-). Posts are never personal - how can they be?

Racism: (indeed offensive threads of all types): I have never reported any thread. The worst one I ever saw was that one with sicko jokes immediately after the bombs. Even then I would not have reported it, I would have left it there to languish in full view. The Submit button is like an all-staff email - seems like a good idea at the time but goes a long way and you can't retract. The problem is who defines what is racist (etc). If you do and report a post it gets withdrawn (automatically I suppose?) you have merely imposed your own view on another's. Same if I were to. I think there is a difference between a rant on AB and a guy inciting racial hatred on a street corner or in the press, because AB is at least partially private and we get to know each others foibles.

p.s. you will never get banned because you have no badness in you; if you ever did I would leave too in sympathy.

[acw]

Thanks mfewell - :-)

IWANOWEN - I'm asking a question - where should the line be drawn?  I have a right to be offended by the comments I refer to.  I don't expect everyone to agree with me.  If you know me even a tiny bit you'd know that I'd hate everyone to agree with me, because then I'd have no-one to debate with.  You rarely have anything to say, and have only ever entered threads I started to pick a fight.  So please don't start calling the kettle black.  I know what I am and I admit to it. 

So IWANOWEN - where should the line be drawn in terms of racism on this site?

 

I do ask this seriously.  I know some people feel very strongly about free speech.  I do too, but I draw my line in a different place to those drawn by others.  I'm just interested to hear where people put the lines. 

[Glossopswift]

I wholly disagree with 10ClarionSt�s views but defend his right to say what he said. It�s a fine line that was walked but I think he had the right to say it, as we have the right to argue the point with him. 10ClarionSt could have kept his feelings to himself and continued thinking that his views were those of the general population, but now he is aware of the arguments against it. His view probably hasn�t changed, those arguing against him probably haven�t changed, but onlookers who read the thread without contributing are now better informed of both sides of an argument. Throughout the debate I never felt that anyone was inciting or urging racial hatred, merely giving their opinions, albeit in a less and less eloquent manner. There are many, many times of late that SEVERAL people have taken the fact that others have a different point of view as a personal attack but (and this IS directed at you acw) please don�t think it means that people want you off the site. They can�t do that even if they wanted to, you are free to express yourself however you want, and so is everyone else. I honestly look forward to your reasoned and passionate comments during this week�s test on Thursday and Friday (but probably not Monday). Love peace and pixies.

(p.s. � I�ve just refreshed my browser to see if anyone has posted while I�ve been typing and I would add that the drawing of lines is probably too subjective to define, that�s the point of the debate.

[AB Editor]

Hi all,

Please keep in mind that in light of recent events and the current political situation the line between legitimate topical debate and sensational (racist) commentary may appear blurred to some. Rest assured I have been reviewing particular threads in case things get "out of hand". All racist/discriminatory comments are removed as per the Site Rules. 

AB ED 

[mfewell]

acw: Racism, another point. There can be no discussion about it because no-one is permitted to put the 'pro-racist' argument. The only debate permitted is along the lines of how bad racism is. Yet it is out there. Similarly many many brits are antipathetic towards Islam, but you/we won't let them say so because it is religionist. How about the view that Britain is fundamentally a Christian (albeit secular) country and we'd rather not have excessive Islam here ? A perfectly valid view which many hold. The trouble is it's not correct to say so. I noted that pupils from minority groups/religions are at my old school, but the school pointed out "------ does however remain fundamentally a Christian school".

As long as we can spot any new and significant Hitlerism on the rise then I think we are doing ok.

[IWANOWENS743]

It is better to let Answerbank be used to vent anger towards different groups by certain Answerbankers than they go out on the street and vent it for real at least on here we can debate with them and hopefully change their minds if you just keep banning their questions then you become part of the problem as we have no chance to change their minds before they vent their misguided anger in a violent way. We all know a racist Q&A when we see one and most on AB will report it. You are aggressive acw and will argue about anything with anyone. As for you becoming a solicitor or whatever no way you have the wrong temperament you will not make it. All the time on here acw and you have not tempered your responses, even after so many Answerbankers complain about your unrelenting attitude towards other Abers  acw    

[outaboutnowt]

Blimey acw! I was about to stick up for you until I seen IWANSOWENS743 link! Have some respect for other users on AB. We all have are own views you know!

[jno]

not sure AB is a venting-anger site IWANOWENS - Q&As and a bit of debate about current issues is the mission statement as I recall, which is not the same thing as being a soapbox, let alone a megaphone.

As for being a solicitor: there are solicitors who drily tell clients what their chances are, and solicitors who passionately fight for their rights. Both are ok.

[mycatis]

I'm a bit confused how this thread, which seemed like a perfectly fair question to me, has ended up being an attck on acw. I think you are perfectly entitled to ask why there is no racism option, I dont understand why people have a problem whith the idea, am I missing something? You are as entitled to anyone else to your opinion