Hacker Neue

Preferences
jacquesm parent
Offense is in the eye of the beholder, if someone has Tourette's would you berate them for profanity? Would you feel insulted anyway?
chc
It's not the profanity. I and I'm sure many other people here are exposed to profanity very regularly and aren't bothered by profanity alone. It's the hateful messages. If anyone posted "N•••••s deserve hell", they would be hellbanned on the spot. You want to give Terry special treatment because he's ill, but being ill doesn't make his comments not awful, it just makes me judge him less severely as a person.
jacquesm OP
> You want to give Terry special treatment because he's ill,but being ill doesn't make his comments not awful, it just makes me judge him less severely as a person.

Exactly, you got it perfectly.

ealexhudson
I think the issue here is that it's easier to forgive understanding who he is; a random passerby (or simply regular visitors who skim) wouldn't know and would see a community that effectively is condoning that behaviour.

FWIW, I voted unban. I think that would reflect positively on the community, but I worry that from the outside it looks negative.

chc
That isn't my issue. My issue is that this isn't about forgiving or not forgiving a person. I don't have a personal grudge against, say, people who post cat memes, but I still believe somebody who persists in doing so should be banned. This isn't because of my hatred of them as a person; it's because they routinely post crap that is not welcome here.

Terry posts stuff that is very much not welcome here and is offensive, but that doesn't mean I hate him or anything. But I still think he should remain hellbanned, because although I may not have anything against Terry himself, his backstory doesn't make the actual racist and otherwise nonsensical content more permissible.

For this reason, I voted to keep the account hellbanned. He can keep posting in his hellbanned state without junking up the site at large, and those who wish to see his dead comments can opt to see them. This is as it should be.

CanSpice
Forgiving works when the other person has expressed regret for their actions and doesn't repeat them. Neither apply in this case. I too voted to keep him banned.
chc
Even if he regrets his comments — which he may sometimes, as people with his condition are given to do, but I don't know him well enough to say — he can't promise not to repeat them. He's not a well man. There's really nothing to be gained from hating this person. He deserves sympathy, not ire.
bdcravens
I don't think the comparison is apt; a person with Tourette's has "spasms" (everyone knows about the verbal, but also has muscular manifestation). Typing in a comment requires some degree if cognizance. I imagine if a Tourette's patient had a "reply" button for their words to come out, they'd choose to never click it.

Let's assume though that TempleOS can't help it. If you had an acquaintance with chronic flatulence that was persistent and horrible smelling, how often would you have them at your dinner table?

jacquesm OP
> If you had an acquaintance with chronic flatulence that was persistent and horrible smelling, how often would you have them at your dinner table?

How about every day?

Or would you propose they eat in solitary confinement or something?

catshirt
"chronic flatulence" was an awful analogy and an easy out for you.

what if your acquaintance was verbally and physically abusive? what if they threatened to kill you or, worse, tried to because of schizophrenia? do you bear the abuse because they can't help it?

i'm struggling to understand what point you are trying to make. we should unconditionally forgive the mentally ill when they offend us? that we have the responsibility to provide them a public forum?

jason_slack
agreed. They are still human beings after all!
SoftwareMaven
If you believe this, you have no idea how schizophrenia affects its sufferers.

This item has no comments currently.