-3
DomitiusOfMassilia -3 points ago +2 / -5

That's because 'race' is a complete misnomer, and it was religion, culture, and ethnicity.

Race, in the way it is used in the American sense, is a purely abstract concept that pretends to have biological legitimacy. Race, even as used by Enoch Powell, wasn't used to describe everyone of a certain skin color, but was more nuanced than that. This is why the definition of "white" people's changed as much as it did. It didn't literally mean everyone from anywhere that fell along a certain color swatch. When he used it, it mostly meant British.

Biological race makes some sense as a form of human stratification; but is mostly disconnected from culture and religion.

2
DomitiusOfMassilia 2 points ago +2 / -0

And I will criticize muslims too.

Right, based on cultural and societal doctrines. That's why none of this is a rule violation.

-5
DomitiusOfMassilia -5 points ago +2 / -7

No, and Arab would be more of a clear violation.

I agree that Muslims are not a race. The weird part is that there is a racialization of Muslims that make the attacks on them an identity attack. Where you could have lesser devout forms of Muslims reject certain aspects of Islam, and this isn't much of an issue.

Frankly, it's a similar problem with jews. Jews aren't a race; but most of the rule violating attacks on them treat them as a race.

2
DomitiusOfMassilia 2 points ago +3 / -1

BRING BACK MY GRILLED CHICKEN SANDWITCH YOU BASTARD

0
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] 0 points ago +1 / -1

Post Reported for: Rule 11 - Spam

Post Removed: You can't actually make posts about other users. I allow his post up because it's technically a meta-post.

-12
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] -12 points ago +9 / -21

Sigh.

When I say "have to" I mean "have to in order to be in compliance of Rule 16". It's not an order, I'm just explaining to you what the rule is because I like to not hide what the rule means.

After all, the invasive, criminal and exploitative behavior of muslims aligns with the instructions of their warmongering cult-leader. They don't see it as a 'moral failing'

See, that's actually a criticism of the religion, that's why that's okay.

You tried to divert attention from the behavior of muslims by demanding that I criticize their so-called religion. You demanded that I take part in the lie of seperating islam from the muslims when their own "religious" doctrines specifically exhorts upon them to exploit, extort, enslave and exterminate anyone they deem 'infidels', which they have been doing for centuries.

No, I just want you to be clear about the distinction. The reason a Muslim behaves in a morally inferior way is from the institution of the religion, and once outside of that religion, their behavior may return to normal.

Also, stop using chatGPT

I don't use chatGPT (I don't know how). I just sound like this.

If you're that determined to ban all criticism of your mohammedan leash-holders, then make it a clear law. At least then people will know who truly owns you.

So, what you're saying is that you can't claim I'm JIDF now? Hmmmm Intriguing offer, but I'll have to pass. You can criticize Islam all you want.

2
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Post Reported for: Rule 12 - Intentional Falsehoods / Disinformation

Post Removed for: Rule 12 - Intentional Falsehoods / Disinformation

You shared an explicitly fake headline, made to look like the real thing, and when confronted you didn't apologize, take it down, or pull back. You just rationalized it.

More info here: https://kotakuinaction2.win/p/17te51rVA1/x/c/4ZCatKkTzbI

-1
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] -1 points ago +1 / -2

Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks

Comment Removed for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks

Referring to Indians as Muslims and Indians as creepy insinuates an inherent moral inferiority.

-1
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] -1 points ago +1 / -2

Post Reported for: Redditor

Post Approved: I want to see my users accomplish things. Don't tear people down.

-2
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] -2 points ago +1 / -3

Comment Reported for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech

Comment Removed for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech

Do not call for mass executions

-1
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] -1 points ago +1 / -2

Comment Reported for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech

Comment Removed for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech

Do not support suicide.

-1
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] -1 points ago +1 / -2

Comment Reported for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech

Comment Removed for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech

Do not encourage suicide.

1
DomitiusOfMassilia 1 point ago +1 / -0

I read the thread, and it looked like Siegfried had responded saying "I" when speaking about Yoisi's comment. But, it's debatable considering the grammar was Siegfried was using, so I removed the note.

0
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] 0 points ago +3 / -3

No, it still really looks like he was referring to your comment.

BUT, looking at this, it's arguable enough. It could go either way, he's not being clear enough in the comment to know which one he's referencing.

So, I can see the argument. I'll remove the note

1
DomitiusOfMassilia 1 point ago +1 / -0

What receipts? I'm not even sure he can get receipts. Do you mean this?

"merciful solitary" instead of "merciful solution"

It wasn't in any aspect of my decision that yoisi & siegfried were the same.

0
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] 0 points ago +2 / -2

Comment Reported for: Rule 3 - Harassment

While an insult, this isn't harassment on it's own unless GuestAccount69 is actually going everywhere to specifically harass people.

-4
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] -4 points ago +1 / -5

Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks

This actually sounds more like a basic environmentalist argument.

1
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks

Comment Removed for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks

-13
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] -13 points ago +1 / -14

You literally replied to me as your alt, in first person, defending your comment. I just noted that down.

That is to say, WitchHunterSiegfried replied in the first person, regarding a comment you made, in defending it. It was a slip of the tongue.

It's not that big of a deal. You're allowed to use alts, just not ban evade.

1
DomitiusOfMassilia [M] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Comment Reported for: Rule 15 - Slurs

Comment Approved: You're allowed to call each other faggots.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›