Me too. Guess that means we are in the same boat then. Rejoice, acting stupid and becoming smarter can be strangely related.

GOAT curry has got to be that black stuff from Sri Lanka. I make it with pork though, because that's just how I roll.

Some of them are worse.

Now you're talking. Back in the day I used to go to an awesome place with colleagues and often had goat curry.

The restaurant had a major cockroach infestation problem but one of the chaps had a PhD on cockroaches and used to catch them and keep them under upturned glasses. Great fun when the waiters cleared the table and they would all escape. Sadly they rebuilt it some years ago and no cockroaches but the foods not as good.

Don't even get me started on GOAT curries.

What the hell???

what are you so shocked about? that's just the SMP usual-usual

I guess I expected them more to be discussing the pros and cons of sexual intercourse with livestock as a purely intellectual exercise instead of actually engaging in goat ****ing.

(if one is here to just laugh then i suppose these people are not operating with the best intentions of how the site should work in order to prove an interesting place and experience. "Unchained" should promote even stronger forms of free speech and creative interactions, not prove an opportunity of excessive mocking and abusing and bullying and name calling.)

I dont think any SMP people that post here have a grudge against you guys or other regulars in politics etc. A great deal of people here though have essentially written off guys like Bruce and others. They appear decided about them (to eg dislike and hate at some level or constantly find ways to appear sarcastic, unforgiving, always ready to oppose etc ). Personally i am not decided about any of you. We do not operate that way. We are free thinkers as much as we can and can allow even extreme positions without hating the person instantly and wanting to ban, remove, block, shame, shun, take out mod privileges, destroy online identity, fame, respect, legacy, alter lives etc. We will of course proceed to debate the other person and if we think something unethical is suggested we will be very vigorous about it without trying to belittle the other person. We do not hate or create factions and keep score.

The process is not always without bs and ego crap games and some insults but its very limited. We are not generally hostile to others that are not regulars as if we own the place and are ready to gang up on them in group style and direct them how to operate by instantly attacking every little aspects of their posts and ideas and style with unreal magnitude sarcasm and trolling.

Its great to have fun but why does it have to be at the expense of other people or to have decided in a permanent manner that some of them deserve such targeting permanently?

See what i mean with grudge now? Treat the others as potential friends eventually that can improve each other. Not as permanent opponents that you must defeat and remove.

If racism should be encouraged here because of free speech then so should excessive mocking, abusing, bullying and name-calling

The purpose of "Unchained" is to illustrate that more freedom isn't necessarily better. Also, to be more forgiving of posters who would otherwise be banned.

Opinions here are usually formed over time and can change in the face of new information. I can't speak for others, but my opinion that Bruce was racist was formed after reading almost all of his posting history in relevant threads, including posts not cited in arguments. That could change with additional data, but it seems clear that he isn't going to offer more data.

The only person who threatened to ban anyone, who threatened to ruin the identity of anyone, who threatened to alter offline lives, who threatened to remove any posts, or who threatened to use his mod powers against anyone was BruceZ.

If you guys are so open to having discussions about extreme positions, why does that somehow not include relatively ordinary positions like "Comparing Mexicans to cockroaches is racist" and "Presupposing that black people in Ferguson are rioting only because they are fools who have been fooled by charlatans is racist?" Your claims about wanting an open dialog are completely hollow if you are not open to anyone who disagrees with BruceZ.

When you spout off crap like, "We do not hate or create factions and keep score (but you do)" it's obvious to anyone that you have made your own faction against us, that you hate our faction, and that you are keeping score.

lol it is almost tilting how much you clowns portray yourselves as victims itt

You're doing that thing again where you completely misinterpret everything about the post to mean something it doesn't, and then you declare the poster to be the most vile form of human garbage. Sort of like you did to Swissmiss when you called her a holocaust denier, or like you seem to do in some form or another on the regular. Is it by accident or on purpose?

The strange thing is, the first time you read Duffee's post, you seemed to understand what he meant, and instead of calling him a white supremicist, you responded appropriately:

So what happened here that caused you to misinterpret his post?

One might see similarities to those who complain that "reverse racism" is worse than actual racism.

masque doesn't seem to understand that not everybody wants to be friends with people who are overt power abusing racists

I like the part where masque's entire opening paragraph was a parenthetical. That's exactly the sort of out-of-the-box style of prose I expect from free thinking individuals.

He gives three reasons why the arrests might have occurred, and all three explanations imply that the black person deserved that arrest, despite the tremendous disparity between black and white arrest rates. His explanation is only true if and only if black people are deserving of arrest at a rate that much higher than whites, which necessarily implies black people are more criminal. Mind you, his post was made to explain away why blacks were searched more often than whites, so as to justify the higher rate as attributable to something other than racism. Trying to split the difference, to go a third direction where he really thinks that blacks are arrested more, and that's the reason for the search disparity, and then conclude that higher arrest rate is evidence of systemic racism is completely contrary to his whole thesis thus far. His post in no way implies that he's arguing something like, "It's not really the searches that show the racism of the cops, it's the higher arrest rate that shows how racist the cops are." He's been arguing that the arrest are justified, and that the cops really aren't all that racist. In order for that to be true, black people have to be more criminal.

You're reading it wrong. Try going back and reading the few preceding pages to get a better idea of the conversation, and you should see why you didn't take it that way the first time.

He's trying to make the case that the higher stop rate plus the fact that every arrest leads to search, coupled with that blacks had more warrants and so on lead to them being searched more. He's not making any claims of who deserves what or any of the implications you are claiming.

They make themselves look continually bad. They really don't need your help. Literally everyone sees what's going on. They don't need outting. They're all out. When the mods are clearly on the side of the trolls, they don't need to hide.

The same thing that always happens? He does it on purpose. Because he's a troll. Why are you pretending to not understand this?

yea you must be pretty unfamiliar with duffee's posting history in the mike brown thread

Every single person you are trying to have a conversation with is here to just laugh.

He even ends the post putting the blame on the cops:

He's pointing out the "trivial reasons" can easily lead to non-compliance.

foldn, why would blacks be twice as likely to be "non-compliant" than whites, if they were not inherently more criminal and more aggro?

duffee can word things however eloquently and objectively he wants, he still finds a way to betray his true intentions and your last quote of him kinda proves that

even if you pre-suppose that blacks aren't inherently more criminal/aggro, and that the reason for higher rates of "non-compliance" are due to indignance over frivolous arrests/charges, you still then have to admit the fact that there is systemic and institutional racism in the way the police department operates. i don't think duffee has ever conceded that point, but i suppose i could be wrong.