Mods the close threads without giving reasons should be de-modded

[File0]

Originally Posted by Ronin4hire

Even when that distinction is made I still think Japan makes the top spot.

In fact I think straight up insults are rare. The thread MMM closed was mostly about the perception on Americans and their knowledge of the outside world in general.

He didn't try to clear up any misunderstandings or explain it, he just closed it.

Furthermore I think I have a more objective angle on it because I'm neither American nor Japanese.

Anyway, in answer to why I'm making a big deal out of this, the reason I was kinda pissed off was because I had typed out a lengthy reply to what I thought was a particular bigoted post by Sangetsu, and when I went to post it I couldn't.

Sangetsu's post was far the most arrogant I've read here!
So I couldn't agree more, it should have been answered. The only reason I haven't posted what I wrote as a reply to it, because I felt ashamed, I thought it was rather humiliating to go into a conversation, which was obviously generated by a very advanced troll.

I still have the text though, if you don't believe me, I can pm it to you
But I'm kind of glad I didn't posted it and the thread was closed, so I didn't give the satisfaction to the thread's OP(who's finally got banned).
I mean, if you want to complain than I think you better do it a little later, in case he's still checking back as a visitor("lets see how bad is what I've caused")...

................
BTW as a compromise, can't you delete just the off topic posts from that thread, so it could be reopened, so Ronin4shire could be reassured?

[RealJames]

Originally Posted by File0

Sangetsu's post was far the most arrogant I've read here!

That's an understatement, and it was also why I reacted as strongly as I had, I suppose I don't have the restraint you do lol.

What if we parallel the "What's good about Japan" and "What's bad about Japan" threads with America? And see if things can be said in the same manner.

If I remember, in the bad things about Japan thread, a certain few Japanese lovers reacted quite sensitively towards any negative comment and few off the handle and then a few other threads started all about getting labeled as a hater or racist. So it's not quite like negative opinions about any country on these forums goes unpunished lol.

[Suki]

Originally Posted by MMM

I am not sensitive about the US, but am sensitive about stereotyping and untruths spread about ANY persons or country. The fact is, on JF most of the time that is about Americans.

Yes, you are. You went as far as to suggest it was ok for the US to have dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki because allies are supposed to help allies and so the US had to step in and help out any way possible, regardless of the consequences. Then you'd have to forgive Japan for bombing Pearl Harbor to ashes, because they were only helping their fellow Germans after all. And you know, that is coming from me, probably the least Japan-obssessed member of this forum.

[MMM]

Let's not mix apples and oranges. A discussion about WWII that I don't even remember from a couple years ago has nothing to do with this topic.

[Suki]

Originally Posted by MMM

Let's not mix apples and oranges. A discussion about WWII that I don't even remember from a couple years ago has nothing to do with this topic.

A couple years? I'm talking about December 27th, 2010.

And yes, it has all to do with the fact that you seem so eagerly desirous to spot an inexistent sign of America-bashing you forbid people from having a discussion they might actually want to have by closing a thread. Being a mod isn't about making that call when you think it is suitable to do so, but doing what's best for the forum and its members according to the specified rules (which -by the way- should have been voted on by all the members before being established, but that's off the topic at hand). You don't have to argue with us about whether or not it was right to close that thread (we'll never reach an agreement so it is pointless), but if several people are asking you to have it reopened you cannot deny their right to discuss whatever they want, especially since you were the only one who took offence to it, which comes to show it wasn't all that offensive.

[TalnSG]

Derailing discussions into off-topic bickering sometimes reaches the level of a fine art around here, and that is just where this seems headed, too.

Regardless of why a thread is closed, or by whom, I think it is best for the last post before it is closed to be the mod's explanation for the closing - no matter how blatantly obvious it should be.

Reason 1 - it makes it clear to all involved in the discussion up to that point and then the cause can be disputed, if anyone feels it is necessary.

Reason 2 - Having been a mod for various forums since the early 1990s I learned one thing that doesn't seemed to have caught anyone's attention here. When you close, but do not delete a discussion it means that every time someone opens the thread to read the most recent comment, they usually see the most offensive post of the discussion. Is that really what you mods want users to see first? Especially new users? Better that there are only two options: read from the beginning and perhaps understand the digression; or read from the most recent - the mod's explanation of why it was closed.

[MMM]

Suki, are you talking about the thread where you said America is responsible for all major world catastrophes?

I never said what you are saying I said, so if you want to quote me, quote me, but please keep it in context and on topic. And don't pretend there was no America bashing going on there. Even YOU called another person's comment "harsh".

The reason I closed the thread without deleting it was to show that when discussions get off topic and into bashing they can get closed. Mods do cherry pick inappropriate comments to keep valuable threads going, but there are times when a thread goes so off the rails it gets closed and/or deleted. This is one of those times.

However I will take File0's request and remove the inappropriate posts and reopen the thread.

I understand some of you would like to see it remain closed, and I will keep a close eye on it. If an appropriate discussion cannot take place, then it will be closed or deleted.

[Suki]

Originally Posted by MMM

Suki, are you talking about the thread where you said America is responsible for all major world catastrophes?

I never said what you are saying I said, so if you want to quote me, quote me, but please keep it in context and on topic. And don't pretend there was no America bashing going on there. Even YOU called another person's comment "harsh".

Here's context and irrefutable quotation:


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"If our ally is being attacked then it is not only our duty but a requirement to help them. If that help is in the form of military defense and is what is needed, then that is what happens."

You actually said those words. If I were a mod I'd have someone banned for saying things along those lines. But anyway, yeah someone went on and made a pretty harsh statement about Americans in general, to which I LOL'ed, cause I knew he didn't mean it and was just messing around for kicks. I would have had the same reaction if I were American because YES, it is funny how uncultured and blatantly dumb some people can be, despite of where they come from, so it's just better to laugh it off and let it be.

[MMM]

Suki, your passion for trying to prove me wrong is unending, to say the least.

That statement was not made in defending the atomic bombings of Japan in WWII. It was just a general statement about how allies work together. (That's why they are called "allies".) You were talking about Iraq and more recent conflicts, and not about WWII. You put the context of "the last 30 years."

So if you think someone should be banned for saying "If our ally is being attacked then it is not only our duty but a requirement to help them," then I am not sure what to tell you. You complain that I am stifling free conversation, but would ban someone for saying something as reasonable as that?

Anyway, I would prefer to get back on topic.

[Suki]

Originally Posted by MMM

Suki, your passion for trying to prove me wrong is unending, to say the least.

That statement was not made in defending the atomic bombings of Japan in WWII. It was just a general statement about how allies work together. (That's why they are called "allies".) You were talking about Iraq and more recent conflicts, and not about WWII. You put the context of "the last 30 years."

So if you think someone should be banned for saying "If our ally is being attacked then it is not only our duty but a requirement to help them," then I am not sure what to tell you. You complain that I am stifling free conversation, but would ban someone for saying something as reasonable as that?

Anyway, I would prefer to get back on topic.

You said you'd never said what I said you'd said, so I found prove that shows I wasn't making it up, which makes it obvious you're biased when it comes to anything to do with America. And I would not really ban someone for saying that, but to me this stuff you said is more alarming than saying Americans are really bad at Geography.

I apologise for going offtopic.