ThreadBare said:

Okay, what happened with muthafunka?

Yeah, great post threadbare.

I think the current mods do a great job (especially in PR), and I don't think that's what tb was talking about (correct me if I'm wrong), but what he was talking about (I think) was the troubled history of the org regarding race, and how that can't be erased, and how it's an unspoken and unresolved burden on current mods...

This is a community.

Deal with fucking it.

Or don't.

I just spoke the truth to evenstar in an orgnote.

2the9s said:

the frustrating thing is that there's so little that can be done about that particular aspect of it.

2the9s said:

You mean she did not have you blocked?

mdiver said:

this is true.. i agree 100% .. there is no justification for racism in any race, no matter what kind of hardships a person is experiencing... a racist black is just as bad as a racist white ..2 wrongs dont make it right ..the whole act in itself is a crime..

2the9s said:

Racism, in my opinion, is never dealt with on here. The same people do the same things time and time again with no consequences.

Holy shit! I haven't clicked on this thread in weeks. I had no idea it had turned into this or the dealings with Gray and Mutha.

Adisa said:

Hot ghetto mess, isn't it?

Stymie said:

Time to bring back my old signature.

Serious said:

i agree wholeheartedly.

i think racism is a huge issue that needs to be addressed, along with other forms of discrimination.

i think and i hope that it's possible for humans as a species to evolve past the point where we judge each other by the color of our skins or by our genders, our sexual preferences, religion or other criteria.

i'd love to find a solution to this problem but i don't think that solution will be found by us, here at prince.org, in the P & R forum. i don't think we have the maturity or perspective to handle these discussions well.

i've been here since 1997 or so and from what i've seen most race threads (going as far back as the rainbow children in 2001) eventually deteriorate into personal and racial attacks. imo, through this kind of vitriolic discussion we just make it worse.

so, i refrain from taking part in the numerous race threads not because i refuse to recognize the problem, but simply because i do not think that any of the discussions so far have actually helped matters any.

just my 2c
[Edited 5/27/08 10:20am]

XxAxX said:

I agree.

Adisa said:

The issues with me had nothing 2 do with race. Rather than get into the details, I will not be posting 2 P&R any longer.

Graycap23 said:

Understandable, but good to have you back anyway..

mdiver said:

You have consistently discounted people's experiences. If you have ever tried understanding, I sure have never seen it. And I find it interesting that you must rely on the dictionary instead of using your own words to say what you mean.

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

I have NEVER discounted anyones experience Richard, stop spouting the accusations of others to curry their favour There is a massive difference in discounting an experience as invalid and not agreeing with the conclusion drawn. Go find me where i have "consistently" discounted anothers experience as invalid . Or will this be another one of your "i will get back to you on this" moments?

On your second point, it is neither here nor there that you find it interesting, it is a simple statement of definition,if you ask for a definition where do you expect it to come from? Are you saying that if you ask me to define racism and i say "it is when you kick a football" that is as valid because my experience is telling me that????
Commonality of definition is the basis for the use of a word. That is a simple premise of language and conversation otherwise NOTHING would make sense.
If you want to talk of experience i will talk to you of my experience (which has been discounted by many i would add) if you want to talk of my description of what i have felt then i will do that but if you ask me which description, in MY language i would add, i use for a word then it will come from a concordance of language. Don't ask for a definition if you don't want it
[Edited 5/27/08 16:04pm]

mdiver said:

Well let me say I have never seen you agree with a conclusion. How's that? I have to wonder why that is always and consistently your stance when it comes to the issue. If you can point me to the threads where you didn't do this from post one, then I'll gladly admit I'm wrong. I've never seen it though.[/quote]



I didn't ask for a definition as described in the dictionary. I asked for your and other Europeans definition because it seems that some are claiming that Americans don't have a clue what the definition is. There are different cultures and it could be that Europeans are operating under a different understanding as it applies to their experiences. That is why I asked in the first place. I agree, blacks can be racist. All races have this ability but you seem so hellbent on making black orgers complicit in hating on white folks when the real attitude stems not from the fact you have white skin but your approach to them.
[Edited 5/27/08 16:18pm]
[Edited 5/27/08 16:19pm]

2the9s said:

You're right, 9s. That was exactly my point. I want to reiterate that I think the mods do outstanding work in a thankless job. It's more a matter of seeing examples where people go out of their way to stir up things, particularly concerning race. Fortunately, there are times when Orgers don't let such behavior gain any traction.

Graycap23 said:

Welcome back, Gray... I missed you.

noimageatall said:

Fa sheezy, my neezy!

XxAxX said:

I have a solution, but unfortunately it will never happen in my lifetime on this board.

noimageatall said:

It doesn't involve fire does it?

Graycap23 said:

Good to see you back..

noimageatall said:

I appreciate the comments but unless they get some even handed mods over there, I'll choose 2 stay out.

Love

SCNDLS said:

lol....

ThreadBare said:

Word!

This thread is a good example. Supa started it with good intentions and the replies were civil and good humoured until...

The ONLY effective remedy for baiting is to ignore it...we're not fish! It's sad to see good threads ruined one after another when people can't resist going tit for tat with individuals known to be serial baiters.

Improved moderation will only resolve a portion of the issues. We can also do our part by refusing to be provoked.

It bears remembering that the primary goal of a serial baiter is to create a disturbance and gain attention. The topic of discussion and other's opinions/feelings are secondary because no matter what the topic, somehow it always ends up being about "them". Notice that they tend to go after the same people every time. People they know they can get a reaction from.

There will always be those who don't understand the difference between having an opinion and being opinionated or cannot disagree without being disagreeable but as TB suggests, we have to be mindful and "choose" our battles wisely.

babynoz said:

True dat.....

Graycap23 said:

Hey!

I had no idea either.

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:[quote]

mdiver said:

Thankyou for the retraction of your accusation, i am pretty sure that is more down to the fact that you can't prove anything as ususal but a retraction is a retraction.If you wish to prove a point against me Richard that is your job to do, not mine to disprove, you have a high opinion of yourself if you feel that i am going to run around disproving your misguided accusations of where my disagreement comes from.
Perhaps if you understood a little more of the world outside the US, the structures of countries and THEIR definitions of racism,hate crime and prejudice then YOU would understand a little more that the US stands differently in their definition and that makes it insular in my opinion. This does not come down to who is right and who is wrong. If Americans wish to say that in their realm the definition is "x" then so be it. My point is that this definition is only valid in that realm and unfortunately the American way is usually not to understand the world outside but to ask the world to change to their way of thinking.
My point has never been more than the fact that MOST Americans have never travelled outside the Union, most Americans have never seen racism or prejudice
outside of the Union so it is arrogant and foolish to try and tell the rest of the world and me that we don't understand racism. That is BS.
This is a worldwide problem, a worldwide scourge that needs to be wiped out and it will never be done with dilution of definition.
The problem when you dilute a definition is that there are those that will the seize upon this and USE it as an excuse to act in a racist manner. Not all, but some. There have been many accounts on this forum of racist remarks made bt people that feel they are not racist because, quite simple, the colour of their skin means they cant be racist....WTF?????

If you want my feeling on the matter i would say that trying to assign power to the definition of racism totally dilutes the application. It undermines the reasons and motives and misses the point.
For example, lets use a situation in a workplace where a black person goes for a job. As i understand it, the American understanding would be such that if a person in authority denies a person a job based on skin colour then that is a racist act, however lets say that person is given the job but that an equal level employee feels aggrieved, they WOULD have denied the job, they do not like a black person being there but yet they have no power then that person is merely being prejudiced because they have no ability to enforce their feelings on another human..... FUCK NO....THAT PERSON IS A RACIST However the definition in use removes responsibility from huge number of people and therefore will never be changed. It is somewhat (to some) a get out clause to act how they wish. IMHO

It is really simple to me, any man that thinks or treats or reacts differently to another based on skin colour needs to address not prejudice but racism within himself.

The other issue that pisses me off is the immediate assumption that the issue I or others have is skin colour. There are threads on here right now that, they make the assumption that choices are made on skin colour.That to me is racism, when you look at a person's skin and decide that their choice is based on race based on that then ironically YOU are being racist. You are not defining that person on their heart, or their reasons but on skin colour.

This to me is an area that perpetuates racism, it redraws the line and i don't believe that one can stand up and say "I want to end racism" when in fact they are perpetuating the issue themselves.

I can only change me, if you KNEW me, if you KNEW what i do in my community to fight these things then you would KNOW the man i am, but you don't. You never will Richard because this is your latest little soap box. That is fine. It is a shame because you judge by the words of others, by the feelings of others and not by your own thought process. That is very evident from your dealings with me and my family in the past. So be it, that will not change and one thing is for sure, i remain the same.
Obnoxious to some, so be it, if i were black and obnoxious because my passion to fight racism were strong then those on here now that hate me would love me.That to me is again racism.
I know what i do, what i am and how i fight. I am at peace with me and have no fear or anger about my stance.
[Edited 5/28/08 0:15am]

ThreadBare said:

This post is a point in question Richard.
Threadbare has made the ASSUMPTION that the tread he quotes (the one about the bicycle) is some attempt to stir the racism pot when, if you actually read it the jibe was in fact at the ridiculous American political race currently going on where race and association is a major part of the mud slinging going on. Yet, thready then jumped on this as an "attempt to stir the pot" i have said this many times here, if you look hard enough you can see it wherever you wish.

Lets look at the alleged posts:

I said "if this is anything like the American election then someone will play the race card soon" .....hmmmmm poke at the US election or racist????? Is this being done in the race? Yes it is

McMeekle then points out an association issue "I think the green one used to hang about with a motorcycle gang".....so then stirring the race pot or a jibe at the election????? Is association an issue in the election...yes it is

I then say "the guy that pumped up the black bike's tyres once said "damn AMerica"" So race stirring or a jibe at the election???? Has association been an issue in the election??? Yes it has.

McMeekle then makes a point on wishing to hear the views of a certain bike colour on inner city issues, a political association.

I then say "I don't think it matters who we WANT to win, the black one won't be ALLOWED to and the green one is too old. It really does not matter anyway because the Bilderbergers have already decided"

So have we seen all over this board people saying that it does not matter who we pick because the "higher ups" decide anyway???? Race based or political?

And then the jibes about conspiracy theory continue.

So an assumption was made AGAIN that this is in some way an attempt to stir the pot....FFS really, this is what i mean, LOOK OUTSIDE IN TO THE WORLD, lift the vision from seeing what you need to see.

Thready i am somewhat disappointed in you for trying that

[Edited 5/28/08 0:34am]