[20Cent]

I wish to appeal a ban I received in a thread in the politics section. The thread was about the Che Guevara installation being proposed in Galway city.

It quickly became a bit heated with comments such as:
"I must say, I thought the disciples of Che might do a better job of justifying this monument on behalf of their esteemed butcher ... but "he didn't kill as many as Batista" seems to be the best they can come up with."

"The fact that we have statues commemorating some homicidal extremists does not rationalize adding more to the national catalog."

" It would be as if the Egyptian authorities were now to round up all supporters of former President Mubarak, imprison them, and put them in front of firing squads without trial. Would you support that as an act of "heroism"?"

"ou're still trying to rationalize putting innocent people in front of firing squads as "heroism."

"He only shot half of them" isn't a defense.

"Yes, we should shoot innocent people in the head without trial because of what they might do if they got out of prison.... So much for the hundreds of men Guevara executed in cold blood, the wives he widowed, the children he orphaned, and the parents whose sons and daughters he executed. Viva La Revolución!"

"Poor lads. Maybe you'd like statues of Mao, Stalin, and Kim Il-sung as well?"

"Would you like to laud Pol Pot and Idi Amin as heroes too?"

"While you're at it you should read up on the labour camps where homosexuals were sent for "re-education".

As you can see it turned black and white, you were either against Che or for the above things. Libertarianism was brought into the thread by a libertarian
"As a libertarian, I don't endorse slaughtering innocent people to achieve political ends. That applies regardless of the ideology involved."

The thread also discussed free markert and Declan Ganley.

"What if they threatened to "Occupy" the homes of the "one percent," by violent force if necessary?"

"Would you then support putting them in front of firing squads without due process?"

There was a mod warning about it being reactionary.

Then my comment
Threads like this are why I think libertarianism should be kept in the theory section, it is impossible to have a sensible debate about anything with blinkered ideologues.

This comment got an infraction the reason being

Unfortunately the red card for the post about Libertarianism still stands as it was very off topic

I disagree libertarianism was being discussed and used by some posters as a reason why they disagreed with the statue.

and inflammatory after an on thread warning.
How is it inflammatory? Libertarianism is a theory, it has not been inacted anywhere ever. We can just theorise what a libertarian society would look like there are none never has been. Saying its a theory is a statement of fact.

As seen above the thread was going no where reason being that ideologues were posting in it making it impossible to have a sensible debate about the subject. People were being called supporters of the worst tyrant in history over it. Then I get banned for pointing this out!

How the ban went about was messed up also:
Firstly I received an infraction, then told I was banned, then received and apology for being banned in error. Then two days late Scofflaw bans me for a week because of three infractions in a month. I actually did have three infractions in a month so Scofflaw was right if not late in doing it.

Anyway that is why I think the infraction and subsequent banning was unfair.

[Dades]

I'm looking into this. Bear with me.

[Dades]

Hi 20Cent,

After discussions with the mods and a review of your posting history in Politics I'm upholding the red card. At first glance your post seemed to warrant a yellow card, however given your history of persistent digs at libertarianism it became clear why a red was handed out. Mods can, and do take into account your history and postings in other threads on the forum when acting on single posts. This is what happened here.

It's unfortunate for you that this red brought you over the 3 cards in a month limit, but there you have it. That rule is there for a reason.

The mix-up in relation to your ban was an "administrative" one, rather than anything else. The 3 reds made it inevitable, however.

If you're unhappy with the result or the explanation you've received here, you may request an Admin review your red card - which is the issue in question.

Dades

[Khannie]

No further response from the OP, so I'm marking this resolved.