There are two ways to read “bad” in the sentence, “It is bad to be mentally ill.”
Mental illness makes you a bad person; you should be ashamed to be ill; etc.
No one has said this, yet this is how you are reading the posts.
It is unfortunate, less-than-ideal, etc to be mentally ill.
This is obviously true. If mental illness were simply neutral it wouldn’t be an illness! There would be no need for psychiatrists, psychologists, or psych meds. It is obviously true that is is better not to be mentally ill. It is a bad/unfortunate to be bipolar, depressed, etc.
I have only seen posts in this thread pointing out #2. You seem to be reading them as #1, but I’m not sure why.
Strongly disagree, NotBruce is the one putting us all in a shitty position. I get his anger but to the extent our reputation matters, he makes us all easy to dismiss.
Just like the people trolling about Heather Heyer’s death made 2+2 Unchained easy to dismiss.
The problem with this is that we can’t agree on the behavior itself. As an example, there have been lots of disagreement regarding if certain posts which purportedly condone violence actually do condone violence.
Can someone explain to me why, given this, we should allow him to keep posting this way? He says he’s probably mentally ill and he believes what he says.
Can we stop with the, “I’m sure he’s just kidding/trolling, I’m sure he doesn’t mean it.”
He says he believes what he says.
The guy has repeatedly posted about wanting his political enemies dead, he’s said he can’t promise he won’t be violent in the future if Trump wins in 2020, he said he has a mental illness, he said it’s not his fault if someone acts on his posts… If you think that doesn’t fall under a category of stuff the authorities should be looking at, I don’t know what to tell you.
These posts. It reads as “see, he has a mental illness, why should he post here?”
No, sorry. Most of the ones posted early in the thread do not condone violence in my opinion. And when examined in context barely were worth even discussing.
That’s not true. It’s NBZ plus all the people who voted and don’t think a ban is in order. If a majority found the posts ban worthy, the thread (and issue) would be largely over.
Setting your own standard of removal is quite precious considering you banned someone who didn’t actually meet your own arbitrary number. Similarly, continuing to call it violent rhetoric doesn’t actually make it violent rhetoric. You made an argument, and more people than not disagreed with you. The refusal to accept this is why we’re in this discussion at all.
It’s understood that mods will exercise some personal judgement when making decisions. Fine. No biggie. Everyone can agree to disagree about a lot of things. But when you pose a question to the community and then ignore the answer because it didn’t correspond with your own set of internets poasting moralz, and have this ban button bequeathed to you by the almighty forum gods, we all have a bigger problem than some questionable posts. Most children understand the difference between what can a person do and what should a person do.
If you cannot effectively communicate what was wrong, and set standards that most of the community can live with moving forward, then reconsider what your role is here. Because us figuring out what you want as we go along is not good for any of us. And you can expect to continue from those who disagree with your ultimately arbitrary decisions.
That’s not at all how it is intended or how it should read. Sorry if it is interpreted that way. To be really clear (if I haven’t already), my issue is with the violent rhetoric and dehumanizing rhetoric, as well as his repeated statements that he believes what he posts.
People have repeatedly suggested that he’s joking/trolling/not a threat, which is why I brought his statement that he might be mentally ill into question. It increases the likelihood that he’s serious or a threat, specifically given what he’s posted. It does so no differently than if he had simply stated that he’s not trolling, or that he believes what he’s saying (which he has said).
I am not in any way calling for anyone to be banned simply because of a mental illness that they have or disclose. I would actually encourage people to support them, stay in touch with them, encourage them, etc… But mental illness is not a hall pass for violent rhetoric, and the combination of the two is in my opinion scarier than the rhetoric alone. I suppose people can disagree with that or be offended by it, but I think it’s a reasonable take and in no way shaming people for mental illness. We’ve seen the combination of the two manifest itself in mass killings over and over again in this country.
I actually was misdiagnosed with a mental illness once, and it took a couple years for a second doctor to correct the diagnosis (sleep apnea was causing severe sleep deprivation which led to a missed diagnosis). So, I spent a couple years thinking I had a mental illness, telling people I would date at some point along the way, and living with the stigma. I make every effort not to stigmatize people and to be supportive of the friends and loved ones that have disclosed their struggles with mental illness to me.
With all due respect, I’m not sure why your opinion of what he really means matters?
A guy says he endorses ethnic cleansing, hopes for another 9/11, thinks republicans are sub-human, and on and on. Then he says he’s serious, not joking, not trolling. Why shouldn’t we believe him? When someone tells you who they are, believe them.
So your assertion is that mentally ill people are more likely to be violent. That is what oozes out of your posts and could not possibly be more wrong. That is a stigma. It is false.
Hey, he says he genuinely believes what he says, but let’s not believe him when he says that!
Like, you guys know how when the past behavior of mass shooters comes to light everyone is like, “Holy shit, how did nobody catch that? Why didn’t anyone do anything about that?”
Well, here you go. A group of people are actively choosing not to take him at his word on believing what he says, and as a result fighting as hard as they can to prevent him from being banned, even temporarily.
