Here is the link from the first one which has been closed:

http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/2560750

Shown below is the final entry before it was closed:

As you can see, the previous topic was simply closed, hence my point of "being more effective to remove oneself from the discussion is easier online". However, in real life, we will be expected to be courteous towards one another.

In reference to what you were saying about how one can choose to decline to answer my questions in real life, here is my question:

Why? What is the justification and rationale behind of denying an answer to a question?

Do you simply not know the answer to the question, or was it something else? Was it psychological insecurity?

Remember, if you continue to close or even suspend me because of this topic, IT PROVES MY POINT. It is indeed easier for you to IGNORE a discussion by digitally removing it from your sight.

However, in real life, we will be expected to be civil to one another, as there are no ways to simply "remove yourself" from the discussion. If you do indeed decline to answer any of the questions, you will be seen as being discourteous and impolite for simply walking away or even been seen as someone who is ignorant and being in denial to simply remove yourself from the discussion in real life. As a matter of fact, the act of actually closing the previous discussion simply shows an utter lack of decorum.

The fact you cannot "close" a topic like that in real life, gives better justice in a discussion.

Imagine this situation. A huge tragedy happened in the family. Do you know how important it is to have an organic discussion between each other?

Hence your lack of participation may be due to your impression towards the significance of this discussion. How about I reveal one of the topics then?

Look at my warning bar which is at 50%. One of the topics involved was, "Why the Health & Fitness forums only have one race in the background?" which was opened in this thread"

Now you may have your reasons of suspending me, but I wanted a real life discussion, because I am considering this as something IMPORTANT, hence I want to bring it into real life.

So what will you do? Will you close this topic again, or even suspend me further, HENCE PROVING MY POINT that you rather walk away than to actually, and SINCERELY find out what it is all about?

You are right that this may be a hassle. This is because I am treating this as something important. So if you don't treat this as importantly enough as I do, it proves another thing as well, which should be OBVIOUS in the first place:

That you simply just don't care, and pretend as if there is really nobody behind your monitor.

This post has been edited by Deadlocks: Oct 29 2012, 07:01 AM

I am not about to do that.

But in time, if things continue to repeat itself, who knows.

Remember, I know you guys are following GUIDELINES on how to moderate this forum.

I am QUESTIONING the GUIDELINES themselves.

What I am also question here can be illustrated with an example.

Imagine a house on fire with one victim, in comparison a house on fire with ten victims. It is considered common sense for one to look in favour of the majority, to save the ten than to save the one.

However, imagine another situation. If there is one healthy person, in comparison to ten injured people who each needs an organ to survive, do we simply take the life of that one person in order to save the ten?

Hence the question of greatest good with the greatest number vs. individual rights. I have many threads which were closed usually in favour of the majority, but while in favour for the greatest number of people, you have denied my unalienable liberty to question, to speak, and to discuss. In other words, you "censor" my threads, because you think it's too sensitive, which is equivalent to telling a man he can't have steak because a baby can't chew it.

I also KNOW that there will be at least ONE person who will simply say:

"Aiyah! Just ban this fella, and SETTLE!"

It is exactly this type of person I would like to have a heart-to-heart discussion in real life.

This post has been edited by Deadlocks: Oct 29 2012, 07:26 AM

Which is why it would be interesting to have a heart-to-heart conversation about it.


You missed the point of the analogy. When you removed my topics, you "saved" people being insecure and agitated from the sensitive topic. The "closure" of the topic is exactly the "death" I was referring to, i.e. the death of ideas.

I understand how you will follow certain guidelines given to you by Malaysian law. The reason of the discussion was exactly to question the inconsistency of the morality behind the laws and guidelines which you are currently following and enforcing.


Perhaps the content of the topic can be changed. But the topic was not an intention to stereotype people of different races, it is a discussion of the existing stereotypes in order to reach an understanding of how stereotypes work, and how each race has it's so-called "professional" stereotype. And just because it sounded like a flame-bait, the failure to grasp the intentions behind the topic should be blamed upon the thread starter for not considering the insecurity of the public. Instead, it should be the responsibility of the public, or at least, the responsibility of those who govern the public to allow the topic to be created in the first place. Now you may insist, MAJORITY is more powerful than MINORITY, it is not necessarily true, as shown in the analogy of public interest vs. individual liberty.

Which is important to you? Public interest? Or individual liberty? Should an individual's liberty be sacrificed in the name of public interest?

Too bad there are actually REAL people behind your monitor. Nobody is asking to demand for happiness. The goal here is to have a discussion. Not company to company, but HUMAN BEING to HUMAN BEING.

But what if the private house is silencing the ideas of individuals just because the public does not like it?

Is that true JUSTICE?

If we're talking between a human being to another, ask yourself, is this JUSTICE?

You did not read in full. I did not say you cannot close a topic in real life. I said due to our tendency to be civil in real life, simply walking away from a discussion will be more difficult compared to online discussion. It is exactly the civility which will keep you from making an instantaneous decision about simply walking way from a discussion, as you will be seen as an impression that you are simply RUDE to simply walk away without a proper understanding from both parties in the discussion.

What ISSUE? How about the the belief of standing for what it is TRULY RIGHT? TRUE JUSTICE? QUESTIONABLE MORALITY? If these topics HUMAN VALUES are not important to you, then I submit to you, that you are indeed an ignorant to what makes a human being? Am I not a human being to you?

Forum or not, you seemed to missed the point of the discussion. It is not to give or take something in value. It is a DISCUSSION to find out what is RIGHT, and what is WRONG.

Listen. If you don't actually care about these things, why don't you simply say this:

"Look. Truthfully speaking, I don't care. I run this forum how I want, no matter what you may find questionable or not. I just don't care."

Use those sentences. Because if you truly do not care, I think it will be pointless for me to go on.

Because if it is true that you do not care, I can at least tell myself:

"Stop trying to talk to this people. They do not care, except for their own interests. And if their own interests ask you to shut up, you must shut up, because YOU HAVE NO RIGHT to your IDEAS."

In other words, if you truly do not care, I want you to make a public confession:

Say this: "I am a dictator, who does not care about other thoughts. This is a dictatorship, and there is no room for individual liberty and ideas

This is dumb. If you don't really care if there is an actual HUMAN BEING behind your monitor, why do you PRETEND as if you do?

This post has been edited by Deadlocks: Oct 30 2012, 06:02 PM

...not to be a sexist but, I'm sorry, you sounded like a female.

Why would speaking to forummers in real life would be "okay", but not to the moderators? After all, the moderators and administrators are the ones I am questioning, not the other forummers.

I know what you were talking about rights and privileges. But I am speaking about something that it more than liberty. It is the question of what it is RIGHT and WRONG, and that act of questioning should be an ABSOLUTE RIGHT.

You obviously did not read.

Thanks Shadow Kun.

With a such a move to move the entire thread to Kopitiam, do you think they are capable to withhold a rational discussion?

An assumption.

Perhaps even more qualified than the Main Site/Forum Feedback and Helpdesk that you're insinuating?

I am not merely seeking a discussion. I am seeking an actual, organic discussion where it will be harder to simply leave a discussion hanging.

In real life, you finish the discussion. You can't just close a topic nor move it like how one of the mods did it. They can leave if they want to, but it's harder to do it in real life, you see.

This post has been edited by Deadlocks: Oct 30 2012, 08:33 PM

I am not questioning the freedom of your choice. I am questioning the reasoning, rationality, and morality behind your choice. I have plenty of experience in online discussions where people simply leave a discussion hanging when they have nothing to say, and the discussion was left hanging, only hoping to not acquaint me in the future so that I do not remind them about it.


Your idea of idealism is that because it is idealistic, it should be avoided. Then wouldn't idealism be simply classified as bullsh*t? You know, when people in the past used to idealize that we can build machines to allow us to fly? That kind of "bullsh*t"? The idea of building tall poles to hold wires for electricity?

The idea is treating the issue as serious as possible so that a discussion can AT LEAST TAKE PLACE. As a matter of fact, I don't see a problem at all about a discussion unless you are not confident at all to take place in the discussion in the first place.


So how is different here, in comparison to the Feedback forums? If what you say is indeed true, why would this thread be moved in the first place? Think carefully.


Then fight with me in the Feedback forums, or sit on the fence indecisively.

That's only because you refuse to care, and when you don't care, you won''t even bother to try to understand, or even ask the parts which you do not understand.

I am curious why do you say that? Are you saying that...in actuality, the mods and admins I wish to meet in real life has something to hide? Like how a thief will be afraid to approach a police man in comparison to when they can approach their friends?

What do you mean that I can exploit their weaknesses? I am curious of this.

This post has been edited by Deadlocks: Oct 30 2012, 08:58 PM

But what if the RULE is WRONG?

Is this something you wish to teach your children? To ignore people who does something wrong, and to shun away people who does something right?

You mean like a dictatorship?

But what if excitement isn't the purpose here?

Please do not sway from the main point and act as if my comment on you on being a female is relevant. It isn't.

And how exactly your suggestion will help me again? I am requesting for the moderators acquaintance who made the relevant decisions. I am not requesting for a number of people to be classified as a forum.

But if you think carefully about the human psyche behind it, wouldn't it be simply a dictatorship?

That is precisely why I am still fighting.

Fair enough. But as usual, as as how I have pointed out, online discussions can indeed be left hanging easily compared to real life conversation.

Your hesitation to passionately reply is an evidence.

Isn't that the reason why a person should be fighting for?

I do not ask for a satisfaction guaranteed discussion in real life. I am asking for an existence of such discussions in real life, and specifically with the mods and admins.

Specifically.

But at least I get to see how discourteous a person can be who can simply leave like that.

Real life discussions are harder to leave compared to online ones, because like I said, we are expected to be civil. Leave the table without coming to a mutual understanding, it's simply rude, and at least when I get to see how rude you are, I will, indeed, forfeit the entire endeavour for a CIVIL discussion, because obviously you could not hold one.

So if being impolite is your forte, please, for your daughter's sake, do not let her be influenced that way.

Morally, yes.

Except that I am fighting for something that is more important than the colour of walls.

With people like you, yes. With certain type of people, they ignore your online discussion and leave you hanging in the conversation.