Post deleted. War time Atrocities!

[TheOfficialBren]

However, I note something interesting here, that I did not expect.

This thread, even sans link, is getting a huge amount of attention here.

I have also posted a thread in this same forum about a new custom sporran that has just been completed for me, to which I have now appended a couple of large pictures. The response of the X Marks community is an enormous shrug of non-interest, indicated by the fact that practically nobody has posted to the thread..

What exactly does this mean, I wonder....

Your new sporran is very nice, Alan. I viewed the thread and admired the fine workmanship.

Controversy always generates attention. It is human nature. Mystery surrounding controversy is a sure thing.

It's the oldest trick in the book. As a former entertainer I can assure you that it is a lesson not lost on the biz. Most celebrity conflicts are utter falsehoods designed to generate attention and stimulate economic growth (buy their album, see their film, Tweet about them, et cetera).

One name pops up in my mind. The material girl (no, not Madonna, although her career is assuredly influenced by this one):

Mata Hari

[Alan H]

So "controversy" over a totally unknown link to an unknown wartime political issue is now more important to X Markers than a new custom sporran? I've had 6-8 people in my message room asking for the link, which I'm happy to provide, but only one person has made a comment on the sporran, and nobody has messaged me about it. The contrast is very striking, to me.

I'm not SO sure it's just the "draw" of ...."controversy". Maybe it is, maybe it's not. Maybe we ought to be thinking about this.

[AFS1970]

I think it was the mystery more than the controversy that has made this thread so long. I read through it trying to figure out what it was about.

As for civil discussion, I reject the idea that we cannot post civilly, however there are a great number of people (on and off of this forum) who simply choose not t o be civil with one another. They prefer to go and call the proverbial nanny, or in this case hit the "report post" button, because they are deathly afraid of being offended.

Now onto the custom sporran thread.

[tripleblessed]

Thanks, Alan, for the link. It was, for me not the controversy about conflict, but the belief in the need and the right to control the subject matter of the conversations of others. Mystifying to me, sad, unnecessary, but seemingly common. Not solely aimed at
this thread. I believe I would thoroughly enjoy conversing over a meal with all those who have objected, it's definitely not personal.

As to the inappropriate nature of the link, I read about this unit in Weekly Reader when I was in fifth or sixth grade. That
is, about 1958 or 59. Not, as one might imagine, in such depth, but the general nature of it. I don't think anyone here is more delicate than 50s schoolkids. Again in college, and a few articles along the years 'til now. Always breathtaking, but certainly nothing to hide from. If we don't understand how people have gone wrong, how do we guide ourselves? And I don't think out of bounds in the Miscellaneous forum, "where our members can talk about the other parts of our lives".

And I hadn't seen the sporran thread since pictures were added. Looks great. On a side note, a friend of mine's brother-
in-law's sister dated Sporran Jones before he ever even owned a bass.

[CDNSushi]

Folks, this is all quite simple. It's laid out in plain language in the forum rules.

"We understand that as a kilt specific forum our chosen subject of discussion is not the complete spectrum of life." Over the years we have found certain subjects always seem to result in discord. Therefore, we respectfully ask our members to remember that this is a kilt forum and to leave their Politics, Religion and Weapons at the door.

Yes, war crimes trump sporrans, and there is absolutely nothing preventing anyone here from joining a political discussion forum site to discuss such matters, whether civilly or otherwise... But I would challenge that if you were to start up a thread about kilt-wearing there, it might get flagged as off-topic. There are zillions of sites where you CAN talk about anything you want, in any way you want, so I don't understand this persistent insistence by some that we allow that here -- a fairly purpose-specific forum.



But from a moderator's vantage point, let me just say that with the site traffic what it is, the last thing I'd be happy with would be a sub-forum for politics and religion, as we would have to be the ones to sort it all out when things would get out-of-hand.

As a brief aside, I used to be on the mod team of another site, where they took a different approach. Anything was essentially acceptable, and when trolling and flame-wars cropped up, they didn't get locked, moved, or censored. They got moved to a special area where contenders could duke it out to their hearts' content in ways that were too nasty for the rest of us... Well, it was a failed experiment because nasty it got. REALLY nasty. It was a moderator's nightmare. And as averse to censorship as the site owner was, he eventually had to stop it because it just got too ugly. Not that it would ever be allowed to go in such a direction here, but I for one have no interest in pushing limits and challenging whether or not people can post civilly. Let's just not go there. But that, among other things was a part of the site's downfall... It tried to be too many things to too many people. It lacked focus, and therefore, purpose. I would not care to see XMarks diluted in such a way.

What's more, the moderators here on XMarks volunteer their time. We are not paid for what we do, and most of us do have far better ways to spend our evenings than to be voting on whether someone pushed their political agenda just a little too far, or whether a particular religious comment was over the line or not. There's enough work dealing with the range of what we have now.

Understandably, there's only so many threads about hose colour you can read before you go batty, so I do get it when people want to start talking about other things. And if you've "outgrown" XMarks in that you feel like there's nothing left to talk about that's ON-topic, then perhaps that's a good cue to find a fresh pasture to graze. Take a break. Check out some other fora. Come back when you've got kilts on your mind again.

Finally, for what it's worth, not only is there a Misc. section where you can talk about anything to your heart's content (provided that it abides by the rules), there's also.........

- a pub, to talk about food and drink
- a history and heritage forum
- a clans forum, a genealogy forum
- a Gaelic language forum
- a Highland Games and Celtic events forum
- a humour forum for telling jokes and stories
- a Celtic music forum.

Seriously. Is that not sufficient? Do we really need MORE forums? With all these forums, at your disposal (and quite possibly an infinite number more if you access the "Groups" feature of the site), do people really feel THAT deprived for staying away from those two topics?

[Jock Scot]

CDNSushie.

You raise some very valid points, most of which I can agree with. Not necessarily because I particularly like them, but I can see the sound reasoning behind them. Where things get more problematical for me and I think others too, is the Misc. section. You generously say(think, Henry Ford and car colours!) that we " can talk about anything to our heart's content" and then comes the problem bit; "provided that it abides by the rules". And it is this, that stifles conversations like the one we are trying to have above. It is an important issue that it is plain to see is of interest to many who, perhaps, have little or no knowledge of these horrific events and frankly and in this particular instance(war crimes), they should know. As you so rightly say "war crimes trump sporrans".

So in light of the situation here, could I formally ask you, the other moderators and Steve if it would be possible to find a way of wording the rules to allow topics, such as the above interesting and civil discussion of world wide relevance, so that it would be then be a valid subject to be within the rules that might be discussed in the misc. section?

[Micric]

Agree Jock.

I well see the point of barring political and religious discussion, as there will always be at least two camps on these issues, but I must ask;
Are we to take it that the Mods here think there would be two camps on the issue of War Crimes?......ie, those who Support and those who oppose?

I can't for the life of me see many wearing the , "I support War Crimes" tee-shirt.

[Jock Scot]

I can only but agree with you. It would be difficult to imagine that any on this website that are aware of these things would disagree. Make no mistake, there are some scattered around the world that are in denial and even see merit in these dreadful events. It is precisely for this reason that everyone and anyone who does not know of these appalling actions are made aware of the often, yes I have to say it, grizzley details, by all means available to us,(I can think of few things more powerful than the internet) to counter these misguided people. Let us hope that the mods see it that way too.

[Micric]

Jock,

Re. your statement about those scattered around the world who are in denial of these dreadful events;
This is true and a very valid point.
We do hear some spouting off on such from time to time, But! Again But! they can Only gain a hearing amongst those who do Not know the facts,....amongst the ignorant.
The uninformed/ignorant may say something like,"......well, I've heard it isn't true.....we don't know for sure..."
Now, try selling the same bill of goods to someone who Knows the Facts, and see where this denial leads!

If I may presume to use Alan H as an example;
If someone had denied these doings (that this thread is concerned with) just a few days ago, Alan would have been in no position to frame a rebuttal,
but since Alan became aware of these facts and posted them here, I am quite sure his reaction to anyone attempting denial would be entirely different.

The same goes for all of us, once we Know.

[Jock Scot]

Precisely and thank you for your excellent and supportive thoughts on this matter.

I am conscious that I have probably said more than enough on this thread and I don't want to appear that this is a JS crusade, so I will sit back with my mouth shut and watch points for now.