Conquer Club

Is This Normal?

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Is This Normal?

Postby Funkyterrance on Mon Feb 11, 2013 3:19 am

I was reading a thread in C&A reports that had been closed where a user had Hitler in his username along with a historically significant year. There are two explanations as to why this person chose this username. One being they have some connection with the username which makes it personally significant, the other being they think it's funny/cool to have the name of a mass murderer and therefore monstrous person inseparable from their CC experience. The latter is obviously much more likely.

To quote my clan mate and friend, qwert:

qwert wrote:If these guy have some quite good and logical explanation why he decide to be Adolf Hitler, then i dont have nothing against these name.
But if he want to celebrate Adolf Hitler name and date when he become kancelar then he are not normal.

I would agree with this quote. I don't think it's "normal" to want to associate yourself with mass murderers, real life-villains, etc.. but at times I get the very strong impression that many people on CC do not share this viewpoint. "All in good fun", in so many words, or "freedom of speech" are very common response to issues like this.
So if you all don't mind, I'd like the hear some good reasonable defense(in a thread that will be viewed by a larger audience) for usernames as well as avatars, etc. on here that seem to laugh in the face of decency?
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Mon Feb 11, 2013 4:46 am

Generally, when I take the position of free markets in a debate about welfare, some people will immediately assume that I must want people to die because I oppose government welfare. They're wrong, of course, but their jumping to that conclusion requires no knowledge about me or my position. Does the OP fit this description?
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby Funkyterrance on Mon Feb 11, 2013 3:11 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:Generally, when I take the position of free markets in a debate about welfare, some people will immediately assume that I must want people to die because I oppose government welfare. They're wrong, of course, but their jumping to that conclusion requires no knowledge about me or my position. Does the OP fit this description?

By OP do you mean me? I mentioned the possibility, however slim, that the users may have some meaningful connection to the handle/avatar but the likelihood of this is questionable. But back to the original question, is knowingly using a username/avatar that represents a monster among men a normal thing to do, psychologically speaking? Do these people wear Hitler T-shirts in public? If not, why not and why don't the social norms that apply to real life apply to a socially active online site?
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Postby 2dimes on Mon Feb 11, 2013 3:59 pm

There were some white supremist folks here. I didn't meet most of them but a few I've met would wear a hitler T-shirt in public. Now they might not wear one to work but.

On the side of what you're suggesting. I worked with one white supremist guy and we were chatting and I said something about, "You seem like a nice enough guy." he responded with a chuckle and said, "You think so? I'm not a nice guy trust me."

I didn't really think anything about that. Later on another job with a guy that was on both jobs I was asked, "Say that guy that they found in Eagle lake, wasn't that xxxx xxxxxx the white supremist from that other job we were on?" I'm like, "White supremist?" "Oh yeah he was a big time white supremist, guy. Didn't you know that?" I responded, "No but that makes sense of some of the things he was saying looking back."

That's part of why I don't like things being too Politically Correct. I find it more difficult to tell who's a racist. 20 years ago it was easy. After the racist jokes were told there was some people that just kept going on about things. Now the racists don't even use racial slurs until they think you're racist too.
User avatar
Corporal 2dimes
 
Posts: 12651
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:08 pm
Location: Pepperoni Hug Spot.

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby Pedronicus on Mon Feb 11, 2013 5:37 pm

I would suggest you only quote qwert after spell checking and re writing his quote into readable English....
Image
Highest position 7th. Highest points 3311 All of my graffiti can be found here
Major Pedronicus
 
Posts: 2080
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 2:42 pm
Location: Busy not shitting you....

Postby 2dimes on Mon Feb 11, 2013 5:41 pm

Wat da mene...
User avatar
Corporal 2dimes
 
Posts: 12651
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:08 pm
Location: Pepperoni Hug Spot.

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby Dukasaur on Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:05 pm

Funkyterrance wrote:I would agree with this quote. I don't think it's "normal" to want to associate yourself with mass murderers, real life-villains, etc.. but at times I get the very strong impression that many people on CC do not share this viewpoint. "All in good fun", in so many words, or "freedom of speech" are very common response to issues like this.
So if you all don't mind, I'd like the hear some good reasonable defense(in a thread that will be viewed by a larger audience) for usernames as well as avatars, etc. on here that seem to laugh in the face of decency?

I don't think it needs a "defense" per se. If people have a right to give themselves fantasy names, then that right should be absolute and not need defending. However, if you want a rationale for naming yourself after vicious dictators and butchers, it is simply this. This site is selling a game about warfare and world conquest. Thus, one would expect names associated with warfare and world conquest to be commonplace. I'm actually surprised that we don't have more usernames reflective of Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, Ghenghis, Ceasar, Xerxes, Tamurlane, etc. than we do.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.”
― Voltaire
User avatar
Lieutenant Dukasaur
Community Coordinator
Community Coordinator
 
Posts: 26969
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
32

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby Funkyterrance on Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:13 pm

Dukasaur wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:I would agree with this quote. I don't think it's "normal" to want to associate yourself with mass murderers, real life-villains, etc.. but at times I get the very strong impression that many people on CC do not share this viewpoint. "All in good fun", in so many words, or "freedom of speech" are very common response to issues like this.
So if you all don't mind, I'd like the hear some good reasonable defense(in a thread that will be viewed by a larger audience) for usernames as well as avatars, etc. on here that seem to laugh in the face of decency?

I don't think it needs a "defense" per se. If people have a right to give themselves fantasy names, then that right should be absolute and not need defending. However, if you want a rationale for naming yourself after vicious dictators and butchers, it is simply this. This site is selling a game about warfare and world conquest. Thus, one would expect names associated with warfare and world conquest to be commonplace. I'm actually surprised that we don't have more usernames reflective of Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, Ghenghis, Ceasar, Xerxes, Tamurlane, etc. than we do.


If it didn't need a defense, it does now lol. Basically these people are being referred to in some circles as abnormal which I'm not feeling is a universal response. But putting Hitler and Stalin in the same boat as any of the great Caesars of Rome... for shame!
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Postby 2dimes on Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:23 pm

I'm no fan of the Herr Hitler but he mearly demanded everyone to hail him as Führer. Ceasar considered himself God. I'm thinking that lead to some pretty hard core nasty if he felt slighted by whom ever. I'm pretty sure you're under valuing what those guys were up to. Maybe the nazis got them on volume but that can't be the only way to awards/recognition for atrocity.
User avatar
Corporal 2dimes
 
Posts: 12651
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:08 pm
Location: Pepperoni Hug Spot.

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby Dukasaur on Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:27 pm

Funkyterrance wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:I would agree with this quote. I don't think it's "normal" to want to associate yourself with mass murderers, real life-villains, etc.. but at times I get the very strong impression that many people on CC do not share this viewpoint. "All in good fun", in so many words, or "freedom of speech" are very common response to issues like this.
So if you all don't mind, I'd like the hear some good reasonable defense(in a thread that will be viewed by a larger audience) for usernames as well as avatars, etc. on here that seem to laugh in the face of decency?

I don't think it needs a "defense" per se. If people have a right to give themselves fantasy names, then that right should be absolute and not need defending. However, if you want a rationale for naming yourself after vicious dictators and butchers, it is simply this. This site is selling a game about warfare and world conquest. Thus, one would expect names associated with warfare and world conquest to be commonplace. I'm actually surprised that we don't have more usernames reflective of Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, Ghenghis, Ceasar, Xerxes, Tamurlane, etc. than we do.


If it didn't need a defense, it does now lol. Basically these people are being referred to in some circles as abnormal which I'm not feeling is a universal response. But putting Hitler and Stalin in the same boat as any of the great Caesars of Rome... for shame!

Okay, that kind of bullshit hypocrisy will not stand.

Why should one bloodthirsty butcher be selected for special treatment over others? Just because it's politically fashionable? Or just on numbers? Because the various Ceasars only butchered a few hundred thousand victims here and there, that makes them morally superior to Hitler and Stalin because those butchered people by the millions?

When Constantine stripped 100,000 P.O.W.s of their clothing and made them march outside during winter until they froze to death, that was so much more humane than what happened at Dachau? Bullshit. Vicious tyrants are vicious tyrants.

All the "Greats" are great mainly at murdering their opponents. There isn't anyone who has a full chapter devoted to them in a history textbook who isn't a bloodthirsty killer. The whole long littany of terror, from Sargon of Akkad to George W. Bush of Washington, is a river of blood and unnumbered tears. Just try to find one example of a historical "leader" who isn't responsible for at least 10,000 innocent deaths. Getting from 10,000 to 10,000,000 is just a difference of opportunity and means, not motive.
Last edited by Dukasaur on Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.”
― Voltaire
User avatar
Lieutenant Dukasaur
Community Coordinator
Community Coordinator
 
Posts: 26969
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
32

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby gordon1975 on Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:28 pm

let anyone have any name they please,will give me more satisfaction killing a hitler , bin laben or George W. Bush.on the maps.its a war game after all
God can judge my enemies, i will arrange the meeting.
User avatar
Lieutenant gordon1975
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:07 pm
Location: Scotland

Postby 2dimes on Mon Feb 11, 2013 6:37 pm

Dibs on Dubya, leacher of oil.

Or maybe Obama the cruel.
He smote Bin Laden and Gahdaffi after all.
User avatar
Corporal 2dimes
 
Posts: 12651
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:08 pm
Location: Pepperoni Hug Spot.

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby Funkyterrance on Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:15 pm

Dukasaur wrote:Okay, that kind of bullshit hypocrisy will not stand.

Hehe.

Dukasaur wrote:Why should one bloodthirsty butcher be selected for special treatment over others? Just because it's politically fashionable? Or just on numbers? Because the various Ceasars only butchered a few hundred thousand victims here and there, that makes them morally superior to Hitler and Stalin because those butchered people by the millions?

When Constantine stripped 100,000 P.O.W.s of their clothing and made them march outside during winter until they froze to death, that was so much more humane than what happened at Dachau? Bullshit. Vicious tyrants are vicious tyrants.

All the "Greats" are great mainly at murdering their opponents. There isn't anyone who has a full chapter devoted to them in a history textbook who isn't a bloodthirsty killer. The whole long littany of terror, from Sargon of Akkad to George W. Bush of Washington, is a river of blood and unnumbered tears. Just try to find one example of a historical "leader" who isn't responsible for at least 10,000 innocent deaths. Getting from 10,000 to 10,000,000 is just a difference of opportunity and means, not motive.

So either you missed the humor in my post or you are blinded by your need to contradict me at every turn. Which is it?
Besides, lumping madmen, sufferers of god complexes, bloodthirsty killers, sadists and the simply ambitious all into the same group is just lazy. Motivation is everything, Dukasour.
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby Dukasaur on Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:41 pm

Funkyterrance wrote:So either you missed the humor in my post or you are blinded by your need to contradict me at every turn. Which is it?

Must be the first. I have no particular desire to be at odds with you, although it does seem to be happening rather often lately. But if your defense of the Ceasars was meant as sarcasm I missed it. I thought you were one of those Pax Romana apologists who was going to argue that it's okay to murder people in order to prevent violence. If you were being sarcastic my opinion of you goes up one notch.
:)

Besides, lumping madmen, sufferers of god complexes, bloodthirsty killers, sadists and the simply ambitious all into the same group is just lazy. Motivation is everything, Dukasour.

When someone comes to burn down my village and massacre all my relatives I really don't care if he's doing it to glorify the one true god or to enforce a United Nations resolution. The nuances of motivation are interesting academic debates at least on some level, but none of them excuse tyranny.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.”
― Voltaire
User avatar
Lieutenant Dukasaur
Community Coordinator
Community Coordinator
 
Posts: 26969
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
32

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby / on Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:25 pm

I agree that context if largely important. For example, if I were the moderator of a Turkish history forum, I would probably ban a "Vlad the Impaler" name, but if I was running a vampire enthusiast site, the same name wouldn't set off any bells for me.

If we played the board game "Axis & Allies" here instead of risk, I doubt anyone would bat an eye over a hundred "Hitler", "Mussolini", or "Tojo" names.
That said, I don't really mind either way where the mods decide to draw the line in this particular forum, so long as the names don't glorify of the deeds or ideologies of said persons.
Sergeant 1st Class /
 
Posts: 484
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:41 am

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby daddy1gringo on Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:25 am

As many have said, we don't know what the person's motivation was, but I suspect it was just an error of judgement. As many have also said, there's nothing unusual about choosing the name of a bloodthirsty military leader for a game like this, but there should be a little voice that says, "meh... this might be crossing the line". I'm guessing that the person didn't listen to that voice, or didn't have it developed enough.
The right answer to the wrong question is still the wrong answer to the real question.
User avatar
Lieutenant daddy1gringo
 
Posts: 532
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:47 am
Location: Connecticut yankee expatriated in Houston, Texas area, by way of Isabela, NW PR

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby Frito Bandito on Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:42 am

Naming yourself after Hitler, Stalin, or any other truly heinous person probably doesn't indicate evil as much as ignorance of history. Probably a kid or a lout.
Lieutenant Frito Bandito
 
Posts: 659
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 3:55 am
Location: Orygone

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Tue Feb 12, 2013 12:40 pm

Funkyterrance wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:Generally, when I take the position of free markets in a debate about welfare, some people will immediately assume that I must want people to die because I oppose government welfare. They're wrong, of course, but their jumping to that conclusion requires no knowledge about me or my position. Does the OP fit this description?

By OP do you mean me? I mentioned the possibility, however slim, that the users may have some meaningful connection to the handle/avatar but the likelihood of this is questionable. But back to the original question, is knowingly using a username/avatar that represents a monster among men a normal thing to do, psychologically speaking? Do these people wear Hitler T-shirts in public? If not, why not and why don't the social norms that apply to real life apply to a socially active online site?


When people wear the following shirt, does that mean they support all those guys and their policies?


Image


No, of course not. That would be kinda stupid to assume that.


If people wear that shirt, are they abnormal? Is something psychologically wrong??? For nearly all of them, no.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby Funkyterrance on Tue Feb 12, 2013 6:14 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:No, of course not. That would be kinda stupid to assume that.
If people wear that shirt, are they abnormal? Is something psychologically wrong??? For nearly all of them, no.

That shirt offers explanation though, BBS. It's meant to be a joke. Flat out wearing a t-shirt with the face of Joseph Stalin just being regular old Joseph Stalin, without any explanation, implies support and/or I dunno, idolatry? I'm not going to put any words into your mouth but I would imagine you might find something a little abnormal in this?
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:28 pm

Funkyterrance wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:No, of course not. That would be kinda stupid to assume that.
If people wear that shirt, are they abnormal? Is something psychologically wrong??? For nearly all of them, no.

That shirt offers explanation though, BBS. It's meant to be a joke. Flat out wearing a t-shirt with the face of Joseph Stalin just being regular old Joseph Stalin, without any explanation, implies support and/or I dunno, idolatry? I'm not going to put any words into your mouth but I would imagine you might find something a little abnormal in this?

Of course, but that is different, so perhaps you can clarify your stance here.

With names, sometimes we cannot see if the user is joking (like the Communist Party shirt) or is totes serious (like I dunno, that guy over there).

From what I've read from you, your position seemed to assert that ALL users fit into the totes serious and psychologically abnormal category--and no funny stuff.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby Funkyterrance on Wed Feb 13, 2013 2:30 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:From what I've read from you, your position seemed to assert that ALL users fit into the totes serious and psychologically abnormal category--and no funny stuff.

If I've been inconsistent on here somehow, that's not how I've felt. I feel that if you have an image/name of one of these lovely individuals representing you without explanation, its going to be assumed that you are a proponent of said individual. The natural assumption is that he/she is ok with this. Whatever idealistic beliefs may exist on here, it's arguably not normal or even healthy to be apathetic of droves of people assuming that you are a horrible person who idolizes Adolf Hitler.
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby GeneralRisk on Wed Feb 13, 2013 5:40 pm

Frito Bandito wrote:Naming yourself after Hitler, Stalin, or any other truly heinous person probably doesn't indicate evil as much as ignorance of history. Probably a kid or a lout.

“History is written by the victors.”

― Winston Churchill
Atrocities were committed by the Axis Powers during World War 2. Atrocities were committed by the Allies both during and after World War 2. The extent of the atrocities supposedly committed by the Germans have been exaggerated and in some cases totally fabricated..................................................Image
show: Economic Boycott of 1933


The "holocaust" was the strangest genocide in history. While waiting to be gassed, you could enjoy a cold beer, play a game of soccer, listen to an orchestra or watch the kids perform in a play.ImageImage
show: IKE
...........................................................full length video of Deanna Spingola Dwight D Eisenhower's death camps in Germanyhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jz1GTIimIjI....................................."Hitler... one of the most significant figures who ever lived"
President J.F. Kennedy



"Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived...
He had a mystery about him in the way that he lived and in the manner of his death that will live and grow after him.
He had in him the stuff of which legends are made."
- John F. Kennedy,
President of the
United States of America
Major GeneralRisk
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:58 pm
Location: Neu-Schwabenland

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby GeneralRisk on Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:19 am

Funkyterrance wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:I would agree with this quote. I don't think it's "normal" to want to associate yourself with mass murderers, real life-villains, etc.. but at times I get the very strong impression that many people on CC do not share this viewpoint. "All in good fun", in so many words, or "freedom of speech" are very common response to issues like this.
So if you all don't mind, I'd like the hear some good reasonable defense(in a thread that will be viewed by a larger audience) for usernames as well as avatars, etc. on here that seem to laugh in the face of decency?

I don't think it needs a "defense" per se. If people have a right to give themselves fantasy names, then that right should be absolute and not need defending. However, if you want a rationale for naming yourself after vicious dictators and butchers, it is simply this. This site is selling a game about warfare and world conquest. Thus, one would expect names associated with warfare and world conquest to be commonplace. I'm actually surprised that we don't have more usernames reflective of Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, Ghenghis, Ceasar, Xerxes, Tamurlane, etc. than we do.


If it didn't need a defense, it does now lol. Basically these people are being referred to in some circles as abnormal which I'm not feeling is a universal response. But putting Hitler and Stalin in the same boat as any of the great Caesars of Rome... for shame!

The Conquest of Gaul

Now Caesar was free to pursue honour and glory for another five years. The conquest of Gaul, during the Gallic Wars celebrated in Caesar's own treatise on the subject, does not appear to have been planned, but in 58 BCE an intrusion into Roman controlled territory of the Helvetii from the area of Switzerland gave Caesar an excuse to go on the offensive.

Later Caesar used a request for help from some of the Gallic tribes to intervene in internal Gallic conflicts, and he defeated one tribe after another. By the end of 57 BCE most of the tribes were defeated and forced to accept Roman supremacy.
The Capitoline 'Dying Gaul' The Capitoline 'Dying Gaul'

In 56 BCE the alliance of Caesar, Crassus and Pompey met fierce opposition in the senate in Rome and one candidate for the consulship in 55 BCE promised to call back Caesar and prosecute him if he won the election. Caesar, who had spent the winter in Illyricum, met with Pompey and Crassus in Italy to sort out the situation. The agree to prolong their private agreement for another five years. Caesar would support the election of Pompey and Crassus for the consulship of 55 BCE, and Caesar's pro-consular command in Gaul would be prolonged for another five-year period, giving him another respite from prosecution. Their plan succeed, Pompey and Crassus became consuls and Caesar's command prolonged.

With his back covered Caesar returned to Gaul. In the following years (55 and 54 BCE) he fought Germanic tribes that had crossed the Rhine into Gaul, with a brutality and ruthlessness that caused much opposition in Rome, and he crossed the British Channel and made a short, victorious campaign in Britain, but with no lasting consequences.

Caesar's troops camped for the winter in various places in Belgium, but in the spring of 53 BCE some of these camps were attacked by the local tribes and suffered serious losses. Caesar spend most of that year fighting these tribes, and effectively annihilated some of them, men, women and children. The next year an alliance of many Gallic tribes, under the leadership of Vercingetorix, rose against the Romans. They tried to starve out the Romans, burning many of their own towns and collected all their forces and supplies in a few heavily fortified strongholds. Caesar's forces took some of these towns, but failed to take others. In the end all the Roman forces was concentrated around the city of Alesia, but failed to take it by storm. Caesar decided to starve the Gallic forces out, and after a prolonged siege Vercingetorix and the Gauls surrendered.

It is estimated that one million persons died in the wars and another million was sold into slavery, draining Gaul of approximately one third of the entire population. Caesar had effected an unprecedented genocide (in modern terms we would talk about war crimes, genocide and crimes against the humanity), all in the name of honour and glory.
Major GeneralRisk
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:58 pm
Location: Neu-Schwabenland

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby Funkyterrance on Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:59 am

GeneralRisk wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:I would agree with this quote. I don't think it's "normal" to want to associate yourself with mass murderers, real life-villains, etc.. but at times I get the very strong impression that many people on CC do not share this viewpoint. "All in good fun", in so many words, or "freedom of speech" are very common response to issues like this.
So if you all don't mind, I'd like the hear some good reasonable defense(in a thread that will be viewed by a larger audience) for usernames as well as avatars, etc. on here that seem to laugh in the face of decency?

I don't think it needs a "defense" per se. If people have a right to give themselves fantasy names, then that right should be absolute and not need defending. However, if you want a rationale for naming yourself after vicious dictators and butchers, it is simply this. This site is selling a game about warfare and world conquest. Thus, one would expect names associated with warfare and world conquest to be commonplace. I'm actually surprised that we don't have more usernames reflective of Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, Ghenghis, Ceasar, Xerxes, Tamurlane, etc. than we do.


If it didn't need a defense, it does now lol. Basically these people are being referred to in some circles as abnormal which I'm not feeling is a universal response. But putting Hitler and Stalin in the same boat as any of the great Caesars of Rome... for shame!

The Conquest of Gaul

Now Caesar was free to pursue honour and glory for another five years. The conquest of Gaul, during the Gallic Wars celebrated in Caesar's own treatise on the subject, does not appear to have been planned, but in 58 BCE an intrusion into Roman controlled territory of the Helvetii from the area of Switzerland gave Caesar an excuse to go on the offensive.

Later Caesar used a request for help from some of the Gallic tribes to intervene in internal Gallic conflicts, and he defeated one tribe after another. By the end of 57 BCE most of the tribes were defeated and forced to accept Roman supremacy.
The Capitoline 'Dying Gaul' The Capitoline 'Dying Gaul'

In 56 BCE the alliance of Caesar, Crassus and Pompey met fierce opposition in the senate in Rome and one candidate for the consulship in 55 BCE promised to call back Caesar and prosecute him if he won the election. Caesar, who had spent the winter in Illyricum, met with Pompey and Crassus in Italy to sort out the situation. The agree to prolong their private agreement for another five years. Caesar would support the election of Pompey and Crassus for the consulship of 55 BCE, and Caesar's pro-consular command in Gaul would be prolonged for another five-year period, giving him another respite from prosecution. Their plan succeed, Pompey and Crassus became consuls and Caesar's command prolonged.

With his back covered Caesar returned to Gaul. In the following years (55 and 54 BCE) he fought Germanic tribes that had crossed the Rhine into Gaul, with a brutality and ruthlessness that caused much opposition in Rome, and he crossed the British Channel and made a short, victorious campaign in Britain, but with no lasting consequences.

Caesar's troops camped for the winter in various places in Belgium, but in the spring of 53 BCE some of these camps were attacked by the local tribes and suffered serious losses. Caesar spend most of that year fighting these tribes, and effectively annihilated some of them, men, women and children. The next year an alliance of many Gallic tribes, under the leadership of Vercingetorix, rose against the Romans. They tried to starve out the Romans, burning many of their own towns and collected all their forces and supplies in a few heavily fortified strongholds. Caesar's forces took some of these towns, but failed to take others. In the end all the Roman forces was concentrated around the city of Alesia, but failed to take it by storm. Caesar decided to starve the Gallic forces out, and after a prolonged siege Vercingetorix and the Gauls surrendered.

It is estimated that one million persons died in the wars and another million was sold into slavery, draining Gaul of approximately one third of the entire population. Caesar had effected an unprecedented genocide (in modern terms we would talk about war crimes, genocide and crimes against the humanity), all in the name of honour and glory.

I read the whole thing and I don't disagree with any of it. However, don't you feel that the context of ancient history might have at least a little weight here? Again, I implore you to consider motivation as it means everything as far as morality is concerned.
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Is This Normal?

Postby GeneralRisk on Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:15 am

Funkyterrance wrote:
GeneralRisk wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:I would agree with this quote. I don't think it's "normal" to want to associate yourself with mass murderers, real life-villains, etc.. but at times I get the very strong impression that many people on CC do not share this viewpoint. "All in good fun", in so many words, or "freedom of speech" are very common response to issues like this.
So if you all don't mind, I'd like the hear some good reasonable defense(in a thread that will be viewed by a larger audience) for usernames as well as avatars, etc. on here that seem to laugh in the face of decency?

I don't think it needs a "defense" per se. If people have a right to give themselves fantasy names, then that right should be absolute and not need defending. However, if you want a rationale for naming yourself after vicious dictators and butchers, it is simply this. This site is selling a game about warfare and world conquest. Thus, one would expect names associated with warfare and world conquest to be commonplace. I'm actually surprised that we don't have more usernames reflective of Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, Ghenghis, Ceasar, Xerxes, Tamurlane, etc. than we do.


If it didn't need a defense, it does now lol. Basically these people are being referred to in some circles as abnormal which I'm not feeling is a universal response. But putting Hitler and Stalin in the same boat as any of the great Caesars of Rome... for shame!

The Conquest of Gaul

Now Caesar was free to pursue honour and glory for another five years. The conquest of Gaul, during the Gallic Wars celebrated in Caesar's own treatise on the subject, does not appear to have been planned, but in 58 BCE an intrusion into Roman controlled territory of the Helvetii from the area of Switzerland gave Caesar an excuse to go on the offensive.

Later Caesar used a request for help from some of the Gallic tribes to intervene in internal Gallic conflicts, and he defeated one tribe after another. By the end of 57 BCE most of the tribes were defeated and forced to accept Roman supremacy.
The Capitoline 'Dying Gaul' The Capitoline 'Dying Gaul'

In 56 BCE the alliance of Caesar, Crassus and Pompey met fierce opposition in the senate in Rome and one candidate for the consulship in 55 BCE promised to call back Caesar and prosecute him if he won the election. Caesar, who had spent the winter in Illyricum, met with Pompey and Crassus in Italy to sort out the situation. The agree to prolong their private agreement for another five years. Caesar would support the election of Pompey and Crassus for the consulship of 55 BCE, and Caesar's pro-consular command in Gaul would be prolonged for another five-year period, giving him another respite from prosecution. Their plan succeed, Pompey and Crassus became consuls and Caesar's command prolonged.

With his back covered Caesar returned to Gaul. In the following years (55 and 54 BCE) he fought Germanic tribes that had crossed the Rhine into Gaul, with a brutality and ruthlessness that caused much opposition in Rome, and he crossed the British Channel and made a short, victorious campaign in Britain, but with no lasting consequences.

Caesar's troops camped for the winter in various places in Belgium, but in the spring of 53 BCE some of these camps were attacked by the local tribes and suffered serious losses. Caesar spend most of that year fighting these tribes, and effectively annihilated some of them, men, women and children. The next year an alliance of many Gallic tribes, under the leadership of Vercingetorix, rose against the Romans. They tried to starve out the Romans, burning many of their own towns and collected all their forces and supplies in a few heavily fortified strongholds. Caesar's forces took some of these towns, but failed to take others. In the end all the Roman forces was concentrated around the city of Alesia, but failed to take it by storm. Caesar decided to starve the Gallic forces out, and after a prolonged siege Vercingetorix and the Gauls surrendered.

It is estimated that one million persons died in the wars and another million was sold into slavery, draining Gaul of approximately one third of the entire population. Caesar had effected an unprecedented genocide (in modern terms we would talk about war crimes, genocide and crimes against the humanity), all in the name of honour and glory.

I read the whole thing and I don't disagree with any of it. However, don't you feel that the context of ancient history might have at least a little weight here? Again, I implore you to consider motivation as it means everything as far as morality is concerned.
“A moral system valid for all is basically immoral.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
........The Nazis: a Warning from History. In this series an eyewitness account tells of Hitler watching movies (which he did very often). If ever a scene showed (even fictional) cruelty to or death of an animal, Hitler would cover his eyes and look away until someone alerted him the scene was over. The documentary also commented on the German animal welfare laws that the Nazis introduced, which were unparalleled at the time.Image“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
― Mahatma Gandhi
Major GeneralRisk
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:58 pm
Location: Neu-Schwabenland

Next

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mookiemcgee