Dasa and the thought police

Originally posted by yoctobyte
Seems to me if you didn't like what the man was saying... simply ignoring his posts would have been the way to go rather goading him on by conversing when he was spewing such hatred.

Is that how you dealt with him and his ideas?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I cannot say with any certainty what Dasa did other than he seemed to harbour extreme anti Islamic views, this is because I rarely read his text. I understand that some held that these views were disgusting and extreme. It really got me wondering though whether merely 'thinking' disturbing or offensive thoughts warranted a banning or even constitut ...[text shortened]... me kind of 'thought police' and reported him to the site administration for his 'thought crime'?

Nobody condemns Dasa for the way he thinks. They condemn him for the way be communicates what he possibly thinks or possibly just picks up without thinking. If asked to speculate, I would suggest that Dasa is expressing the racist views of Hindu extremists, and if you care to get informed about the history of hatred between Hindu and Muslim communities in modern India then you may get a better grasp of the reason why it is so socially harmful. In the UK you may also be aware of the curious connections between Hindu extremists and White racists making commmon cause against Muslims in Britian.

Obviously there are free speech issues to consider but this forum is a private space governed half heartedly by a set of community rules. Those who participate undertake to refrain from racist hate speech and the moderator, very rarely and only under severe provocation, is entitled to enforce those rules for the good of the community of forum users. In addition, in some countries and certainly in the UK, the site is potentially exposed to prosecution under laws governing hate speech. I imagine the prospects of actual prosecution are slight but on the other hand a responsible site owner would have the law in mind as a matter of course.

Hate speech is a behaviour that has demonstrable social consquences. Your post is disingenuous and the thread title is not pertinant to the situation.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes from what I can discern he was set up by the thought police.

Is what you describe as being "set up by the thought police" a moral issue to your way of thinking?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes but that is abusive speech, its not inciting anyone else to an overt act of violence.

It is important to note that the offence applies only to words that are threatening, not simply ‘abusive’ or ‘insulting’ which protects criticism of groups for their religious, or lack of religious, beliefs.

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/discrimination-law/inciting-hatred.htm#

thus being abusive is not enough

So you did not read the texts, you are citing the wrong law, and you have no legal training, but you apparently can make this judgement?

Originally posted by finnegan
In addition, in some countries and certainly in the UK, the site is potentially exposed to prosecution under laws governing hate speech. I imagine the prospects of actual prosecution are slight but on the other hand a responsible site owner would have the law in mind as a matter of course.

I became concerned that the web site might get blocked in the country where I live.

Originally posted by yoctobyte
Seems to me if you didn't like what the man was saying... simply ignoring his posts would have been the way to go rather goading him on by conversing when he was spewing such hatred.

He clearly demonstrated that this would not have worked.

Originally posted by finnegan
Nobody condemns Dasa for the way he thinks. They condemn him for the way be communicates what he possibly thinks or possibly just picks up without thinking. If asked to speculate, I would suggest that Dasa is expressing the racist views of Hindu extremists, and if you care to get informed about the history of hatred between Hindu and Muslim communities in m ...[text shortened]... consquences. Your post is disingenuous and the thread title is not pertinant to the situation.

Sir I used to live in the Punjab, please don't be so self assuming about what I know and do not know regarding Hindus and Muslims, Sikhs or Christians, or the reasons for ethnic and religious strife. I can assure you I am perfectly well aware.

Yes the site is governed by rules but that is a separate issue, Dasa was here condemned for what he thought and expressed by word. The idea that he could have actually carried out these mass exterminations is quite ludicrous and its rather incredulous to my mind that anyone took them seriously. Dasa was to my mind convicted for thinking!

Originally posted by finnegan
Nobody condemns Dasa for the way he thinks.

Point of order - I would have thought everyone should condemn him for how he thinks.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
So you did not read the texts, you are citing the wrong law, and you have no legal training, but you apparently can make this judgement?

Do I need to me a mechanic to realise that I have a flat tyre? Do I? The fact is that the texts needed to be threatening to constitute a crime and you have not proven that they threatened anyone. The reference encompasses race, religion and so called sexual orientation hate crimes and is good enough for my purposes.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes the site is governed by rules but that is a separate issue, Dasa was here condemned for what he thought and expressed by word. The idea that he could have actually carried out these mass exterminations is quite ludicrous and its rather incredulous to my mind that anyone took them seriously. Dasa was to my mind convicted for thinking!

But if there is no moral issue that you wish to discuss regarding this, what is the nature of the issue you want to discuss?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Sir I used to live in the Punjab, please don't be so self assuming about what I know and do not know regarding Hindus and Muslims, Sikhs or Christians, or the reasons for ethnic and religious strife. I can assure you I am perfectly well aware.

Yes the site is governed by rules but that is a separate issue, Dasa was here condemned for what he thou ...[text shortened]... edulous to my mind that anyone took them seriously. Dasa was to my mind convicted for thinking!

That would be relevant if the crime he was accused of was intent to commit genocide.

As it wasn't, that is a strawman.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
That would be relevant if the crime he was accused of was intent to commit genocide.

As it wasn't, that is a strawman.

were these not your very words?

he [dasa] advocated executing all Muslims pre-emptively

therefore the texts is sound.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes the site is governed by rules but that is a separate issue...

Cannot the members of the community reasonably be expected to contribute to the web site's governing of its forums by its own rules?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It really got me wondering though whether merely 'thinking' disturbing or offensive thoughts warranted a banning or even constitutes a crime.

Although many posters try very hard to practice mind reading in this forum (myself included), they usually fail miserably. Because of this it simply isn't practical to base rules on what people think. As you correctly note, this is different if a God that can accurately read minds exists, or if you decide to judge yourself.
Dasa was banned for things he said, (or more accurately, things he typed) not for what he thought. I do not know the details of exactly why he was banned, nor did I alert the moderators asking him to be banned. He did however violate forum rules in a number of different ways including the extreme views he expressed, insults and spamming. I must note that you took up his use of 'boofhead' which was used to circumvent the forum bad language filter and thus could be considered a violation in itself.

Dasa was guilty of hate-speech which is a crime in many countries including his own (Australia). RHP, by allowing hate-speech to be posted and published on its site could make itself vulnerable to being found guilty of aiding and abetting a crime.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
were these not your very words?

he [dasa] advocated executing all Muslims pre-emptively

therefore the texts is sound.

Do you not differentiate between advocating genocide and intent to commit genocide?