Timeline for Do we have a position on neo-Nazi profiles?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 23, 2013 at 0:06 | comment | added | DVK | @Histophile - profiles, mostly | |
| Jul 22, 2013 at 23:26 | comment | added | user2590 | @DVK - "he's free to state them as long as they aren't done in offensive tone." Are you talking about what someone says in their profile, or their actual posts? I thought this was a history site - "aren't done in offensive tone" is not sufficient when it comes to posts. | |
| Jul 11, 2013 at 0:55 | history | edited | Joe | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
not everyone will get the reference to the 1st amendment of US constitution
|
| Jul 8, 2013 at 6:44 | comment | added | Voitcus | I think the user page which is mentioned by the OP is not aggressive. He says "I believe that...". The only thing is the last "Heil Hitler". I think deleting the account won't help. If we forbid this, we show we have no arguments but banning. If he's really 13 we should teach him that Hitler made many other things, not only somehow helping India get her independence. | |
| Jul 6, 2013 at 17:37 | comment | added | DVK | @Joe - amen.... | |
| Jul 5, 2013 at 21:03 | comment | added | Joe | The problem with neo-Nazi views isn't that they exist, but that they're stupid. If existence were the problem, you'd hide or banish them. But since stupidity is the problem, let them be seen -- in being seen, neo-Nazi views make their stupidity known. | |
| Jul 5, 2013 at 13:34 | history | answered | DVK | CC BY-SA 3.0 |