Black Ops Swastika Emblems Will Earn Xbox Live Ban
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
Why do you assume people are upset because they "were gonna use it."?cjneon said:
I'm upset because I think racists are filth smart guy.
I didn't assume that? its a rhetorical question, the point I was trying to make was that I would bet that 99.9% of this forum aren't the kind of douchebags who would use the symbol anyway, so why does it bother them that they can't now?Anarchy In Detroit said:
Before someone goes on about freedom of speech, civil liberties etc, fight for or get pissed off about something that matters, not microsoft/treyarch banning a symbol most commonly associated with a group of fascist, mass murdering scum.
On a personal note I deplore any use of a swastika in these kind of situations because those using it are only doing it to gain a reaction by causing offence.
What the hell ever happen to "Freedom of speech"? And honestly that nazi shit happened like over 100 years ago... GET OVER IT!!!
Then get rid of the freaking dicks and the bestiality and the like. Why does the interwebs and the like have to be so perverted? Why can't we all have an actually cool emblem? Like mine is a black spade, with a white skull on it, and two red versions of the shooting guy aiming at each other in the secret agent movie intro mirror image fashion. That's not offensive, right?
I know your just stirring the pot, but that is a tad of an extreme leap, like I said people with this much vehemence about clantags would do better to direct their outcry to something that matters, like oh I dunno, the genocide in Darfur (still on going not a history lesson), civil rights abuses throughout China and last but not least the fact that 12 year olds are still playing BLOPS and not outside playing a sport instead!JDKJ said:
(the last one may have been slightly less serious, for those of you with out the ability to detect sarcasm)
And, for the record, if someone murdered 2/3rds of your entire family, and then I told you to "Get over it", what do you think your response would be? Because the Nazi's murdered 2/3rds of mine. So screw you. Like I said, I will defend to the death your right to say stupid shit like what you said, but I don't have to like it.Butbrandon said:
Technically the war did not end until well into the fifties (legally anyway). I know this is a tad finicky but considering the, some might say predictable, direction this thread has gone I feel it is still a valid point.JDKJ said:
Putting aside whether pot-stirring or not, it is, as I said, a logical extension, not, as you claim, a leap.cjneon said:
The logic underlying your argument, as I understand, it, is:
Many of the posters here would never use a swastika as an emblem therefore those posters shouldn't care if use of a swastika is banned.
The same logic, if I extend it, appears in this argument:
Males would never have a need for an abortion therefore males shouldn't care if abortion is banned.
The logic of the first argument repeats itself in the second argument, doesn't it? If it does, then I've not made a leap in logic but, rather, an extension of your logic. Haven't I? And if I have, I can only hope that it's one which illustrates to you the invalidity your argument.
And if your response is now going to be one along the lines of positing that the issue of an emblem's use in Xbox Live is not of equal importance to the issue of an abortion, you won't accomplish much in my book other than to leave me to wondering who you are to think that you should be the one to determine how much or how little importance anyone other than yourself should be attaching to an issue.
It's not a tad finicky. It's more like a whole lotta self-defeating hyper-technicality.Biffin Bridge said:
If you want to define the end of the War in terms of treaties, then, yes, you can push its end into the 1950s. But if you define it as the collapse of the Nazi Party and, accordingly, the end of the Nazi war effort and the atrocities of the Jewish Holocaust (which is what I assumed is meant by "nazi shit"), then that most certainly occurred in 1945.
And you do realize, I hope, that even if you're given the more recent date of the late-1950s, you're still more than a few years short of "over 100 years ago." In fact, you've only succeeded in adding to the shortage of years. As a matter of pure and simple mathematics, in order to meet that 100 year time span, you should be trying to push the end date further back in time from 2010, not closer to 2010.
But, more substantively and less mathematically, if by suggesting that we should "get over" the Jewish Holocaust you mean we should forget about it as if it never happened and fill our minds with more pleasant thoughts, then I fear that the resulting ignorance will only encourage more of Man's inhumanity to Man in the future. Although, that being said, there's no guarantee that a daily and constant reminder to Man of Man's potential for inhumanity will in any way tend to disincline Man from his inhumane ways. History does repeat itself despite no shortage of history textbooks.
That's not completely right, but the Swastika the Nazis are known for does look different than the one in Hinduism.AugustFall said:
There is however a good reason this symbol is forbidden though despite all those complaining about that it's not the sign for Nazism. Does anyone know that it's illegal to have this sign on you, or draw it in public in Germany? If they allowed this symbol in the game it could get banned from Germany and that could result in some loss of money.
Also you can say whatever you want that it doesn't mean you're a Nazi that you use the symbol, but really, show some respect for the history behind it, not the actual meaning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika
First off, low content posts are generally frowned upon. Triple posts are annoying too.Jake Poulos said:
That's a horrible argument, yes the nazis used guns to kill people but so did just about everyone who's fought in a war since they became viable weapons. And the neo-nazis never used guns as a hate symbol either.Jake Poulos said:
It's not "hypocitical", murder is illegal isn't it? Yet plenty of movies have it. The difference is that in a movie when there's murder it's done to advance the plot, if you kill someone in real life then you're just plain killing someone. Same thing with swastikas. If you put is as your emblem then you're not using it to advance some plot or whatever, it's a personal statement. A personal statement that most people find offensive.Jake Poulos said:
I see what you did there.mad825 said:
[sub][sub][sub]GESTAPO WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE GET HIM![/sub][/sub][/sub]
OT
I think its perfectly exeptable to ban the swastika. Also, I think they should put more awareness out about each symbol before banning it. Like if they ban the horse symbol for example, it should be announced on their website a week before the ban is issued.