Please avoid making threats or wishing for violent crimes against any individual

[Torie]

We know that most posters are well aware of this forum policy, but a few have crossed the line on this matter, with regard to President Trump in particular. We understand that for many of you, the level of frustration, anxiety and even fear regarding Trump is high, but please respect this rule. Thank you.

The moderation team for the U.S. General Discussion board

[Torie]

Can I openly wish for Trump to die of bowel cancer? That doesn't seem violent or a threat.

See Pit's post above.

[Torie]

Can I openly wish for Trump to die of bowel cancer? That doesn't seem violent or a threat.

See Pit's post above.

Ah. I intend to test the limits of the Mods' patience with this rule.

You're off my Christmas card list.

[Torie]

Is this applicable to non-American leaders that are our enemies? I still can call for horrible things to happen to ISIS or the Kremlin right? What's the standard on that?

E.g I hope the Russian hackers who hacked our elections are taken out by covert operations that assassinate them? Or that Daesh is blown up?

I'm not interested in saying the same about our fellow Americans. Impeachment is enough and the rule of law should apply as well as respect for it.

Here's the thing. Sure, posting that you wish that someone would off some genocidal maniac with power is not out of line. But then the mods need to subjectively evaluate whether the person involved really deserves summary killing without trial and jury under some moral standard. And that can be tricky. We discussed this aspect too in the Cave.

In the end I think, the best we can do is say that if you post that someone deserves killing, you do so at your own risk, and when in doubt, just don't do it. Close cases will be resolved against you. Typically saying that about someone residing in a nation that has the rule of law and is a civil society would almost always be out of line I would think. In places that have brutal authoritarian folks in power, perhaps sometimes it would not be so out of line.

That's how I see it anyway. My fellow Mods may handle it a bit differently. There is no easy answer here. It really is all about good judgment and common sense. And just how necessary is it for one to post that someone needs killing? It typically would be more of an exercise in venting than anything else I would think.

Just my two cents.

[Torie]

The standard is as set forth above, and goes beyond what would raise legal liability. Calling for Putin's overthrow is fair comment. I would stay away from calling for his assassination however. And no, the Mods are not going to go through the exercise of just who, is whose ally, either. I think enough has been posted, so posters get the idea.

[Torie]

total cuck move etc etc

ah, just out of curiosity, will this be enforced consistently? will posts wishing for the violent death of e.g. abu bakr al-baghdadi be moderatable?

Just read the commentary above for guidance on this. Thanks.

[Torie]

I'm just curious: does this mean that nobody can make a comment in favor of the death penalty (at least in a specific case)?

Ultimately, other than the legal nicities, there really is no difference between having the state kill on your behalf rather than wishing somebody dead (or for 'violent crimes' against any individual.)

If there were truly equal justice in the carrying out of the death penalty, I suppose one could argue it was truly fair justice being meted out by the state, but I think everybody here knows that's not the reality.

I think I've abided by this rule and although I have mixed feelings about it, I can see its value. Every discussion could turn into some flame war without the rule.

But, on my initial point at least 60% of Americans support the death penalty, so this idea that people (at least Americans) find the idea of wishing somebody killed to be morally repugnant is just a lie.  

I wrote in the second paragraph about the supposed rationales of how a person can support the death penalty but virtue signal over somebody else wishing for somebody be killed.  Obviously I think those rationales are garbage.

So, I seriously would like to know if this rule does extend to calling for the death penalty to be carried out, or, if not, what makes the high profile people this rule is obviously primarily for so special?

Read more carefully the text of the headline of this thread, and I confident that you will find the answer to your question.

[Torie]

Wishing someone to die via applying the rule of law is different than wishing or calling for them to be executed outside the rule of law.

[Torie]

Wishing someone to die via applying the rule of law is different than wishing or calling for them to be executed outside the rule of law.

I'm not trying to play games here, but at what point in the 'rule of law' does that apply.  There are credible allegations that Donald Trump committed treason and the ultimate penalty for treason is death, so at what point does that kick in for him and for everybody else? 

When there are allegations?
When they are charged?
When they are convicted?
When they are sentenced?

Again, I expect the rules on this forum are the same for Trump as they are for any other individual.

The comments below would be OK:

When there are allegations? If the allegations are true, Trump should be charged, tried, and if found guilty, he should get the death penalty.
When they are charged? If found guilty, Trump should get the death penalty.
When they are convicted? Trump should get the death penalty.
When they are sentenced? I hope he is executed soon (if he got the death penalty). If not found guilty, then expressing the opinion that he should have been found guilty, and got the death penalty, would be OK.

I hope this helps. But somehow I think you are just messing with me. That's OK.

[Torie]

It's a fair point. I mean I have to imagine that there have been times here when people wished for the violent death of Osama Bin Laden or Saddam Hussein and the same could potentially have been said about Castro or Putin or Kim Jong Un. No different from Trump.

If this poster really believes this, he is deranged beyond belief.

Torie, you're a sane, reasonable person.  I hope you can see that some of these people here are off the rails in what is unprecedented ways for a forum of this nature.

Assuming arguendo that what you say is correct, being "off the rails in unprecedented ways" may show some signs of idiosyncrasy/creativity, but it is not per se a violation of the TOS. One thing about being a Mod that has spilled over somewhat into the content of my posts, is that I get more detached about some stuff. I can't fully explain it at the moment, but I sense that it is there. The scope of my hot button passion area has truncated. Trump however remains in my hot button passion area. I loathe him!

[Torie]

I don't know where the rules are.  Is it now acceptable to say to anyone on this board who still supports Trump that they are a traitor and should be convicted and executed?

As long as the implication is that a necessary precondition is that Trump is first found guilty of treason through the justice system, and if found guilty, the penalty should be death, that is not a violation of either the TOS or the rules I fashioned here. If the implication is that Trump should be killed without the due process of law through extra-legal means, not only is that a violation of the rules here, and the TOS, that comment might well be the cause of a banning.

Oh, I misread the question. To answer the question actually posed (which seems more of a rhetorical than a real question, as to which the poster already knows the answer), I would support banning a poster who published that. Has somebody actually posted that? If so, please direct me to the post!

[Torie]

Freedom dies in Hudson County  :.(

That is in New Jersey honey.