Forum:Vote: Aimsplode's swastikas

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Vote: Aimsplode's swastikas

Note: This topic has been unedited for 4093 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

OK. I f****** had it with his damn swastikas! They are offensive. Yes, but once he leaves a message somewhere the swastika is unwillingly left there against will. GOD DAMMIT I HATE THOSE SWASTIKAS!

Vote for if you want HGA to remove the swastika from his signature.

Vote against if you're a Nazi person who is actually okay with it.

Vote

Vote here.

Score: -8 + Nazi

1.  Strong for IT BUUURRNNNSS!! --ڰโ٣ Ṗ€Áʃeɰɧĩʐʑ ďé Ňөщ Y০гk Ťá|k & ЯерlЧ Ѕтаlк 00:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
2.  For. It makes him look like a Nazi. And HGA is not a Nazi. Perhaps he should try and shout out his fascination for researching Nazi Germany, WWII and Hitler's lust for killing Jews louder? |Si Plebius Dato' Joe ang Kemador CUN|IC Kill | 01:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
3.  Against. The swastika is an Indian symbol associated with notions such as cosmic energy, eternity and good fortune. Please don't allow some Western regime's misuse of the symbol to pervert its original meaning. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 00:53, 9 January 2013

   I know, but it is still infamous because of Hitler. But what about religion? Offensive much?--ڰโ٣ Ṗ€Áʃeɰɧĩʐʑ ďé Ňөщ Y০гk Ťá|k & ЯерlЧ Ѕтаlк 00:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

   Religion? What about it? Are you saying the existence of Indian religions is offensive? —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 01:02, 9 January 2013

   No, I'm saying the Jewish would be offended. And gypsies. And every other run who went down tragically in the 40s.--ڰโ٣ Ṗ€Áʃeɰɧĩʐʑ ďé Ňөщ Y০гk Ťá|k & ЯерlЧ Ѕтаlк 01:05, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

   I would like to ask Socky to cut the "Indian symbol" nonsense. Yes, the swastika is a millenia old religious icon, but the image on HGA's page is specifically a Nazi symbol. -- Kip the Egg Talk Works 09:01, Jan. 9, 2013

4. Penis baron. HGA's a dick like that, but we ain't Wikia. ~ BB ~ (T) ~ Wed, Jan 9 '13 1:24 (UTC)
5. Strongly Against Censorship. What is this, Wikia? -- The Zombiebaron 01:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
6. Neutral. I honestly don't know how to respond to this. On the one hand, this can turn off some potential new Uncyclopedians when they first see the site, but on the other hand, getting a trademark of mine removed forcibly is the same thing that happened to me when {{Times}} almost got deleted. So instead of voting, I'm uselessly commenting instead. Sorry. Also, damn you, Zombiebaron, and your stupid edit conflicts! (Shakes fist mockingly.) ~[ths] UotM 01:34, 01/09/2013
   • Comment: I agree with Socky there. This is an ancient symbol of whatnot, even the Egyptians used it. However, it always depends on personal intentions, so I will need a reaction from HGA himself before I can give my vote. Also, please keep in mind if you ban swastikas, you'll probably have to consequently forbid every symbol that can be linked with ideologies which do not respect the Human Rights Chart or do tolerate mass-murder. Communism (hammer and sickle), Fascism (axes) and symbols of terrorist movements for instance will definitely be a victim as well | Cartoonist | Spit it out! | 01:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

     Who said anything about banning them? The vote is to force the guy to remove it, not ban them... hells, it doesn't even preclude him from putting it back right after. -— Lyrithya ༆ 01:49, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

     Then again, it's not even to force him, just if we want him to remove it himself... -— Lyrithya ༆ 01:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

     No one has ever said that indeed, but other users who put the same symbol in their sig at some point in the future may expect a similar vote? Just to prevent another new debates about the same thing why not make a rule which says something about censorship in general. I mean, if this would ever turn into a legal dispute (I hope not), you have a clear policy to present which says the responsability is totally up to the user. And what about admins doing that? Just a few things to think about. It's good we have a thorough discussion on this | Cartoonist | Spit it out! | 02:14, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

     I'm just seeing things in a long-term view and perspectives. If this isn't required at all, then that's okay for me too | Cartoonist | Spit it out! | 02:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

7.  Against. As much as the Holocaust is not funny, wasn't censorship part of the reason we left Wikia? I mean sure it's a rather poor example of censorship but none the less it's censorship. ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) 01:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
8.   Censhorship is bad, mmkay?--<<>> 03:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
9.  Against-Wessel-Lied. I feel a "Horst-Wessel-Lied" coming on! Also, I do believe, as with probably everyone else voting against, we got away from Wikia because of their abusive censorship policy. --Gamma287 ☭Tetяis? 03:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
10.  Against. Jeez Peasewhizz. What are ya, a Jew? --セクシーな魚 08:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
11.  Against -- I disagree with your Nazi symbol trolling, but I will defend to the death your right to do it. -- Kip the Egg Talk Works 09:01, Jan. 9, 2013
12.  NEVER -- is this some moralfaggotry or something???--WELCOME TO UNCYCLOPEDIA HELL!!!! 10:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
13.  Ah just fucking stop this stupidness! This is not the goddamn Wikia's childrenwebsite anymore, we have the freedom of speech and all that shit. Swastika is a symbol amongst others, deal with it. Also, Sir Peasewizz, did you think that you might hurt HGA's feelings? I mean, he ain't quite surely a nazi, he just uses the swastika, but, if he was one, a real nazi made of flesh, bone and iron, removing a symbol he believes on would be mocking. Like, if you love some fucking bible or something, and you'd have a christian cross or something in your userpage, BUT then it is removed by others because 'it offens Hindus'. Dude, you're free to hate swastikas and HGA, but do not make it such a big fuss when you know others have no problem with it. I hope I've made myself clear. Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz 12:03, 9 January, 2013 (UTC)

    Jeez dude, I didn't mean to make a huge civil war over it.ຮ¡г ♣ Ṕ€₳₰€₩ʰ↑zz (৳alk) ($৳alk) 12:43, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

    Don't worry, there's no war. We just don't like censorship, and we're all afraid of HGA anyway. ~ BB ~ (T) ~ Wed, Jan 9 '13 13:13 (UTC)

14. It's stupid and offensive, but that's just who HGA is. We don't need to get all fascist on his monkey ass. And can you cuntbags be a little more civil in the forums? --EMC ^[TALK] 18:40 Jan 9 2013

    Fascist? Or communist? I'm sure one fascist group would have no issues with the use of this symbol. Carlb (talk) 18:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

15. I more or less thought there wasn't much more ground to cover about this after you consulted several admins' talk pages, then asked us again in IRC, but I guess there's a forum? Anyway yeah you can see pretty clearly the consensus is still the same. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 05:54, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
16.  Against. →L A B O R A T O R I E S_{15:03 11 January 2013}

Response

See Forum:Please call me HGA, and response to swastika argument. →L A B O R A T O R I E S_{02:27 12 January 2013}

I have an idea: let's not make redundant forums. I copied and pasted all of the content from there and brought it back here. And deleted the old forum. And NOW I'm going to read it. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 03:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Aimsplode's Response

First off, as the title can point out, I would like to be referred to as HGA from now on, instead of my actual username. Why? Because using my username = more search results generated for my username = not good for me. Please simply use HGA to refer users to my page(s). Thanks.

---

The swastika was adopted by Adolf Hitler to be the NSDAP's ("Nazi" party, short for National Socialist German Worker's Party) primiary symbol, or logo, because of it's striking-ness and very rigid outline. It was to instill a sense of pride and power in the person who viewed it. This worked perfectly, and practically the whole German nation became swept up under the Nazi symbolism. (Sig runes were also used for logos, such as the Schutzstaffel insignia and other (para-)military organizations.

The swastika was originally an ancient symbol meaning roughly ""to be good" or "to be with a higher self", along with a more recent (okay, not that recent) meaning of "harmony of space and time". Just FYI.

I love the swastika. I find it bold, and very rigid, just as Hitler intended (usually, only the Nazi-stylized version, such as this). It's almost mesmerizing how beautiful such an object can be. That is why I use it as my person identification symbol. I want to be associated with this figure. If I didn't, then hell, I wouldn't be using it.

Another reason is my facination with the Nazi Party, and Hitler: the order, regimented society, propaganda. He was a fucking genius, Hitler. He wrote all his own speeches, made his own tours, just to keep the public in a trance. He had human psychology to an art. He new how to run his country perfectly. His only blunder was attacking the Russians, which was caused by his lust for world domination too quickly. If he had kept pounding the British, and had a little more patience, surely he would have won. This lifestyle, rise and fall, rage and grace, interests me to no end. I love spending time picking apart the various aspects of Nazi society, and Hitler's life.

A few of my views fall in line with Hitler's, but nothing substantial. I would not be massacring people, of course: that only make conflict. And in this day in age, it is impossible to pull off such a feat as him in such secrecy.

In conclusion: I use the Nazi-stylized swastika to represent myself because of it's beauty, boldness, and long historical roots. And while I do imagine it offends quite a few Jews, who I don't care about, I will proceed to use it anyway.

Do note that I am NOT a Holocaust denier/conspiracy theorist asshole. I'm a historian, not a crazy. I know what happened.

And for the grand finaaaahhhhlllyy:

I am atheist, bisexual, and {usually} liberal. I do not believe that a person can always be one-sided, because the lines are arbitrary and it's pointless to fuss over it. If you would like my whole schpeil, ask my on my talk page and I can answer. I believe that all people who believe in a deity are nuts, and insane, and should be committed to a mental asylum: there is no proof there is one, while there is tons of proof there isn't. I hate Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Scientologists all alike. There is no discrimination here.

Thank you, and god bless you FUCK NO. BE A FREE THINKER, AND ONLY BELIEVE IN WHAT YOU TRULY KNOW: EMPIRICAL KNOWLEDGE! SCIENCE FOREVER!

→L A B O R A T O R I E S_{01:02 12 January 2013}

---

Why are search results for your username a bad thing, A*mspl*d*? —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 01:31, 12 January 2013

Personal security issues. I don't particularly like being cross-tracked, but alas, that's what happened. So I'm changing up the usernames. →L A B O R A T O R I E S_{01:38 12 January 2013}

Okay. I'm sorry for making a fuss. I thought you were attempting to piss people off but you're speech was good and I see your use for it is a good use now. Thank you. Don't ever mind me again.--  ŤäŁķ ¿Ș₮áłĶ?฿¡฿↓¡ography 01:42, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey, it's okay man. You're not the first to challenge my use of Nazi-related symbolism. In fact, Matthlock wrote a pretty nasty rant on my talk page a while ago calling me a Jew-slaughtering bastard or something of the like, and that I had killed his family. It gets annoying to explain it over and over. →L A B O R A T O R I E S_{01:47 12 January 2013}

Yes, I am just so use to people misusing Nazi stuff and worshipping Hitler. Sure, he isn't really a good person. But he has done some good things. But he fucked up with the Holocaust. Which you seem to admire his good things. Thanks for explaining.--  ŤäŁķ ¿Ș₮áłĶ?฿¡฿↓¡ography 01:50, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. His Reich sparred the invention of many things we see today. Take, for example, the jet aircraft.

Also, here is Matthlock's message: "...I hate the insignia on your signature. I absolutely hate Nazis. I'll tell you this you dirty bastard, if the Nazis won World War II, my grandmother would be killed, and if my grandmother was killed, there would be no me! So that's what I hate your sig, you indecent, sub-human, dirty, anti-Semitic bastard!" →L A B O R A T O R I E S_{02:00 12 January 2013}

In a twisted way, this actually makes me respect you. However, I will not call you "HGA" as "Aimsplode" is hilarious. -- Kip the Egg Talk Works 02:14, Jan. 12, 2013

Please call me HGA, seriously. →L A B O R A T O R I E S_{02:21 12 January 2013}

How about we call you Swastika instead? :D —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 02:42, 12 January 2013

That'd be cool. Swastika (talk) 02:46, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not going to argue with you if it's your motivation to reappropriate the swastika as you say, instead of just using it to be a provocative ass (something which, as you know, you have absolutely zero history of ever being), but it kinda sorta gives me the idea that you might be blowing your sexually provocative depiction of Hitler out of proportion when you say his "only" mistake was invading Russia. Good for you if you really possess the knowledge and perspective to objectively analyze Hitler's militaristic, economic, and governmental methods that kept the engine of his personal cult running. But a good number of times in this response, you've really toed the line between "free speech" and "completely insensitive, self-possessed hate speech." Reposting Matthlock's comment, completely unnecessarily and unsolicited-ly, is an arrogant brag and a stroke of your dick. So no. This response did not convince me that you deserve to keep that symbol in your signature. On the contrary, it convinces me that you are still the same arrogant, provocative asshole who used to be indefinitely banned (oh yeah, you WERE that! I take back what I said in that last parenthetical). -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 03:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, A*mspl*d* seems to be such an extreme atheist (a Hitler-glorifying one at that, even) that he might just be a troll trying to paint a bad picture of atheists. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 03:35, 12 January 2013

It is well-known that TKF is an ignorant twit, and this post only secures him that title. On Hitler's quest to world domination, invading Russia in OpBarbossa was the mistake he made. That's not an opinion, it's a fact. If he had only waged a one-front war, he would've destroyed England, and then could have turned right around and wiped Russia off the map. And, last time I checked, I wasn't a Neo-Nazi Hitler-worshiping cult member. I was a historian who respects the massive amounts of innovation Hitler's Reich caused, while at the same time noting it's extermination policies were terrifying. Without Hitler, the world would be much worse off today. Japan wouldn't have attacked Pearl Harbor without an alliance, which means the US would still be in the Great Depression, which in turn means innovation and knowledge and funding don't exist. Hitler practically saved humanity, or else when the a-bomb was invented and researched, it could have wielded much worse results without the testing put into it. →L A B O R A T O R I E S_{15:13 12 January 2013}

You know, when A*msp*d* said that everything should be based on empirical knowledge, I was a little worried, because in some areas empirical knowledge is simply impossible to be attained and the nihilism some atheists advocate in relation to such areas doesn't always provide the most practical or most intelligent way of going about it. But I'm glad to see that not all A*mspl*d* believes is based on scientific knowledge. There are so many things wrong with what he said up there, scientifically as well as logically in general. For one thing, q follows from p, therefore q is impossible without p is not a valid form of argument, because it assumes that q can only be caused by p. A*mspl*d* asserts that the only possible outcome of a world without Hitler is a worse outcome, based on absolutely nothing but his assumption that this is the case (and maybe popular culture). This is also wishful thinking, because he wants to believe this to justify his admiration for Hitler. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 17:14, 12 January 2013

Why would you base opinions off of things you don't know, Socky? That's just stupid. Which is why I only believe in empirical knowledge, or THINGS WE ACTUALLY KNOW. And indeed what I said is true: without "P", "Q" wouldn't happen, or happen in the order that it did. Conditions, conditions. Without the Reich's driving intellectual force, we would be centuries behind. →L A B O R A T O R I E S_{19:03 12 January 2013}

Basing opinions off of the delusion that you know and understand the whole of reality. Now that's stupid. And apparently you are so arrogant as to think that you possess such perfect knowledge, because you pretend to know all driving factors of human history in the past century. Yes, without Hitler, things would've been different. But stripping history of everything Hitler, directly or indirectly, caused or contributed to causing and positing that none of it could've possible happened without Hitler is sheer retardation and lack of imagination. Any war where the US got itself involved would've helped solve the Great Depression. No need for Hitler there at all. Any major war would've given impetus to technological innovation. Why do you seem to think that Hitler was the only man capable of setting off a war during that period of the 20th century? —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 20:25, 12 January 2013

Me, I'm a Stalin guy. Pogroms, gulags, mass executions, government paranoia, propaganda, and forced marches to Siberia would still be in their Dark Ages if not for Uncle Joseph. Brings a tear to my eye just thinkin' 'bout him. ~ BB ~ (T) ~ Sat, Jan 12 '13 20:30 (UTC)

Also, great news. It's not the religious that are mentally ill, it's the "spiritual but not religious" people! —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 03:58, 12 January 2013

Psst, aimsplode, bud, learn to accept victory. You got your way, now stop saying words before you dig yourself an even deeper hole here. The swastika makes you look immature and attention-desperate, and although I'll defend to the death your right to project that image, I won't let you sow discontent in the forums by trying to start a "hitler wasn't really that bad" conversation. Sorry, that's not an argument that's worth anybody's time. This thread is getting locked now, if anyone has a problem hit up my talk page. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 22:44, Jan 12

Too late. He got inifibanned for dunking his genitalia in admins' coffee. And that, friends, is how one wrests defeat from certain victory.--<<>> 22:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Well at least we got a happy ending, and also this situation resolved itself in satisfactory manor. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 01:58, Jan 13