Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Moalfas

Divisive Labelling

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Just like you labled all against Iran as following

45 minutes ago, Moalfas said:

Cultists

Backward

Uneducated 

British Shiism 

Anti Iran agendists

USA/Zionist/KSA propagators

Pro munafiqeen 

Love(er) of munafiqeen

Akhbaris

Lanatis

Shirazis

 And even 

Non Muslims !!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Reza said:

Another preachy virtue signaling thread from you?

 

6 hours ago, Reza said:

arguments instead of this high and mighty postering.

How do you know it's virtue signaling and that he's not genuinely concerned about this topic? 

Sorry to say but your comment seems more like it's virtue signaling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Kaya said:

How do you know it's virtue signaling and that he's not genuinely concerned about this topic? 

Because players pretending to be referees to claim a moral high ground is fallacious. He’s not some outsider, he was knee deep in the debate, then acts like he’s above it all. 

There was a previous thread along the same lines.

You can believe what you will.

10 minutes ago, Kaya said:

Sorry to say but your comment seems more like it's virtue signaling.

I’m not wearing morality on my sleeve with bombastic preachy threads, nor implied moral high ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently some people find these threads valuable. I find them a waste of time. 

If the OP truly cared about what he preached, his time would be better spent on the debate thread presenting factual arguments, not provoking others with his “humor”, and would simply overlook the “name calling” and be laser focused on shifting the conversation to the substance as he claims, even if he believes others aren’t. 

But instead, he devoted his time to a concern trolling spectacle, because this is what he really wants to talk about. The actual discussion was simply a means to this end. He wants the emphasis on the perceived deficiencies of others, and wants the credit for calling it out. 

Over all this though, is the debate lacks real substance, mostly speculations, opinions, conjecture, and elementary moral statements. This is impacting all sides, so the debate is very unrefined.

Which if perhaps I can give my perspective being on ShiaChat more than 2 months, is that people gobble elementary moral platitudes like candy.

That’s how over the years, unsavory troublemakers behind the scenes would often be people with high public support and favorability, because they knew the right language and lingo to attract a religion oriented crowd. And unlike most members here, I get to see both sides of the wall, and have for years.

I’ve seen enough “pleas to the Muslim community” threads to know which are legit and which aren’t. It’s not a perfect radar, but I connect the dots the best I can.

But you’re free to believe what you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

@Reza

This thread is addressing a serious problem that we clearly have amongst us in the form of attempts to silence others by labelling them and name calling.

Perhaps you could point out my 'knee deep' involvement in such behaviour. 

It also doesn't help your case when your 'preachy, moral high ground and virtue signalling' remarks are coincidentally and repeatedly used in support of your personal biases. 

Thank you for proving my point.

Edited by Moalfas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Moalfas said:

Perhaps you could point out my 'knee deep' involvement in such behaviour. 

You were in the debate, I wasn’t. Player acting like referee is disingenuous.

9 minutes ago, Moalfas said:

It also doesn't help your case when your 'preachy, moral high ground and virtue signalling' remarks are coincidentally and repeatedly used in support of your personal biases. 

I don’t make these threads, you do. I react to them. So take responsibility. 

If you mean my personal bias against troll behavior, then I’m guilty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Reza said:

not provoking others with his “humor”, and would simply overlook the “name calling

Only person being provoked by this "humour" is you. 

31 minutes ago, Reza said:

but I connect the dots the best I can.

Jeez, is this a crime scene? 

Edited by 2Timeless
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Reza said:

You were in the debate, I wasn’t. Player acting like referee disingenuous to me.

 

17 minutes ago, Reza said:

I don’t make these threads, you do. I react to them. So take responsibility. 

Who the hell says you can only make a thread about things you have no opinion about?

Edited by Kaya
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Reza said:

Alright, I expected some blowback, but I said what I wanted to.

I’m an admin who’s been here 7 years, with lots of site experience, and spent lots of time on making this site a better place. Apparently, the first inclination is to dismiss me as a petty partisan actor, rather than perhaps someone who has something important to say, which may carry some value, due to my experience. But apparently little good will or trust is to be afforded.

If you all know better, than you’ll get exactly the site experience you deserve. If this is what you want, you can have it.

I’ll head back to my thankless behind the scenes job of keeping this site functioning. Peace out.

Appeal to authority fallacy definition:

"When writers or speakers use appeal to authority, they are claiming that something must be true because it is believed by someone who said to be an "authority" on the subject. Whether the person is actually an authority or not, the logic is unsound. Instead of presenting actual evidence, the argument just relies on the credibility of the "authority." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Reza said:

Another preachy virtue signaling thread from you? No thanks.

Engage in real factual substantive arguments instead of this high and mighty postering.

I agree that any discussion should indeed be based on factual substantive arguments. But it is also true that we have an obligation as Muslims not to backbite. Even if there is some truth to nickname we should avoid them. Mudslinging only makes a debate with factual substantive arguments impossible. The truth can speak for it self.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Moalfas said:

Cultists

Backward

Uneducated 

British Shiism 

Anti Iran agendists

USA/Zionist/KSA propagators

Pro munafiqeen 

Love(er) of munafiqeen

Akhbaris

Lanatis

Shirazis

 And even 

Non Muslims !!

How are these divisive labels and insults? All these categories and people do exist in the real world. Each of those listed above. Sometimes some of them give themselves away conforming to the beliefs of those people. And they have the right to be. But pointing it out or being on the look out for these people is natural and does not mean disrespect.

Perhaps these people do not wish to be discovered? But why? If someone calls me an Usooli or a Chinese apologist or an anti-imperial Muslim I won't mind, even if I am not. What does it matter if people are right or wrong about you. The only thing that does matter to a person is the priccking of the conscience and I am unable to imagine why a person in that list above will be offended by those rather ordinary non-insulting labels like Akhbari or Shirazi.

Edited by The Green Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Reza said:

Alright, I expected some blowback, but I said what I needed to, and I stand by it.

I’m an admin who’s been here 7 years, with lots of admin/moderator/development experience, and spent lots of time on making this site a better place. Apparently, the first inclination is to dismiss me as a petty partisan actor, rather than perhaps someone who has some insight whose statements may carry some value, due to my experience and known devotion to the site. But apparently little good will or trust is to be afforded. Or benefit of the doubt. 

If you all know better, than you’ll get exactly the site experience you deserve. If this is kind of topic you want, and you think this helps the community, you can have it.

I’ll head back to my thankless behind the scenes job of keeping this site functioning. Or maybe not. Peace out.

1ikds6.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kaya said:

The Iran WF police detained many Sayed Shirazi scholars who believe in Shuratu Faqih (Council of Jurists) as opposed to Wilayat Faqih. 

this is just a funny meme :hahaha: such police never existed & won't exists also Sayed Shirazi himself  believes to absolute WF but because just he didn't reach to this status so he stole idea of Shuratu Faqih (Council of Jurists) from others scholars that the most dominant supporter of this idea was Imam Khamenei himself but when majority of high ranking Shia scholars of Iran appointed him as absolute WF then Sayed Shirazi reclaimed the idea of  Shuratu Faqih to have a share in power but before his lose he was main supporter of absolute WF because he knew himself superior to others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy who made a thread grouping people into different "proxies" makes a thread saying labelling people is bad.... thats rich.

Sorry brother, although I agree with you that using this kind of rhetoric is destructive and immature, if you were sincere then you would first of all mention your own mistake (the previous thread you made) and second of all your list of examples wouldn't be completely biased, which it currently is as it does not contain any labels at all used against those who are "pro-Iran" or whatever you want to call them, only vice versa.

Edited by Soldiers and Saffron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2019 at 12:15 PM, starlight said:

God! Who exactly is acting high and might here? @Reza

Isnt it about time you put away your grudge towards Reza?

It's literally been going on since the mod elections years ago...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Revert1963 said:

Mudslinging only makes a debate with factual substantive arguments impossible. The truth can speak for it self.

Thank you very much. I could not have put it better. 

I rest my case 

اللهم صَل على محمد وال محمد و عجل فرجهم 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Soldiers and Saffron said:

The guy who made a thread grouping people into different "proxies" makes a thread saying labelling people is bad.... thats rich.

Sorry brother, although I agree with you that using this kind of rhetoric is destructive and immature, if you were sincere then you would first of all mention your own mistake (the previous thread you made) and second of all your list of examples wouldn't be completely biased, which it currently is as it does not contain any labels at all used against those who are "pro-Iran" or whatever you want to call them, only vice versa.

 

23 hours ago, Moalfas said:

Pro munafiqeen 

Love(er) of munafiqeen

^^^ Looks the same to me. Where is the anti munafiqeen?

FYI: Munafiqeen is the name for the so-called "Mojahedin" since the time of Ayatullah Khomeini RA. They are the MEK or MKO aka The People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, or the Mojahedin-e Khalq. They follow a mixture of Marxism and Islam. Being anti-Munafiqeen is normal in Iran. They have a history of murder, even in the masjids and shrines. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Hameedeh said:

FYI: Munafiqeen is the name for the so-called "Mojahedin" since the time of Ayatullah Khomeini RA. They are the MEK or MKO aka The People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, or the Mojahedin-e Khalq. They follow a mixture of Marxism and Islam. Being anti-Munafiqeen is normal in Iran. They have a history of murder, even in the masjids and shrines. 

I agree that these guys are terrible. It honestly isn't far fetched to call them terrorists. They are terrorists. 

However, it's childish to label someone who is anti-WF to immediately be a MEK supporter. 

I am against WF (I support a Council of Jurists rather than only one). But at the same time I would never allow an organisation like MEK to exist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an idea. How about we all proclaim love for each other and make amends where necessary. Allow me to beg forgiveness to any and all who took offense from my name calling. I am but a very sinful man and make so many mistakes. It is also true that I love all of you. @Sumerian @Mahdavist both especially. You guys know that right? I love you brothers dearly for the sake of Allah. Please forgive my transgressions. I don't care if you are different. You are mine and I am yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

I have an idea. How about we all proclaim love for each other and make amends where necessary. Allow me to beg forgiveness to any and all who took offense from my name calling. I am but a very sinful man and make so many mistakes. It is also true that I love all of you. @Sumerian @Mahdavist both especially. You guys know that right? I love you brothers dearly for the sake of Allah. Please forgive my transgressions. I don't care if you are different. You are mine and I am yours.

ShiaChat is like my family. You all make me smile, frustrate me, challenge me or give me hope. All that and much more. I wouldn't want to be anywhere else. Allah bless you all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...