Protest to the Lack of Good Threads in Asian History Section

I am working with Gubook to start new threads that have a more scholarly approach.

You can't expect the mods to be monitoring the boards 24/7.  It happens that I went out to lunch when he made his comments.

In all fairness, his comment that we are not smart enough would include himself.  In that case, it's difficult to make a strong case that he was trying to insult someone, especially since he did not pinpoint any individual.  He is nonetheless warned (see below.)

[QUOTE=demon] It's not really the quality we are missing.  Asian history is rich.  But it's the right intellectuals we are missing.  There's not enough smart people in Asian threads enough to keep a good thread moving./QUOTE]

Warning: potential ad hominem comment.

I can see why NCAA would be angry at the Chinese. Hasnt Gengis Kahn been portrayed as a Chinese man by the PRC?

Actually, you're right about all of that. I didnt mean to say all Chinese people.

Then what makes you failed to react quickly to such racist behaviours, or rather those behaviours thats obviously violated the rules of this forum. GJ atleast gave him a verbal warning, what did you do as a moderator?

I know you are not specially assigned to this section, still, when you posted your reply to NCAA in that thread, those racist remarks were already there  in his previous posts, but you failed to notice and "advice" to him then, compare the frequency of your "advice"  to me. Perhaps you are not responsible as a global mod but  as a viewer of the thread, you are still responsible for yourself to have better and more comprehensive understanding of the thread by studying other forumers who participated there,because you failed to do so, you failed to realize the problem quickly as a viewer, also failed to react quickly as a mod. Despite you are not responsible for the section, you are still responsible for the matter, since you are part of the team, and the section is part of the forum.

Besides what happened around this heated thread does make me seriously question the efficiency of those who supposed to guard the forum rules.

It is still acceptable if this section is less academic, but unacceptable if ther e are too much racist remarks or those kind of behaviours breaching the forum rules but less counter-measures. The difference is that of quality and that of credibility.

Regarding the "advice", im sorry,i hold no golden mean of confucianism. Im a simple straight person, ignorance is ignorance. From what i have  listed  of NCAA's remarks(which mostly were directed at me) here, and what Loknor tried to assert in his, i cannot find another proper "tactical" word than using the word "ignorance" to say of him.

And i retain that position. Whether this could result in angry debates, its only what you think, as perhaps yet again you failed to notice one thing, that although NCAA used many racist remarks regarding the Chinese, i never used same sort of language regarding his nation.

Since we all want the section  to be more "academic", then i have no doubt he will not follow the path of that of NCAA.

my original:"i had an experience,a Mongolian girl study in China once mistook me as one of her country fellow...

I was talking with an American student, just this Mongolian girl came to me, saying frankly Mongolian to me, i was confused, i friendly asked her in English "why you mistook me as a Mongolian", She says "you look very much like my people"

Afterwards i consulted with my classmate who is a Mongolian from Inner-Mongolia, that whether i really look like a Mongol? She told me "yes, you do look like""

and "The Mongolian from inner-Mongolia is a Chinese citizen, but the Mongolian girl mistook me as a Mongol was from "outer-Mongolian", who was an overseas student  study in China.Both are Mongolian ethnicity..."

Is it not clear?  

my original:"...i didnt view them as "the one and only ever-menacing enemy: the Mongols".... "

your response:"And I was refering to that ancient Mongols. Not 21th century Mongols. "

my response:"Well, i only wanted to show that i have nothing against the Mongols consider this is not middle-age anymore, i treat them as equal as any other people in the world."

the conclusion is equal to what i've said in the statement"i dont look at 21th century Mongols as an ever and only-menacing enemy of China, consider this is not middle-age anymore"?"

BTW: perhaps i should use the word "expressed", not "said", since this confused you.

the "adviser" should now understand why i insisted that Loknar has been "ignorant" .