Interesting post... not so much in the content but in the reactions. I applaud Notherwoods & Golyek's efforts for not brushing aside important issues. I just think that the debate gets a bit side tracked.
Sometimes we need to re-frame what debates/problems are really about. This issue seems to be more about hateful speech on the message board - One could call it verging on bigoted speech. Or, as another reply stated, a problem could be combative speech that is aimed to cause anger rather than challenge/extend opinions.
It seems that many people consider Canuck's approach as an acceptable manner of interaction on this site. Why is this and how might it affect future posts? Is it ok for others to engage in negative generalizations or stereotyping of nationanalities, religions, race? Will this example lead others to post comments/post topics as freaky illustrated with this post? Is a new, more extreme, standard of posts/replies now set and accepted or will it be rejected?
Group norms are difficult change once they are set. How do you go about dealing with group norms that may be seen as negative at camp?
