Timeline for Tag deleted against authors wishes, question edited in order to justify tag deletion
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 16, 2022 at 14:17 | comment | added | Rick Smith | significantly describe the content of the question should be significantly describe what the question is about. The use of "content" may be misleading or confusing. See my post, Adding and editing tags with reference to examples, which are content but may be seen incorrectly as "significant". | |
| Feb 16, 2018 at 8:08 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @jwco It's nice to see someone with such a positive attitude toward understanding and learning. I'd like to contribute more to the discussion but I don't have the time. Sorry. | |
| Feb 16, 2018 at 2:15 | comment | added | Jesse W. Collins | @user19142 Thanks for your comment and for your answer, which I learned a lot from. I learned a lot from the very upvoted answer and comments on that too, though they are very different responses. I might comment more on your answer there, but here I want to add to Trilarion's answer above and your comment that IMHO the law could help prevent people from blaming the Polish Nation "against the facts" in the future, even if it is never actually applied. I would also suggest that the Amendment has already had a practical effect without being applied: all this discussion we're having. | |
| Feb 15, 2018 at 17:36 | comment | added | user19142 | @jwco Do you think anyone in Poland has "in public and against the facts ... - if you ask this a common event, then the answer is negative. Especially when you stress out against the facts and next paragraph explicitly excluding scientific work. So while some topics might be controversial, the practical applications of this law are negligible. I tried to point it out in my answer | |
| Feb 15, 2018 at 13:30 | comment | added | RedSonja | This topic is a good example of "Streisand's nose effect". Most people were probably not aware that concentration camps existed outside Germany, and not aware of local complicity in their operation. Now they are. This law is an own goal. | |
| Feb 15, 2018 at 3:47 | comment | added | Jesse W. Collins | I sent you a chat message, but regarding this Amendment, I still haven't seen an example of controversy in Poland. I haven't seen an example of anyone in Poland ever violating the law prior to or since it's signing (I don't think Obama was on Polish soil when he uttered the phrase). I've seen an example of controversy and political ramifications in Israel (cited above). In my view, if I had to choose one tag, I'm not sure it would be "Poland". I think it would be "Israel". | |
| Feb 14, 2018 at 8:27 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @jwco You're welcome. I don't know really. I could imagine that with millions of Poles living in Poland this situation is not too unlikely and could have occurred already but it's not sure. However the discussion becomes a bit offtopic at this point. Maybe we should continue it some other time, in chat or somewhere else (didn't use the StackExchange chats so far). | |
| Feb 14, 2018 at 3:23 | comment | added | Jesse W. Collins | Thanks for continuing this dialogue. I have an honest question. Do you think anyone in Poland has "in public and against the facts, ascribed to the Polish Nation or to the Polish State, responsibility or co-responsibility for Nazi crimes committed by the Third Reich"? I'm quoting from the translation of the law you linked to in a comment on the original post. Thank you for linking to it. | |
| Feb 13, 2018 at 17:24 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @jwco "We both understand that the law applies to speech within Poland. But that doesn't prove that the law has affected anything in Poland, or ever will." Sorry, I'm totally baffled and don't know what to answer to that. A law in Poland should actually affect people in Poland, especially and only in Poland. Somehow I held this to be fairly self-evident but maybe I'm missing something important here. | |
| Feb 13, 2018 at 17:20 | comment | added | Jesse W. Collins | I've linked to a source to support my claim that the law has affected Israel's relations. You and I haven't found a source to prove that the law has affected politics in what we call "Poland." We both understand that the law applies to speech within Poland. But that doesn't prove that the law has affected anything in Poland, or ever will. Maybe we could look for quotes by people within Poland claiming that the Polish nation was responsible for the Holocaust. If historically people in Poland have not made these claims, then how will the law affect politics there? | |
| Feb 13, 2018 at 16:09 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @jwco A law in Poland should affect the country most. The controversy around it may affect it less but will still affect it. I mean you cannot argue with Poland about their law if nobody listens there. My guess is that the international attention Poland is getting is well recognized within Poland. It affects politics in Poland. Now how much it affects politics in Israel that is a good question. I think not enough to warrant adding Israel as a tag. In other words: you could as well add Germany or the US as tag because the law in question is discussed there as well. Would you like that? | |
| Feb 13, 2018 at 15:36 | comment | added | Jesse W. Collins | I read the question as being about a controversy (mostly outside of Poland) moreso than about the law itself. I wanted to upvote your comment to include the hyperlink to more info on the law. But I don't understand your claim that "this law does not seem to affect politics in Israel nearly as strong as the politics in Poland". The laws appears to have affected relations with Israel. I actually don't see how it has affected politics in Poland. | |
| Feb 13, 2018 at 12:59 | history | answered | NoDataDumpNoContribution | CC BY-SA 3.0 |