This is what it says next to General Chat:
"Discuss anything you want: musik, TV, cars, movies, games, sex, books, news, politics, hardware, love, funny stuff, jokes, pics, videos etc. Feel free to post links, pics or just talk. Chat with everyone about everything."
I found it amusing that they were going to rename the stadium which is why I made my original post. This particular death penalty case was exceptional and I was focusing on the exceptional circumstances surrounding this case. Therefore, the pertinent question from this case isn't whether or not countries should have the death penalty, it's whether or not the desire for vengeance should be given precedence ahead of the greater public good.
By executing that man, the world has lost an influential campaigner against gang-violence and it hasn't really gained anything except:
1) a satiated lust for blood
2) another dead body
3) another bereaved family.
As I said, I didn't intend to discuss the death penalty in general but if you take the idea of "an eye for an eye" to it's logical conclusion then a judge who executes an innocent man should be killed too. So, the concept is irrational.
Ok, I'll get off my soap-box now
and if anyone doesn't like my posts then just click on another link, problem solved.