Announcement: In-thread Moderator Warnings

You're correct...

I was just making the point that most threads on this forum are shut down because the conversation turns into insult matches...

Wasn't really trying to argue your point...

 

Another crappy attempt by moderation to apply a band-aid to an arterial wound.

 

I have noticed the change- so far seems appropriate.

To those screaming 'first amendment'- that only applies to protecting your speech from government restrictions- this board can censor as much or as little as they wish- we can choose to participate or not.

Don't like the rules, don't use the board.

 

Well that is partially true. Remember that there is a rule in the Rules that says "You will read things that offend you on here." While I find some of the threads that a few conservatives post on here to be so outrageously offensive, they are not breaking the rules. The problem is I have posted some outrageous stuff that does get deleted. I posted about a guy grilling puppies, it got deleted. A conservative posted a link to video of a dog attack, it wasn't moderated. Both of these are pretty offensive. All I could figure is my thread was just victim to the conservative bias of the moderators. It does seem that they are being more even handed. It seems that all Martin/Zimmerman threads are making the moderators more fair in deleting/banning members.

 

And how would you know that?

Seriously I have seen threads allowed to continue that I feel are way out of line- but it is not my judgement call.

I report whenever I feel that reporting is warrented- and yes- I have been reported and warned myself- I have no problems with anyone reporting me or any of the very few threads I start.

 

That is where the thread warnings/bans come in. Instead of closing the entire thread, simply because we can't, sometimes, keep up with all the violations, why not remove the violators and let the discussion continue?
It will surely take some tweaking, but why not see where it goes? If it doesn't work....

 

I think that's exactly what is going on. The Left has been taking a beating over Obama and progressives' failures, scandals, and general lawlessness on the board. Criticism of the Left's ideology is intolerable to progressives, so it must be stopped by complaints and threats to stop donating to PF, etc. The heretics must be put on trial and burned at the stake. Anti-Christian bigotry is fine here though.

I suspect the rule change will just make it easier to ban conservatives or silence them with intimidation. Clearly, conservatives that obey the current rules but successfully disparage secular humanist socialism as toxic to the West are a BIG problem that must be solved with a final solution.

I hope that I'm wrong, but the track record of unfairness here does not inspire me with any confidence.

 

Bumping this in response to DG's post

 

As long as both those on the left and those on the right are complaining about the unfairness of the moderators- they are probably doing something right.

 

They would never be clever enough to cover their tracks with their own cries of unfairness. LOL!!!

We'll see.

 

I like watermelon.

 

Doesn't even make juvenile sense.You go into a Government Bldg. you
are inspected via a body scanner for metal or any weapon.A spoon
could be a possible weapon. Go into a Courthouse and especially during a Trial
and you best watch yer tongue.The Public has far less constraints.
So yer Government example doesn't even pass the baby boo boo test.
Why on earth a private sector Site has to be moderated with such rigor is
beyond me.I get Political Correctness.But I don't like.
I go back to public airwaves and Michael Savage and Mark Levin,Talk radio
biggies and very openly aggressive and impolite to any caller daring to
spew inanity.BTW ... The word " Inanity " was the most popular
Internet word in the early 2000's.It's seldom used now.
Maybe it sounds and appears too much like the word anus.
Whatever !

 

Posted by SFJEFF



To those screaming 'first amendment'- that only applies to protecting your speech from government restrictions- this board can censor as much or as little as they wish- we can choose to participate or not.
the above posted by SF Jeff

====================================================================
The concept of Freedom of Speech is hardly that simple or that implicit. You will not find your belief or the court decision's concept your belief is based on anywhere in the Constitution.

To attempt to understand what the founding fathers really meant by the phrases 'freedom of speech' or 'freedom of expression' and 'Freedom of The Press' you must do a lot of research in regards to their writings, letters, personal papers etc.

In a nutshell the issue or concept of 'Freedom of Speech' is hardly settled or agreed on by legal scholars or academics or anyone else. It is a ongoing struggle and a ongoing fight to try and preserve some semblance of free speech which is under attack as never before.

Now of course the Internet was not around in those days and as technology advances so should our attempt to apply the 'principle of freedom of speech' in all of our communication or attempts to communicate with others....the founding fathers as we all know had a revolutionary belief in freedom and anyone at all familiar with them knew that for the most part they had a solid belief in as much freedom as is humanly possible...and that should be the guiding light for those interested in free speech on the internet.

Bottom Line: There needs to be a congressional hearing on how to preserve freedom of speech on the internet which is being curtailed severely...most drastically in totalitarian nations like China but also here.

To be specific let us look at the message boards. Why do the owners of the various boards use their ownership to dictatorially control what is said and so forth?

Well....they have to worry about lawsuits for one thing aka copywright infringement being just one.

But I think their control and censorship of their sites goes beyond what is needed or required to protect themselves. It goes to their own personal agenda.

Some of them are very blatant about it....they will only allow certain views and they will not allow certain other views....they do not try to conceal their dictatorial approach they flaunt it...aka do as we wish or go elsewhere.

I am not going into a great depth on this but one can see what I am talking about ..indeed most posters recognize all of this all too well.

So first of all there is no easy solution...or simple solution for a complex problem.

Yes we can choose to participate or not as you suggest but that does nothing for the problem....if it gets to the point where you have no freedom of expression anywhere on the internet(that is the direction we are headed in) what will you do then?...throw away your computer and passively accept the fact there is no freedom of speech on the internet?

Thousands and thousands of patriots have sacrificed their lives to protect our liberty...yet some ...now...too many...seem not interested in fighting for freedom of speech on the internet...in essence an Un-American approach..one fostered by political correctness.

 

It is any wonder that Obama,The Chicago Community Organizer
which means an agitator an instigator,prefers to jerk the chains of Liberty
and Freedom.To test the resolve of ordinary americans who just want to
be left alone.As well as leaving alone their constitutional rights.
" The makers of our Constitution sought to protect Americans.... They
conferred,as against the government,the right to be let alone -- the most
comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized man. "
-- Louis D. Brandeis { U.S. Supreme Court Justice }

" The most beautiful thing in the world is freedom of speech. "
-- Diogenes "the Cynic" {Greek philosopher}

 

Apparently it is.

But one of the wonders of capitalism is that the owners of this site can do with it as they please.

And you have the freedom to abide by their rules and also the freedom to boycott the site if you don't like them.

 

No one is stopping your from starting your own website or blog where you can say exactly whatever you want to - unrestricted, unmoderated- whatever.

I really don't understand what is so hard about this to understand.

We are guests on these boards- we don't own them.

If you want your own board- go start one.

 

What your basically saying is a group/forum shouldn't have any rules and that anyone can join and participate however they want... including being a disruption.

Hate to break it to you, but forums can have rules. If you don't like the rules you can leave or if you don't follow the rules you can be asked to leave.

No different then in real life. You can't put a political sign in my yard and cry free speech when I remove it and call the cops for your trespassing.

Nobody is stopping you from starting a website or blog and you can write away your opinions. Just don't expect someone else to foot the bill for your bandwidth without conditions. Don't like that... pay for your own website or blog or forums.

 

Are you saying that the flamebaiting is going to get reined in? I am curious how folks are slipping through without a major change to the rules of the site.

 

I also think that's exactly what has been going on. A coordinated effort by left-wing posters continually complaining to moderators and the owner about the site and threatening to withhold donations if changes are not made. When I arrived here nearly 2 years ago I would say that progressives dominated most conversations and threads. When the Quorum got going and many new conservatives started posting here, the domination that they were used to was over, and it's been a problem for them ever since. On certain topics where the left is particularly weak, their strategy seems to be - come into a thread, start a flame war, and then report everyone in the hopes of getting threads shut down and members banned from the site. The ultimate goal is to have certain topics completely off limits, and for conservatives to be restrained from exposing progressive ideology, which is what I expect is behind the new rules that we will see shortly. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think that I am.

 

Nothing has been done to curb the thread derailing progressive campaign. We'll see if these new rules clean that problem up or not.

 

To put it as nicely as possible...you are quite confused regarding what I am talking about in regards to freedom of speech on the internet.

Your analogy or comparison of your yard to the internet is fallacious. To begin with the internet is a global common area...a public space. Tray and wrap your head around that.

Perhaps the following will improve your understanding of freedom of speech on the internet.

http://www.livinginternet.com/i/ip_speech.htm

 

Why a surprise.Just tell us posters what the new guidelines are.
However keep in mind that even a boss in the Private sector with his own
company has to abide Discrimination laws on the books.
Yes there was a time not too yore ago when a boss could just up
and fire an employee on a whim.A boss can't just come in one morning and utter
SURPRISE ! I'm gonna fire some a ya'all today.He can lay off but has to
hire them back before anyone else is hired-on.

 

Freedom of Speech is irrelevant on the Internet when you agree to the terms of use of this website. Period.