Page 1 of 2 [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

thechadmaster
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,126
Location: On The Road...Somewhere

21 Mar 2005, 6:27 pm

Recently (5 minutes ago) the thread AS/Fundamentalism was locked out. 1ST Amendment!



duncvis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,642
Location: The valleys of green and grey

21 Mar 2005, 6:30 pm

The first amendment does not entitle you to insist that ohter members are sinners and are hellbound. You have ignored a direct instruction to stop offending other members - if this continued I will have no option but to start deleting posts. Knock it off and re-read the site policy please chadmaster. :evil:


_________________
I'm usually smarter than this.

www.last.fm/user/nursethescreams <<my last.fm thingy

FOR THE HORDE!


vetivert
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,769

22 Mar 2005, 2:49 am

luckily, the BNP aren't in the States, otherwise they'd undoubtedly be pleading the first amendment too. and no, i'm not accusing anyone of being BNP-esque, before anyone starts shouting at me. not yet, anyway...



queerpuppy
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 224
Location: S.E. London

22 Mar 2005, 6:40 am

As far as I was aware, having freedom of speech also measn being responsible enough to be aware of when one's words may curb other people's freedom.

e.g. preachers who stand on street corners preaching that "God hates fags" and "queers will burn in hell" and other such delightful messages of love and forgiveness, whilst they enjoy the freedom to say those things, they also have the responsibility to know what they say causes emotional pain - to the point of depression + potential suicide. This is quite clearly curbing someone elses freedom.

Amyway, I suppose what I'm saying is with freedom comes personal responsibility, and without an understanding of one's responsibilities to others people need to be careful of what they say / do.



thechadmaster
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,126
Location: On The Road...Somewhere

22 Mar 2005, 7:25 am

vetivert wrote:
luckily, the BNP aren't in the States, otherwise they'd undoubtedly be pleading the first amendment too. and no, i'm not accusing anyone of being BNP-esque, before anyone starts shouting at me. not yet, anyway...

What is the BNP?

Also Duncvis, if people dont want to listen to me, nobody is forcing them to read this, Comedy Central offends me , therefore i dont watch it, its that simple



rhubarbnocustard
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

User avatar

Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Gender: Male
Posts: 19
Location: Engerland

22 Mar 2005, 7:47 am

The British National Party is a far-right political organisation. It's widely held to be part of the Neo-Nazi racist thug culture.

Queerpuppy ... Not sure if this has anything to do with responsibility.

The First Amendment is about what kind of laws Congress can pass.

If you're in my house and you say my mum will spend eternity wearing corduroy because she smells like a pineapple, I can ask you to leave.

If duncvis decides a thread is offensive, it's his prerogative to take action. Thats what a moderator does.

Neither example is subject to the First Amendment.



Last edited by rhubarbnocustard on 22 Mar 2005, 7:54 am, edited 2 times in total.

duncvis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,642
Location: The valleys of green and grey

22 Mar 2005, 7:50 am

Please pay attention. This is not Comedy Central. This is a forum with a clearly stated site policy which is not up for discussion. If you post further offensive comments people won't have to read them - because they will be edited, and I have no intention of allowing any member to run ther mouth at the expense of other members. Further deliberately provocative remarks in the manner exhibited in the fundamentalism thread will not be tolerated. :evil:


_________________
I'm usually smarter than this.

www.last.fm/user/nursethescreams <<my last.fm thingy

FOR THE HORDE!


Roman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,298

22 Mar 2005, 7:55 am

You are correct that you can't be LEGALLY punished for expressed ideas. What you are missing, though, is that being banned from PRIVATELY HELD forum, or having your posts deletted on the same is NOT a legal punishment. Technically speaking, a mod is allowed to drop a coin and randomly ban people/delete posts on their own amusement. For instance, there are forums where you lose a regular member status if you don't post for a very long period of time. Now you aren't going to complain that it is a violation of freedom of speech that they are making you post regularly. Thats because no one is "making" you do anything. You have a right to express whatever ideas you want, but AT THE SAME TIME, the moderator has a right to ban whomever they want. Since being banned from private forum isn't a legal punishment, you can't complain that your freedom of speech is violated.



duncvis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,642
Location: The valleys of green and grey

22 Mar 2005, 8:08 am

The moderators follow the site policy and to some extent their own judgement when deciding if action needs to be taken on a thread. Also, as explained in the site policy, a procedure is followed before a member is banned from the site, which only happens in extreme circumstances. Threads are not edited at random. I did not find this amusing; it annoys and frustrates me when members refuse to show respect for others. The rules are there for all to follow, to reduce conflict and hostility on the boards and to encourage all members to feel comfortable posting. I am not going to comment further on this matter, I feel I have made myself pretty clear hopefully. :roll:

Dunc


_________________
I'm usually smarter than this.

www.last.fm/user/nursethescreams <<my last.fm thingy

FOR THE HORDE!


Roman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,298

22 Mar 2005, 8:13 am

duncvis wrote:
The moderators follow the site policy and to some extent their own judgement when deciding if action needs to be taken on a thread. Also, as explained in the site policy, a procedure is followed before a member is banned from the site, which only happens in extreme circumstances. Threads are not edited at random. I did not find this amusing; it annoys and frustrates me when members refuse to show respect for others. The rules are there for all to follow, to reduce conflict and hostility on the boards and to encourage all members to feel comfortable posting. I am not going to comment further on this matter, I feel I have made myself pretty clear hopefully. :roll:

Dunc


Okay when I said ammusement I was just trying to emphasise my point in sarcastic way so that he won't complain its a free speach violation.

However, it still stands that you are allowed to come up with your own rules on the forum, quite independantly of the governmental rules. If you were to tell parliament, or police, or whatever follow your own rules it won't work. But when you are having a PRIVATE forum then you have a right to establish whatever rules you want. This pretty much takes care of any first-commandment-based-objections.



duncvis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,642
Location: The valleys of green and grey

22 Mar 2005, 8:14 am

You are correct Roman; I was trying to clarify my reasons for taking action regarding offensive comments when necessary. :)


_________________
I'm usually smarter than this.

www.last.fm/user/nursethescreams <<my last.fm thingy

FOR THE HORDE!


Roman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,298

22 Mar 2005, 8:18 am

The only reason I responded this way was that he was appealing to First Amandment.



duncvis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,642
Location: The valleys of green and grey

22 Mar 2005, 8:33 am

Understood, no offence taken.


_________________
I'm usually smarter than this.

www.last.fm/user/nursethescreams <<my last.fm thingy

FOR THE HORDE!


thechadmaster
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,126
Location: On The Road...Somewhere

22 Mar 2005, 11:05 am

Roman wrote:
You are correct that you can't be LEGALLY punished for expressed ideas. What you are missing, though, is that being banned from PRIVATELY HELD forum, or having your posts deletted on the same is NOT a legal punishment. Technically speaking, a mod is allowed to drop a coin and randomly ban people/delete posts on their own amusement. For instance, there are forums where you lose a regular member status if you don't post for a very long period of time. Now you aren't going to complain that it is a violation of freedom of speech that they are making you post regularly. Thats because no one is "making" you do anything. You have a right to express whatever ideas you want, but AT THE SAME TIME, the moderator has a right to ban whomever they want. Since being banned from private forum isn't a legal punishment, you can't complain that your freedom of speech is violated.

GOD Bless America



vetivert
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,769

22 Mar 2005, 11:20 am

thechadmaster wrote:
GOD Bless America


well, someone needs to.

thought i might mention at this juncture that dunc is, in fact, site admin, as well as a moderator. although i suppose it's best to play with the big boys if you're going to fight at all.

"isms" stink, whether it's racism, homophobia, sexism, ageism, able-ism, etc., etc. and anything-ists are just scared of the power of the groups they attack. i don't need to attack someone else's religion/race/sexuality etc. on "moral", or even spiritual, grounds, cos i'm confident about my own spirituality/race/sexuality etc. i WILL attack isms, though. until i die.



thechadmaster
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,126
Location: On The Road...Somewhere

22 Mar 2005, 3:00 pm

vetivert wrote:
thechadmaster wrote:
GOD Bless America


well, someone needs to.

thought i might mention at this juncture that dunc is, in fact, site admin, as well as a moderator. although i suppose it's best to play with the big boys if you're going to fight at all.

"isms" stink, whether it's racism, homophobia, sexism, ageism, able-ism, etc., etc. and anything-ists are just scared of the power of the groups they attack. i don't need to attack someone else's religion/race/sexuality etc. on "moral", or even spiritual, grounds, cos i'm confident about my own spirituality/race/sexuality etc. i WILL attack isms, though. until i die.
So you would attack CatholicISM?