The Politicization of Misc.

[Squiggy]

I think people should be able to talk about whatever they want. I thought this was America.

*looks around*

Oh look, it is.

That's not what he first amendment grants.

That's not freedom of speech? Which one is it then.

The First Amendment only applies to the government. "Congress shall make no law...". It says nothing about "...or any private entity too."

A private company can do whatever it wants to do. You've never had the unfettered to say or do whatever you want, whenever you want, where ever you want.

 

[SeerSGB]

That's not what he first amendment grants.

That's not freedom of speech? Which one is it then.

The First Amendment only applies to the government. "Congress shall make no law...". It says nothing about "...or any private entity too."

A private company can do whatever it wants to do. You've never had the unfettered to say or do whatever you want, whenever you want, where ever you want.

Bingo. Try your job, for example, you can't just walk in there and say anything and not expect to be handed your termination papers. Walk into a movie theater and sit in the back and call out the ending to a popular movie and see what happens to you. Or get on the six o'clock news and says the city council is a bunch of sheep fucking pedophiles and use a stopwatch to see how long it takes for your ass to be sued.

Time and time again it had been proven that the US doe not, and never has, had 100% freedom of speech.

 

[John Picard]

That's not freedom of speech? Which one is it then.

The First Amendment only applies to the government. "Congress shall make no law...". It says nothing about "...or any private entity too."

A private company can do whatever it wants to do. You've never had the unfettered to say or do whatever you want, whenever you want, where ever you want.

Bingo. Try your job, for example, you can't just walk in there and say anything and not expect to be handed your termination papers. Walk into a movie theater and sit in the back and call out the ending to a popular movie and see what happens to you. Or get on the six o'clock news and says the city council is a bunch of sheep fucking pedophiles and use a stopwatch to see how long it takes for your ass to be sued.

Time and time again it had been proven that the US doe not, and never has, had 100% freedom of speech.

*sigh* I hate, hate, HATE it when people scream "FIRST AMENDMENT" and never comprehend how it applies.

 

[Squiggy]

Federalist.

 

[John Picard]

Federalist.

You sir, are treading on *dangerous ground*. I daresay, that should you continue to slander my honour any further, we shall have to settle this like gentlemen.

 

[gturner]

Federalist.

You sir, are treading on *dangerous ground*. I daresay, that should you continue to slander my honour any further, we shall have to settle this like gentlemen.

Um, like John Edwards and his wife?

Disgraced former presidential candidate John Edwards reportedly beat his cancer-stricken wife during a horrific marriage-ending fight.

"John lost his temper big time," a close friend of Elizabeth's revealed to the National Enquirer. "She has the divorce papers drawn up, but she can amend them to charge John with domestic violence."

NY Post link

You can't really say my comment is politicizing miscellaneous because Edwards has self-destructed far beyond the point of being any kind of political figure. Now he's just tabloid sleaze.

 

[Kestra]

Not BLAMING you, so much as discussing it with someone that appeared to be in a position to help deal with it. You claim to be generally arguing the same point I am, so not sure why you're being defensive about it, as it seems you've done all you can if you've brought it up to the Admins several times and been told to shut up...

Locutus seems like one of the mods that is more proactive about this sort of thing. He often posts in the "controversial" threads in Misc both as a poster and as a mod. The defensive thing might just come from the fact that he feels he's doing all he can in what's an obviously difficult matter that's not entirely under his control. Some of the things you're suggesting seem more like policy issues that would be better brought up with admins, although I don't know how that's done.

Sorry, not trying to sidetrack your convo, I just think he's a damn good mod and I think he has one of the more constructive attitudes on the board.

 

[TheLonelySquire]

Other mods have given posters trolling warnings in the past and have had them overturned in MA. You have to make sure it's a pretty slam dunk, open-and-shut case before giving a trolling warning, because they have a higher burden than something as simple as a flame.

Are you taken out back and beaten if a warning ends up being overturned? It would at least raise the issue, rather than ignoring it. If you feel there's an issue, and ignore it, have you (general you, not YOU) really helped things?

Despite your usual simplistic and lacking in facts or behind-the-scenes context posts on board policy,

Didn't realize it was delicate international negotiations or rocket science, either. And as T'Bonz is fond of reminding us, it's not a democracy, the staff can do whatever they want. Can't much speak to my lack of knowlegde of "behind the scenes" stuff, as it's all double-secret, and not often shared with us lowly peons. And as I have no access to the BR, nor interest in being a mod to gain access, all I can do is base things off of what I see in public. Use the extra knowledge as you see fit, but don't blame me for not knowing things that are intentionally hidden from me.

good, that's what you're supposed to do...

Again, are you punished if it's a judgement call, you act on your judgement, and it's later overturned? Not seeing the downside, I guess. Other than going hog-wild with it, Enterpriser-style, and being removed from power, but even then, so what?

A pattern of that still ought to count for something, even if it's just tallied up for an eventually warning for repeated behavior. Or at least it's evidence to bring up if your judgement call warning gets questioned in MA, I guess. Maybe more friendlies is a good start, since you can't really argue or overturn those, anyway?

Can't speak to how often these are discussed behind closed doors, but as an example, TLS's borderline trolling Avatar should be recognized as such, especially since it would only really be appropriate in TNZ, and since he's banned from TNZ, it's mostly just to provoke reaction in Misc threads, like the ones we're discussing. Can't speak to whether you have had these discussions with an Admin or not, since you're telling me you don't have to power to issue any warnings, or PM people asking that they change them.

Wouldn't this be the definition of the "proof" you say is preventing you from making a judgement call and issuing a warning? If you can link to a repeated pattern of behavior, seems like a slam-dunk to me. Then again, I'm just a simplistic, lacking-in-facts poster

Would think it's between the Misc mods and the Admins, not sure why the Trek Lit mod would get a vote, for example. What was the result of the last time you took this issue to the admins? Bonz doesn't seem to be the type to wring her hands and fret over what to do. Seems like usually nothing happens until something HAS to, and then Bonz flies off the handle and arbitrarily bans topics for a random amount of time...

Not BLAMING you, so much as discussing it with someone that appeared to be in a position to help deal with it. You claim to be generally arguing the same point I am, so not sure why you're being defensive about it, as it seems you've done all you can if you've brought it up to the Admins several times and been told to shut up...

Or you're just being obstinate for the hell of it, in which case I don't care to argue it any more.

Not agreeing with your statements doesn't mean anything personal. You're being addressed as a person in a position of power, as a Mod of the forum. Don't try to equate it to a TNZ argument and get pissy over it. Calling me simplistic and obstinate probably isn't the best way to go about it, either. rarely results in cooler heads prevailing...

I've always striven to be honest and straightforward with you guys about explaining my actions and mod actions in general, and I don't appreciate what I'm saying being sloughed off as simply not caring or not trying hard enough because you don't find it satisfactory.

when the same problems keep happening, threads keep popping up, and the Staff has to come in and ban discussion topics, who would be the CORRECT person to address? Someone somewhere hasn't done enough, as it keeps happening. You're a Mod of the forum, so you get asked about it first, because it has your name on it. If YOU are arguing these same points to the others, and being shot down, then say so, as we're talking about the PROBLEM, not who to blame. When you get derided for asking the mod of a forum about a problem IN the forum, one that keeps happening, and keeps being started by the same few posters, not sure what you're supposed to do next...

Gee Scout, it's a tad hard to sympathize with your claim of inflammatory avatars when you have such a horribly offensive signature line. Not to politicize but such offensive comments may even cost Rahm Emmanuel his job. Do you really feel it's appropriate for Misc or any other forum here? It's just funny that you can't see the hypocrisy in your post.

 

[John Picard]

Other mods have given posters trolling warnings in the past and have had them overturned in MA. You have to make sure it's a pretty slam dunk, open-and-shut case before giving a trolling warning, because they have a higher burden than something as simple as a flame.

Are you taken out back and beaten if a warning ends up being overturned? It would at least raise the issue, rather than ignoring it. If you feel there's an issue, and ignore it, have you (general you, not YOU) really helped things?


Didn't realize it was delicate international negotiations or rocket science, either. And as T'Bonz is fond of reminding us, it's not a democracy, the staff can do whatever they want. Can't much speak to my lack of knowlegde of "behind the scenes" stuff, as it's all double-secret, and not often shared with us lowly peons. And as I have no access to the BR, nor interest in being a mod to gain access, all I can do is base things off of what I see in public. Use the extra knowledge as you see fit, but don't blame me for not knowing things that are intentionally hidden from me.

good, that's what you're supposed to do...

Again, are you punished if it's a judgement call, you act on your judgement, and it's later overturned? Not seeing the downside, I guess. Other than going hog-wild with it, Enterpriser-style, and being removed from power, but even then, so what?

A pattern of that still ought to count for something, even if it's just tallied up for an eventually warning for repeated behavior. Or at least it's evidence to bring up if your judgement call warning gets questioned in MA, I guess. Maybe more friendlies is a good start, since you can't really argue or overturn those, anyway?

Can't speak to how often these are discussed behind closed doors, but as an example, TLS's borderline trolling Avatar should be recognized as such, especially since it would only really be appropriate in TNZ, and since he's banned from TNZ, it's mostly just to provoke reaction in Misc threads, like the ones we're discussing. Can't speak to whether you have had these discussions with an Admin or not, since you're telling me you don't have to power to issue any warnings, or PM people asking that they change them.

Wouldn't this be the definition of the "proof" you say is preventing you from making a judgement call and issuing a warning? If you can link to a repeated pattern of behavior, seems like a slam-dunk to me. Then again, I'm just a simplistic, lacking-in-facts poster

Would think it's between the Misc mods and the Admins, not sure why the Trek Lit mod would get a vote, for example. What was the result of the last time you took this issue to the admins? Bonz doesn't seem to be the type to wring her hands and fret over what to do. Seems like usually nothing happens until something HAS to, and then Bonz flies off the handle and arbitrarily bans topics for a random amount of time...

Not BLAMING you, so much as discussing it with someone that appeared to be in a position to help deal with it. You claim to be generally arguing the same point I am, so not sure why you're being defensive about it, as it seems you've done all you can if you've brought it up to the Admins several times and been told to shut up...

Not agreeing with your statements doesn't mean anything personal. You're being addressed as a person in a position of power, as a Mod of the forum. Don't try to equate it to a TNZ argument and get pissy over it. Calling me simplistic and obstinate probably isn't the best way to go about it, either. rarely results in cooler heads prevailing...

I've always striven to be honest and straightforward with you guys about explaining my actions and mod actions in general, and I don't appreciate what I'm saying being sloughed off as simply not caring or not trying hard enough because you don't find it satisfactory.

when the same problems keep happening, threads keep popping up, and the Staff has to come in and ban discussion topics, who would be the CORRECT person to address? Someone somewhere hasn't done enough, as it keeps happening. You're a Mod of the forum, so you get asked about it first, because it has your name on it. If YOU are arguing these same points to the others, and being shot down, then say so, as we're talking about the PROBLEM, not who to blame. When you get derided for asking the mod of a forum about a problem IN the forum, one that keeps happening, and keeps being started by the same few posters, not sure what you're supposed to do next...

Gee Scout, it's a tad hard to sympathize with your claim of inflammatory avatars when you have such a horribly offensive signature line. Not to politicize but such offensive comments may even cost Rahm Emmanuel his job. Do you really feel it's appropriate for Misc or any other forum here? It's just funny that you can't see the hypocrisy in your post.

Going to have to agree with TLS here. Scout's sigline is beyond juvenile and really in bad taste. Actually, there's bad taste, and then there's Scout's sigline, which goes above and beyond into just plain pathetic.

 

[Garak]

In reality though TLS is just trolling Scout in his usual fashion, he doesn't care if the sig is offensive or not. It's what he does. Well that and obsess about gays.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

And with that the topic is closed, because we're just going to start having to hand out infractions from now on if we keep it open.