Blue and Taz, you can remove an offensive POST, can't you? I see no reason whatsoever why a thread should be removed unless it's because that its originating POST should be removed (otherwise, in no other case). But, having said that, only extreme cases of POSTS with persistent personal antagonism and/or name-calling should be worth deleting, imho, but never a THREAD that starts out as usual.
Is the Jacko thread lost? If not, and if enough people want it back, can it be restored? I, for one, still have it on my computer. Personally, I see the dissappearance of the Jacko thread and subsequent talk about it as possibly misrepresenting of posters, including myself, and as ill considered censorship. I've made more specific points regarding this in the Management forum.
Should threads be removed?
-
bambooneedle
- Posts: 4533
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:02 pm
- Location: a few thousand miles south east of Zanzibar
-
verbal gymnastics
- Posts: 13657
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 6:44 am
- Location: Magic lantern land
Saying that, do we need to keep posts that have not been responded to for a long time? Whilst there may be interesting comments/praise/thanks etc do we still need to keep them up? We could, for example, delete threads that haven't been looked at for 6 months. Being a computer illiterate, do these threads take up a lot of memory or does it not matter? It just seems pointless to me to keep these threads.
It would be particularly interesting to hear views form the new members of the board eg did reading the old threads help make up your mind to join?
If we can have some advanced warning of ones to be deleted then we can save any ones we may wish to*
VG
* can someone tell me how I'd do that?
It would be particularly interesting to hear views form the new members of the board eg did reading the old threads help make up your mind to join?
If we can have some advanced warning of ones to be deleted then we can save any ones we may wish to*
VG
* can someone tell me how I'd do that?
Who’s this kid with his mumbo jumbo?
-
laughingcrow
- Posts: 2476
- Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:35 am
Hey, the Wacko Jacko thing was a thread I started because I wanted people's opinions on him..and got them. I dunno how people started on about theology...and I barely bothered reading it (as its always the same old diatribe in one form or another), but I can only assume someone got all upset again and asked for it to be taken down, or maybe Bluey and Taz thought someone would be upset...I dunno, did I miss someone saying something naughty?
I do think that stuff should be taken off if it is really offensive without any reasoning...but at the end of the day, I d rather see posts removed than the whole thread.
Some of the old stuff we've talked about has been really good so should be kept for the annals of time, other stuff sucks..like when you make a post and noone replies
oh the shame!
Maybe Michael Jackson threatened to sue the board!
I do think that stuff should be taken off if it is really offensive without any reasoning...but at the end of the day, I d rather see posts removed than the whole thread.
Some of the old stuff we've talked about has been really good so should be kept for the annals of time, other stuff sucks..like when you make a post and noone replies
oh the shame!Maybe Michael Jackson threatened to sue the board!
At the risk of looking like a prude, and I might be one, I think posts with sexual pictures and explicit content should be pulled. There are thousands of websites with sex as their purpose. And there are people who will reduce anything to a sexual level. But since this site purports to be about Elvis and other more intelectual topics, and many people want to participate while at work, seems like there should be a limit.
I would rather not have to cover up my computer screen when my kids or my students come up to ask me a question.
As for the other category, how would you feel if something that deeply offended YOU was left up? If someone from the KKK gets on here and starts promoting their beliefs, should that be left on? Kiddie Porn?
But then that's always the problem with censorship, isn't it? Who will stand up for common sense?
I would rather not have to cover up my computer screen when my kids or my students come up to ask me a question.
As for the other category, how would you feel if something that deeply offended YOU was left up? If someone from the KKK gets on here and starts promoting their beliefs, should that be left on? Kiddie Porn?
But then that's always the problem with censorship, isn't it? Who will stand up for common sense?
Don't bury me 'cause I'm not dead yet.
But why was the Michael Jackson post pulled? The last I saw of it there was the usual theological back and forth, nothing incredibly defamatory. I don't like this unusual air of censorship.
Cut off our famous trouble-makers from the past boards, fine, rubbish people who post waste of time messages (like the Justin Timberlake one I remember). But why take off a thread because there was a bit of grown up debate going on? Unless the thread took some bizarre racist paedophilic twist that I missed.
DrJ
What planet are you from??!!?? There's never been anything like that on this forum. But many thanks for stating the bleedin' obvious.Lipstick wrote:At the risk of looking like a prude, and I might be one, I think posts with sexual pictures and explicit content should be pulled. There are thousands of websites with sex as their purpose.
...
As for the other category, how would you feel if something that deeply offended YOU was left up? If someone from the KKK gets on here and starts promoting their beliefs, should that be left on? Kiddie Porn?
Cut off our famous trouble-makers from the past boards, fine, rubbish people who post waste of time messages (like the Justin Timberlake one I remember). But why take off a thread because there was a bit of grown up debate going on? Unless the thread took some bizarre racist paedophilic twist that I missed.
DrJ
Tlentifini Maarhaysu
Not sure which part of my post you're ridiculing.
But to clarify, there was a thread just a few weeks ago called "Top 5 erogenous zones," and nude photography shows up on a variety of threads. I think a warning in the title is enough to ward off people like me who don't want to see it, if people will follow through and actually bother to do it.
The reference to KKK topics, etc., was a What If example. Which is why it starts out, "How would you feel if..."
Are there no topics that should be deleted?
On the Jacko thread I didn't see anything that was any worse than I have seen here before, although I may not have seen everything written before it was pulled. Perhaps our host was hoping to steer conversation in a more productive direction.
But to clarify, there was a thread just a few weeks ago called "Top 5 erogenous zones," and nude photography shows up on a variety of threads. I think a warning in the title is enough to ward off people like me who don't want to see it, if people will follow through and actually bother to do it.
The reference to KKK topics, etc., was a What If example. Which is why it starts out, "How would you feel if..."
Are there no topics that should be deleted?
On the Jacko thread I didn't see anything that was any worse than I have seen here before, although I may not have seen everything written before it was pulled. Perhaps our host was hoping to steer conversation in a more productive direction.
Don't bury me 'cause I'm not dead yet.
Wow...so the topic about threads being deleted has started it's own controversy and potential name-calling.
Debate is perfectly acceptable, the differing opinions are what keep the board interesting and alive.
BlueChair has already commented that we are not going to delete threads, however, posts containing any personal attacks will be deleted and if there are repeated situations then that user will be subject to their IP being banned.
Thanks,
Taz
Debate is perfectly acceptable, the differing opinions are what keep the board interesting and alive.
BlueChair has already commented that we are not going to delete threads, however, posts containing any personal attacks will be deleted and if there are repeated situations then that user will be subject to their IP being banned.
Thanks,
Taz
A lot of Christians wear crosses around their necks. Do you think when Jesus comes back he ever wants to see a fuckin' cross? It's kind of like going up to Jackie Onassis with a rifle pendant on.
-
noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
Sorry I was a bit narky and sarky earlier on, but I just felt that the sudden jump to KKK and paedophilia reminded me of Sky News-type hysteria. I felt you were highlighting something that hasn't been a problem here at elviscostellofans.com, and I didn't see the point. Think of the children, wont somebody think of the children!!! Yes let's keep things above board, etc, etc, but I really haven't found anything objectionable on this board which, incidentally, is one of the few websites not blocked at my workplace.
...plus I'm really quite nice here, in real life I curse a lot.
DrJ
...plus I'm really quite nice here, in real life I curse a lot.
DrJ
Tlentifini Maarhaysu
-
A rope leash
- Posts: 1835
- Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 6:47 pm
- Location: southern misery, USA
I'll say what I damn well please.
Censorship is wrong because 
!
Free speech is the American way. We must allow the KKK to mouth off. We must allow the preaching of damnation. We must have pictures of nekkid people.
Now, whether or not the Elvis forum wants real free speech is up to the Elvis forum. This place has become sort of a hangout for lefties, I must agree, and I like to think that Elvis and I had something to do with that. But it has also been truly eloquent arguments from all the leftie fans of Elvis who speak out against war, greed, and oppression on the rare occaision that someone comes in here thinking war, greed, and oppression are good things. If there are any staunch Republicans out there reading our forum, they haven't felt the need to defend themselves much, and I'd like to think that's because they know the dog will bite them in the ass.
Now, I know I shouldnaa oughta said some of the things I've said about the religious. Please note my careful use of such qualifiers as "many", "some", and "most". We are all painted with the broad brush of our associations, and that's just natural human tendencies. If someone is offended by my words, well, I'm not surprised. What I want is an argument, a reasonable pastime for the brain. If I say that God does not exist and it offends someone who can show no proof that God does exist, why should it bother me? I think it must be awful to see something and feel something and know something absolutely incredible, and yet not be able to show this incredible thing to another person.
In the spirit of free speech, The Noises and others should grace this board with the details of their religious endeavours. I, for one, am very interested in the specifics of various belief systems. I find it fascinating. I'm always spewing off about my agnostic ways, so by all means let's hear about what you believe in. It's way more "professional" than talking about Jackwad or the Beastie-Beach Boys. I mean, unless that's what you really talk about in your social circle.
If the Elvis forums wants to ban speech that could be considered inflammatory, then I believe that it has every right to do so. The scale of my addiction to the board is such that I would probably curtail the bile in order to be accepted. But, on the other hand, euthanasia might become appropriate.
Whatever happens, I've got enough real people to hold grudges against, so I don't really hold any among youse folks, no matter how combative our relationships might be. I sure don't hold any ill will for Noise, and I would gladly sacrifice my board entity if it meant that he could go on posting forever.
Maybe Blue and Taz could come up with a sppech policy that we could vote on. I agree that sexual explicitness is not right for this board. That, in my mind, means hard porn intended to arouse, not a nude painting or dirty joke. I believe the F bomb should be used freely. I do not like explicit violence or gore in any form, and would ask that such depictions carry a warning.
Here's to hoping you're not too pissed off!
!Free speech is the American way. We must allow the KKK to mouth off. We must allow the preaching of damnation. We must have pictures of nekkid people.
Now, whether or not the Elvis forum wants real free speech is up to the Elvis forum. This place has become sort of a hangout for lefties, I must agree, and I like to think that Elvis and I had something to do with that. But it has also been truly eloquent arguments from all the leftie fans of Elvis who speak out against war, greed, and oppression on the rare occaision that someone comes in here thinking war, greed, and oppression are good things. If there are any staunch Republicans out there reading our forum, they haven't felt the need to defend themselves much, and I'd like to think that's because they know the dog will bite them in the ass.
Now, I know I shouldnaa oughta said some of the things I've said about the religious. Please note my careful use of such qualifiers as "many", "some", and "most". We are all painted with the broad brush of our associations, and that's just natural human tendencies. If someone is offended by my words, well, I'm not surprised. What I want is an argument, a reasonable pastime for the brain. If I say that God does not exist and it offends someone who can show no proof that God does exist, why should it bother me? I think it must be awful to see something and feel something and know something absolutely incredible, and yet not be able to show this incredible thing to another person.
In the spirit of free speech, The Noises and others should grace this board with the details of their religious endeavours. I, for one, am very interested in the specifics of various belief systems. I find it fascinating. I'm always spewing off about my agnostic ways, so by all means let's hear about what you believe in. It's way more "professional" than talking about Jackwad or the Beastie-Beach Boys. I mean, unless that's what you really talk about in your social circle.
If the Elvis forums wants to ban speech that could be considered inflammatory, then I believe that it has every right to do so. The scale of my addiction to the board is such that I would probably curtail the bile in order to be accepted. But, on the other hand, euthanasia might become appropriate.
Whatever happens, I've got enough real people to hold grudges against, so I don't really hold any among youse folks, no matter how combative our relationships might be. I sure don't hold any ill will for Noise, and I would gladly sacrifice my board entity if it meant that he could go on posting forever.
Maybe Blue and Taz could come up with a sppech policy that we could vote on. I agree that sexual explicitness is not right for this board. That, in my mind, means hard porn intended to arouse, not a nude painting or dirty joke. I believe the F bomb should be used freely. I do not like explicit violence or gore in any form, and would ask that such depictions carry a warning.
Here's to hoping you're not too pissed off!
-
noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
Rope,
Our posting is not mutually exclusive, nor have I ever asked you not to post. Recntly, I asked you to watch where you were swinging your fist, as the end of my nose was getting zonked. That's not the same thing as asking you not to speak or censoring you. And I'm not offended that you don't think God exists. I've never been offended by that. I have been offended by statements which painted Christians as morons, barbarians, bigots, and the like. That's not me. There are Christian bigots and barbarians, but then there are bigots and barbarians of every creed. There are bigoted atheist barbarians, too. I don't think either of us fits those categories, and we should respect that about each other. And I for one am not pissed off right now. I was and I vented. I feel much better.
You raised an interesting possibility, but it's one I tend to avoid for reasons I will explain below. That of trying to explain my experiences with God. First, I'm not sure very many people would be interested in that. Second, I'm not sure this would be an appropriate forum, even if people were interested. Third, I have no desire to step out on a limb only to be jumped for it. These are deeply personal matters for me and to expose them is something I do only with people I feel completely safe with. This board and its previous incarnations have had their share of nutjobs, and I'm not wild about leaving myself wide open like that. Even though I think most people would be respectful and engage in thoughtful discussion, I feel confident that it wouldn't be too long before the broad brush of "most Christians" was being applied to me. And I don't really need that. Finally, I am not God's apologist. I am not burdened--at all--by the "Great Commision" concept that it's somehow my job to enlighten the world about Christ. I firmly believe that God is more than capable of handling his own PR. That's why I'm uninterested in debate about the existence of God. It profits nothing. It's all been done before, by men and women much more capable than either you or I, and yet here we are at loggerheads even 2,000 later.
Nevertheless, if there were real interest by parties willing to discuss matters of faith without resorting to namecalling and ridicule, I'd be willing to try to explain what I have experienced. I'm not sure I am capable of putting it into words in this type of forum with any meaningful results. (And I'm really not sure if it's even a good idea, given the last couple of days.) But for what it's worth, I'm not totally opposed to the idea of discussing these matters.
Our posting is not mutually exclusive, nor have I ever asked you not to post. Recntly, I asked you to watch where you were swinging your fist, as the end of my nose was getting zonked. That's not the same thing as asking you not to speak or censoring you. And I'm not offended that you don't think God exists. I've never been offended by that. I have been offended by statements which painted Christians as morons, barbarians, bigots, and the like. That's not me. There are Christian bigots and barbarians, but then there are bigots and barbarians of every creed. There are bigoted atheist barbarians, too. I don't think either of us fits those categories, and we should respect that about each other. And I for one am not pissed off right now. I was and I vented. I feel much better.
You raised an interesting possibility, but it's one I tend to avoid for reasons I will explain below. That of trying to explain my experiences with God. First, I'm not sure very many people would be interested in that. Second, I'm not sure this would be an appropriate forum, even if people were interested. Third, I have no desire to step out on a limb only to be jumped for it. These are deeply personal matters for me and to expose them is something I do only with people I feel completely safe with. This board and its previous incarnations have had their share of nutjobs, and I'm not wild about leaving myself wide open like that. Even though I think most people would be respectful and engage in thoughtful discussion, I feel confident that it wouldn't be too long before the broad brush of "most Christians" was being applied to me. And I don't really need that. Finally, I am not God's apologist. I am not burdened--at all--by the "Great Commision" concept that it's somehow my job to enlighten the world about Christ. I firmly believe that God is more than capable of handling his own PR. That's why I'm uninterested in debate about the existence of God. It profits nothing. It's all been done before, by men and women much more capable than either you or I, and yet here we are at loggerheads even 2,000 later.
Nevertheless, if there were real interest by parties willing to discuss matters of faith without resorting to namecalling and ridicule, I'd be willing to try to explain what I have experienced. I'm not sure I am capable of putting it into words in this type of forum with any meaningful results. (And I'm really not sure if it's even a good idea, given the last couple of days.) But for what it's worth, I'm not totally opposed to the idea of discussing these matters.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
--William Shakespeare
--William Shakespeare
-
Misha
- Posts: 733
- Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2003 6:59 pm
- Location: Northern Cold England, and Los Angeles, CA
Ok, my $ .02...
I say delete a thread if it is old and no one has touched it in awhile....someone above said six months....I'm good with that.
When I was newer than I am now, I read a lot of the old crap to let me know what was going on and what I missed...
But, all this data has to take up space. If no one has dusted the thread off in awhile, I say chuck it. If the topic needs to be created again, it can be....
Individual posting deletions on old stuff would be really frustrating. I speak from experience. In reading the old stuff, there were pictures deleted, or people would reference changes, but I had nothing to compare it to, so it was annoying. Plus, that involves Blue and Taz reading every damn post and then deleting things they thought were attacks. Leave stuff there if the post is active, it will help the new folks figure out who is who and what they think, good and bad.
I don't really care that the Wacko thread is gone. I watched you all debate theology, and it was getting old, so all the better. It was a wacko thread. So, stick to wacko topics. If anyone wants a Religious Free For All thread, make one and then debate that stuff there. Remember, no one is going to change anyone's mind on an Elvis Costello message board. I like ARL and Noise both,,,so far....
Now, about the nudity and adulty stuff. There hasn't been anything even remotely wild on here. We had a naked butt on the cover of Playboy posted...oh, my virgin eyes!!! Please.....
If you are going to post a photo marginally racy...post NC17 in the description.
If you see people breaking this rule, stop checking this site where kids will see it.
The world should not be the protector of children and what they see. The caregiver should.
This is a forum for adults...I think, unless I have assumed incorrectly and somehow you are all in middle school and having sleep overs that I know nothing about....so, let's be adults and talk of adult things....and as long as I'm not seeing ovaries or testicles, I'm ok with this.
Ooops, soapbox again......
I say delete a thread if it is old and no one has touched it in awhile....someone above said six months....I'm good with that.
When I was newer than I am now, I read a lot of the old crap to let me know what was going on and what I missed...
But, all this data has to take up space. If no one has dusted the thread off in awhile, I say chuck it. If the topic needs to be created again, it can be....
Individual posting deletions on old stuff would be really frustrating. I speak from experience. In reading the old stuff, there were pictures deleted, or people would reference changes, but I had nothing to compare it to, so it was annoying. Plus, that involves Blue and Taz reading every damn post and then deleting things they thought were attacks. Leave stuff there if the post is active, it will help the new folks figure out who is who and what they think, good and bad.
I don't really care that the Wacko thread is gone. I watched you all debate theology, and it was getting old, so all the better. It was a wacko thread. So, stick to wacko topics. If anyone wants a Religious Free For All thread, make one and then debate that stuff there. Remember, no one is going to change anyone's mind on an Elvis Costello message board. I like ARL and Noise both,,,so far....
Now, about the nudity and adulty stuff. There hasn't been anything even remotely wild on here. We had a naked butt on the cover of Playboy posted...oh, my virgin eyes!!! Please.....
If you are going to post a photo marginally racy...post NC17 in the description.
If you see people breaking this rule, stop checking this site where kids will see it.
The world should not be the protector of children and what they see. The caregiver should.
This is a forum for adults...I think, unless I have assumed incorrectly and somehow you are all in middle school and having sleep overs that I know nothing about....so, let's be adults and talk of adult things....and as long as I'm not seeing ovaries or testicles, I'm ok with this.
Ooops, soapbox again......
Where are the strong?
Who are the trusted?
Who are the trusted?
-
Copenhagen Fan
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:00 am
- Location: København, DK
- Contact:
Censorship is bogus....
Why should the weak and febile of mind decide what is "offensive"?
By the way, personal attacks are not that bad really, Noize has ripped my head off and shit down my neck verbally when he feels it's warranted...I'm still hurting from his scalding attack on Jerry Garcia....
Why should the weak and febile of mind decide what is "offensive"?
By the way, personal attacks are not that bad really, Noize has ripped my head off and shit down my neck verbally when he feels it's warranted...I'm still hurting from his scalding attack on Jerry Garcia....
I'd never leave the house if I had a Gimp
-
laughingcrow
- Posts: 2476
- Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:35 am
Yeah it was me that posted a pic of a the cover of a jazz mag which had an EC interview in, and it (as these magazines tend to) had a naked bum on it.
Seeing as it's been brough up again
I'll just say it would only be offensive to muslim people in the arabian states who cover up ladies for religous reasons (and if there are any who saw it I apologise)..someone said that they could get in trouble at work for having it on their computer while they browsed the net whilst at work...fair enough, so we agreed to have a big bumper sticker NC17 on a post if it had something so scandalous in it.
That and the top ten erogenous zones thing are the most controversial things that have been on this site...and they're fine as far as Im concerned, nothing to worry about or get fussed about at all. Their is a hell of a lot worse in your news everyday and elsewhere on the net.
Sorry to reiterate the same old stuff, but chill pills need to be taken...this is just a sodding web forum, not life or death.
Seeing as it's been brough up again
I'll just say it would only be offensive to muslim people in the arabian states who cover up ladies for religous reasons (and if there are any who saw it I apologise)..someone said that they could get in trouble at work for having it on their computer while they browsed the net whilst at work...fair enough, so we agreed to have a big bumper sticker NC17 on a post if it had something so scandalous in it.That and the top ten erogenous zones thing are the most controversial things that have been on this site...and they're fine as far as Im concerned, nothing to worry about or get fussed about at all. Their is a hell of a lot worse in your news everyday and elsewhere on the net.
Sorry to reiterate the same old stuff, but chill pills need to be taken...this is just a sodding web forum, not life or death.
-
Copenhagen Fan
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:00 am
- Location: København, DK
- Contact:
I still think it's weird that certain people here try to silence others and censor them, along with treat them harshly and with a prejudice that is unbecoming of the board. Why is everything so black and white?? Good guys and bad guys? A little disention is healthy, unless you live in the Soviet Union or Victorian England.
It seems hypocritical, when abuse on the board is not allowed, but certain "good guys" can bust loose on the bad guys, using the "forbiden behavior" as a tool.....it just seems so inherently idiotic to condemn the use of a single name on the site, and to make it a type of blasphemy, when everything should be open to discussion. It just reeks of the worst hypocritical double standard type of behavior that smells of witch hunts or an evangelical crusade.
Until further notice it seems that 90% of the people do not endorse censorship of any kind.....why should the few decide for the overall group? Let's be democratic.....like the Danes. Pragmatism is always better than fanatisism.
Now go and eat your milk and cookies while I smoke a bowl of crack.
It seems hypocritical, when abuse on the board is not allowed, but certain "good guys" can bust loose on the bad guys, using the "forbiden behavior" as a tool.....it just seems so inherently idiotic to condemn the use of a single name on the site, and to make it a type of blasphemy, when everything should be open to discussion. It just reeks of the worst hypocritical double standard type of behavior that smells of witch hunts or an evangelical crusade.
Until further notice it seems that 90% of the people do not endorse censorship of any kind.....why should the few decide for the overall group? Let's be democratic.....like the Danes. Pragmatism is always better than fanatisism.
Now go and eat your milk and cookies while I smoke a bowl of crack.
I'd never leave the house if I had a Gimp
-
miss buenos aires
- Posts: 2055
- Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 7:15 am
- Location: jcnj
- Contact:
I don't think threads should be deleted just because of intense, fractious debates, but neither would I say that "90% of the people on this board do not endorse censorship of any kind." We all knew when we joined that narbawlz, and then Blue, and then taz, would have the power to delete threads as they saw fit. If we disagree with their judgment, then we have another debate about it. But just the fact that someone else has the power to delete a post means that we are not willing to lionize and shellac some ideal of free speech that translates to, "everyone should be able to say anything that pops into their head, even if it's a personal threat, even if it shows evidence of some sort of mental instability." We knew there were limits, and we agreed to those limits.
We are our own little society here. There are societal norms. I don't see anything wrong with enforcing those norms. I must admit, my eyes glaze over when I see yet another longwinded debate on religion, and so I can't even comment on whether anyone was actually called a looney. Obviously noise is one of the most thoughtful, intelligent, sane people around, even if he is religious (kidding! kidding!).
Free speech doesn't mean that you should say stupid shit just because you can. It's perfectly legal for me to tell my sister that she's getting a fat ass (she's not). It's perfectly legal for me to tell dirty jokes to my 94-year-old grandmother. It's perfectly legal for me to tell my best friend that her ex-boyfriend seems happier than he's ever been, now that he has a new girlfriend. It's perfectly legal for me to go up to a Jehovah's Witness and tell them I think the Bible is a great work of pure imagination. But I don't do any of that, because I have some idea of what it means to function as a part of society, and what it means to not be a complete dickhead. It doesn't infringe on any fundamental liberties to not be an asshole.
We are our own little society here. There are societal norms. I don't see anything wrong with enforcing those norms. I must admit, my eyes glaze over when I see yet another longwinded debate on religion, and so I can't even comment on whether anyone was actually called a looney. Obviously noise is one of the most thoughtful, intelligent, sane people around, even if he is religious (kidding! kidding!).
Free speech doesn't mean that you should say stupid shit just because you can. It's perfectly legal for me to tell my sister that she's getting a fat ass (she's not). It's perfectly legal for me to tell dirty jokes to my 94-year-old grandmother. It's perfectly legal for me to tell my best friend that her ex-boyfriend seems happier than he's ever been, now that he has a new girlfriend. It's perfectly legal for me to go up to a Jehovah's Witness and tell them I think the Bible is a great work of pure imagination. But I don't do any of that, because I have some idea of what it means to function as a part of society, and what it means to not be a complete dickhead. It doesn't infringe on any fundamental liberties to not be an asshole.
-
Copenhagen Fan
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:00 am
- Location: København, DK
- Contact:
Miss BA...very poignant.....but who gets to DECIDE what an "asshole" is??? Who's "WE"...? 5 or 6 people here? Maybe there is a "cultural elite" on this site....consensus or popularity does not make one "cool"...coolness is the ability to say what one means and be an individual. I'll take Rope as a good example of someone who marches to the beat of his own drum, someone who I don't always agree with, but the cajones are hard to beat, and at least it makes for food for thought. The most important thing a person can do is to make one actually reflect over things....unfortunately power and safety is more cherished than honesty in most societies. All societies band together when threatened by "otherness". I would hope that this board would not become a society....that's not really the point. If one wishes to be a part of a society, I would suggest a foray into real life. The protection of a so-called society has always been the tool to abuse and discriminate against "the others", minorities, women and newcomers. I don't ascribe to that type of thinking. On the contrary, I would rather make a statement that I don't even believe in to make a statement of freedom, or to make a symbolic statement against the "union" of common thinking....but that's just my form of thinking. I'll leave my conformist behaviour to the times when I need to bow down in Real Life to get something tangible out of a situation. I rather just discuss, rationally or irrationally as the case dictates, in order to get the most freedom or entertainment possible.
by the way...the poll is 9 against 1 right now...90% ..na na na na na.
by the way...the poll is 9 against 1 right now...90% ..na na na na na.
I'd never leave the house if I had a Gimp
-
miss buenos aires
- Posts: 2055
- Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 7:15 am
- Location: jcnj
- Contact:
Cope, I know the poll numbers; I'm saying that not supporting deletion of threads with actual debates on them is not tantamount to saying, "everyone should be allowed to say whatever they want, at any time, no matter what." There are shades of gray.
Everyone gets to decide for themselves who the assholes are, just as you have your own definition of "cool," a word so vague that it could apply to anyone at all, or any behavior at all.
Like it or not, we are a society here. According to Merriam Webster's, one of the definitions for "society" is:
I think, Cope, that you and I fundamentally disagree on the role of free speech, at least in this particular microcosm.
Everyone gets to decide for themselves who the assholes are, just as you have your own definition of "cool," a word so vague that it could apply to anyone at all, or any behavior at all.
Like it or not, we are a society here. According to Merriam Webster's, one of the definitions for "society" is:
Sound familiar? You are part of it, and you play your role to the hilt, I hate to break it to you.an enduring and cooperating social group whose members have developed organized patterns of relationships through interaction with one another.
I think, Cope, that you and I fundamentally disagree on the role of free speech, at least in this particular microcosm.
-
noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
-
noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
-
A rope leash
- Posts: 1835
- Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 6:47 pm
- Location: southern misery, USA
ASSHOLE!
All assholes should be clearly marked!
Perhaps we need some sort of rating system as well...
Perhaps we need some sort of rating system as well...
-
oily slick
- Posts: 1864
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 5:07 pm
- Location: st louis
if it is too many jokes, i give myself a 9.5. of course it is a little society. and a tough one to break into too! we all say "hi, howdy" when someone new innocently checks in and almost all of them disappear. cope, you hope we don't become a society cause it picks on minorities and a couple threads before that you proclaimed tyrannical victory for the majority because of the poll!? (note:cope and i have the exact same intellectual compatability with elvis.) most people aren't reading this stuff, although heaven knows how many it has chased off, because it is long, repetitive, and pretty much reeks of white guys wanting to get their own way. thats the fuel of the world, isn't it? i know i know, proclaim your love of debate. testosterone. and i'd still like to meet everyone; just cause it'd be a hoot. so please carry on. don't delete threads. and for heaven's sake people don't eat the turkey. it's an animal.
I'm not concerned about the very poor.
-
mood swung
- Posts: 6908
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 3:59 pm
- Location: out looking for my tribe
- Contact:
