[Samson]

Originally Posted by scandum I guess I'm one of the few that find it strange that US citizens, perhaps the only nation that allows unrestricted free speech, are so eager to censor whenever a teensy little bit of power comes within their grasp.

Except we don't allow unrestricted free speech. I can't yell FIRE! in a crowded room. I can't stand on a street corner and incite the masses to then storm the bank. I can't give a speech in which I say you're a child molester if it's not true. And this is concerning government, with criminal and civil penalties.

Yet, it seems to me that your position is that TMS should allow unrestricted free speech. While disregarding that TMS isn't a government body. It's a private organization with the ability to create its own rules for membership.

[Milawe]

Originally Posted by Samson Except we don't allow unrestricted free speech. I can't yell FIRE! in a crowded room. I can't stand on a street corner and incite the masses to then storm the bank. I can't give a speech in which I say you're a child molester if it's not true. And this is concerning government, with criminal and civil penalties. Yet, it seems to me that your position is that TMS should allow unrestricted free speech. While disregarding that TMS isn't a government body. It's a private organization with the ability to create its own rules for membership.

Quoted for truth!

People often misunderstand what "freedom of speech" is in the US. It's a legal term that has very specific applications, and it really can't be applied to a forum. Granted, some forums do allow unrestricted free speech. I don't traffic those.

[scandum]

Originally Posted by Samson Except we don't allow unrestricted free speech. I can't yell FIRE! in a crowded room. I can't stand on a street corner and incite the masses to then storm the bank. I can't give a speech in which I say you're a child molester if it's not true. And this is concerning government, with criminal and civil penalties.

Regardless, I can say things on US sites without persecution that would get me a visit from the police if I said it on a Dutch site, and I'm grateful for that. At best some women will deem me unfit breeding material because they dislike what they believe to be my political viewpoints, which suits me as well as a woman disliking me for my skin color.

But what good is freedom of speech if it's invaded everywhere you go? Removing sleep leaving a 16 hour day if you spend 2 hours a day on TMS that's 15% of your life you don't have freedom of speech. If you spend 8 hours at work that's another 50% of your life without freedom of speech. If your wife doesn't allow you free speech that basically leaves you to road rage in your car on your way to work, which unsurprisingly happens to be what a lot of Americans do. So much for your rights and dignity, which you throw out of the window for some silly social stigmas.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by scandum But what good is freedom of speech if it's invaded everywhere you go? Removing sleep leaving a 16 hour day if you spend 2 hours a day on TMS that's 15% of your life you don't have freedom of speech. If you spend 8 hours at work that's another 50% of your life without freedom of speech. If your wife doesn't allow you free speech that basically leaves you to road rage in your car on your way to work, which unsurprisingly happens to be what a lot of Americans do. So much for your rights and dignity, which you throw out of the window for some silly social stigmas.

See, what you sound like want to do is take someone's private property (TMS) and tell him how to run it. Part of freedom is the freedom to do with what is yours as you wish, within various limits. TMS is Lasher's. You seem to wish to rob him of his freedom to do with as he wishes with that which is his.

Would you appreciate someone coming to a party you threw and spending all his time screaming, "I HATE <pick your racial/religious/cultural/whatever minority?" Or would you decide that your freedom to run YOUR party as you wish is a lot more important than his freedom to act like a jerk and tell him to knock it off or get out? Are you violating his freedom of speech by doing so? Of course not, because there is no freedom to behave like that at someone else's party/in someone else's living room/on someone else's forums.

If you want to exercise freedom of speech in a forum, it is extremely cheap to simply start your own. Then you can exercise it all you like. What you're asking for isn't freedom of speech, but the freedom to intrude on other people's property, which is not a freedom that is protected in most cases, barring special circumstances (such as the UK laws protecting people's ability to use traditional hiking paths even if they cut through private property)

You have freedom of speech, within limits. What you don't have is carte blanche to do whatever you want with/on someone else's property, just like I do not have carte blanche to come into your living room and make myself comfortable regardless of whether you object or not.

--matt

[scandum]

Originally Posted by the_logos See, what you sound like want to do is take someone's private property (TMS) and tell him how to run it. Part of freedom is the freedom to do with what is yours as you wish, within various limits. TMS is Lasher's. You seem to wish to rob him of his freedom to do with as he wishes with that which is his.

Nope, I'm simply voicing my opinion. Now what you are doing is much more offensive and intruding. What you do is speak in the name of Lasher, telling me how Lasher feels about things, and how I should act because you have a psychic hotlink to Lasher and know exactly how he wants everyone to behave.

Would you appreciate it if I come to a party you threw and tell people that they cannot complain, and speak softly because they're on Logos' property and should keep their traps shut if anything obnoxious comes to mind because they're in Logos' house, and that Logos' can do with his property whatever the hell he wants. And that if they don't like that they should throw their own party?

Last time I checked you only own TIC and while I guess it's okay if you speak in the name of Andrew I'm not sure if Lasher appreciates your delusions of grandeur.

Of course you're free to pretend you're the one in charge here, and who knows, maybe Lasher doesn't mind you doing so at all, but your reasoning for why I couldn't voice my opinions is downright silly.

[Jazuela]

Originally Posted by scandum Nope, I'm simply voicing my opinion. Now what you are doing is much more offensive and intruding. What you do is speak in the name of Lasher, telling me how Lasher feels about things, and how I should act because you have a psychic hotlink to Lasher and know exactly how he wants everyone to behave.

Scandum, NOWHERE in logos's last post does he mention how Lasher feels. In fact, the paragraph you included is pretty clearly -not- logos' assessment of Lasher's feelings, but rather, his observation of YOUR behavior.

In your first sentence, you say "I'm simply voicing my opinion." Great. You voiced it. Everyone's had a chance to read it. Move on.

[cratylus]

Of course you're free to pretend you're the one in charge here

I find it offensive that it isn't Lasher sending me threats,
but rather a mod. I've taken to CC'ing Lasher when I
receive them, because unless a mod is marked as
"admin", I don't see that they automatically have the
authority to out me on double secret probation.

Since I haven't heard Lasher object, I presume my
"thin ice" (and that's a quote from one of the PM's)
status is valid.

But I find it distateful that it's his people taking it upon
themselves to be tough guys, rather than him taking
his admin responsibility to avoid having a vacuum
where people step in and act like they're boss.

If Bob or Sue Moderator is in fact site co-admin, then
let's please have that documented somewhere.

For that matter, is there a mod list? How can you tell
who mods what board?

Is there a PM alias so that I can CC all mods?


Anyway, I've had another post deleted, this one
apparently on aesthetic ground, since I'm told
it violated no rules. I've been hunting around my
private thread cache and am still not quite finding which
one it was. It's quite tedious because my thread cache
is in ghostscript format and I have to grep by sight.

So I'd like to ask that if a post is in fact deleted, the
mods please take the time to specify which post it was
by quoting it, and explicitly declare the reason
for the deletion.

If I take the time to write more than one word in a
post, you can take the time to quote it in a PM
before deleting it.

If you can't be bothered to have a "flames" or "offtopic"
board to archive removed material, at least help posters
maintain *some* record for themselves of the erased past.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

[Xerihae]

Originally Posted by cratylus For that matter, is there a mod list? How can you tell who mods what board? Is there a PM alias so that I can CC all mods? Anyway, I've had another post deleted, this one apparently on aesthetic ground, since I'm told it violated no rules. I've been hunting around my private thread cache and am still not quite finding which one it was. It's quite tedious because my thread cache is in ghostscript format and I have to grep by sight.

On the main index of the forum, click the "Forum Leaders" link at the bottom of the screen which is located next to the "Mark As Read" link I believe.

If there isn't a CC there should be one, thanks for pointing that out.

As for the rest, if you really want to discuss this here then allow me to illuminate to everyone else exactly what happened:

1 - Tangent in "What is free?" about professional vs hobbyist.
2 - Post by you in "What is free?" that says ONLY something along the lines of "This discussion is a tangent and should be placed in its own thread."
3 - I toddle along, agree, and move posts to a new thread on Professional vs Hobbyist.
4 - As the basis for your post is gone, it makes sense to delete your post as it is no longer relevant to the "What is free?" thread since it contains no information regarding that discussion.
5 - I send you a PM telling you said post was deleted.

You seem to be implying here, and in PMs to me, that my judgement is questionable and you demand evidence that the post didn't contain any other information. It's funny really, as I've suggested to the other mods that any deleted post be moved so Lasher has a bit of oversight but it's something we're still discussing and in this case, as it was obvious the post had no value to the "What is free?" discussion, I didn't think it would be a problem. If you cannot remember what was in your own posts without me quoting them back to you because of volume of posting, bad memory, or just plain forgetfulness, I fail to see how that is my problem. At the end of the day it was my decision to make and I cannot allow whether you trust my judgement or not to influence how I do my job here. Nor can any other mod. You're perfectly within your rights to query why the post was deleted if you think I wasn't clear enough, but to imply that I'm wrong just because I no longer have the post to quote at you (or "I destroyed the evidence" as you put it) doesn't necessarily mean that I was wrong.

[cratylus]

You seem to be implying here, and in PMs to me, that my judgement is questionable and you demand evidence that the post didn't contain any other information.

I demand? I guess you can see it that way. I asked
you to provide me with a quote of the post. I don't
think it's unreasonable to ask for the post to be
quoted to the poster before deletion.

I keep hearing the moderator workload here is vast
and staggering and so on, but quoting text is so
trivial and deleting posts so harsh that I think the
effort to quote is worth it.

As you your judgment, I hope you are not
suggesting it is beyond question. I can think of
very few people whose judgment is simply beyond questioning.

It's funny really, as I've suggested to the other mods that any deleted post be moved so Lasher has a bit of oversight

Are you saying not even Lasher can oversee whether a
post was rightly removed? That is surprising and
shocking, if true.

it was obvious the post had no value to the "What is free?" discussion

In your opinion. Since I spent the time to type it out,
I obviously differ on that. The least I can expect
is for my effort in contributing to the site to be
respected just enough by a mod so that they realize
maybe their opinion of the post is not 100% objective
universal fact.

If you cannot remember what was in your own posts without me quoting them back to you because of volume of posting, bad memory, or just plain forgetfulness, I fail to see how that is my problem.

Oh, that's rich. So if you can delete posts without
people noticing, that's enough justification right
there?

Weren't you just suggesting something about
your judgment before? How does this position
reflect on your judgment?

At the end of the day it was my decision to make and I cannot allow whether you trust my judgement or not to influence how I do my job here.

Not caring about the opinions of contributors
is poor judgment. In my opinion.

to imply that I'm wrong just because I no longer have the post to quote at you (or "I destroyed the evidence" as you put it) doesn't necessarily mean that I was wrong.

I guess we'll never know.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

[Xerihae]

It's all a moot point, since from now on I'll be sure to move deleted posts to the mod discussion board so next time you try and show how corrupt the system is I can flat out prove you wrong.

[cratylus]

It's all a moot point, since from now on I'll be sure to move deleted posts to the mod discussion board so next time you try and show how corrupt the system is I can flat out prove you wrong.

Moving rather than deleting is an excellent idea and I
heartily support it. However, since (presumably) I do
not have access to the mod board, I'm asking that
deleted posts please be quoted in the PM to the
person who wrote it.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

[cratylus]

<Snip: Please refrain from referring to deleted posts unless you wish to start a new thread - Xerihae>

I maintain, however, that it is a very good idea to have
a "flames" or "nasty" board to move these things to, that is opt-in-only,
so that people who do not get the vapors from reading
crude but earnest responses can judge for themselves.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

[chaosprime]

Originally Posted by cratylus t is a very good idea to have a "flames" or "nasty" board to move these things to, that is opt-in-only

Second that.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by cratylus I maintain, however, that it is a very good idea to have a "flames" or "nasty" board to move these things to, that is opt-in-only, so that people who do not get the vapors from reading crude but earnest responses can judge for themselves. -Crat http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

Or you could just show some respect instead of making repeated demands that have already been indicated will not be met. You yourself suggested, albiet sarcastically to Matt, that you should take the abusiveness elsewhere like TMC. Maybe you should take your own advice and quit antagonizing the moderators? At this point if you got banned nobody here would really need to question why it happened.

Having an "opt-in" flames board would be rather stupid as it would only encourage the behavior to continue so that folks who get off on being trolls would be able to point to it and say "see, I ****ed someone off again!". Personally I'd much rather the flamebait/trolling/etc just be deleted.

[Valg]

Originally Posted by cratylus I find it offensive that it isn't Lasher sending me threats, but rather a mod. I've taken to CC'ing Lasher when I receive them, because unless a mod is marked as "admin", I don't see that they automatically have the authority to out me on double secret probation.

Xerihae is one of the people Lasher has asked to keep an eye on this forum, which is why he gave him the ability to moderate its content. Given that moderators are publicly listed, I'm not sure sure what the problem is.

Originally Posted by cratylus Since I haven't heard Lasher object, I presume my "thin ice" (and that's a quote from one of the PM's) status is valid. But I find it distateful that it's his people taking it upon themselves to be tough guys, rather than him taking his admin responsibility to avoid having a vacuum where people step in and act like they're boss.

They aren't taking it upon themselves. Lasher has previously asked each of us to participate and help him manage the site. There were emails and private discussions. Sadly, no cookies.

Originally Posted by cratylus If Bob or Sue Moderator is in fact site co-admin, then let's please have that documented somewhere. For that matter, is there a mod list? How can you tell who mods what board?

At the bottom of the main forums page is a link marked 'Forum Leaders' which lists Lasher's choices for each board.

Originally Posted by cratylus Is there a PM alias so that I can CC all mods?

Not to my knowledge, though 'report post' and other buttons automatically contact the right people.

[cratylus]

Or you could just show some respect instead of making repeated demands that have already been indicated will not be met.

Forgive me, I missed the post where Lasher said this would
not happen.

Maybe his post got deleted.

I'm not inclined to think that, though, so could you please point
to the post I missed that says this?

In any case, as I've said before, dissent is not disrespect.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

[cratylus]

Xerihae is one of the people Lasher has asked to keep an eye on this forum, which is why he gave her the ability to moderate its content. Given that moderators are publicly listed, I'm not sure sure what the problem is.

I'm not questioning Xerihae's mod status.

They aren't taking it upon themselves. Lasher has previously asked each of us to participate and help him manage the site.

Since I'm not in on mod discussions, I have no way of
knowing whether Lasher authorizes mods to issue
ban threats.


-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

[cratylus]

<Snip: Please refrain from referring to deleted posts unless you wish to start a new thread - Xerihae>

My reference to the deleted post was the predicate for
my expression of support for an opt-in board. You
removed on-topic material directly relevant to the
point of my post.

Please put it back. Thanks.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

[chaosprime]

Originally Posted by cratylus My reference to the deleted post

That one's pretty tough. It seems inescapable to me that moderation policies have to forbid resurrection of deleted posts.

If I were a moderator, I'd probably ask that, if their existence and nature were going to be the basis of a proposal, reference to them should be kept carefully abstract and nonspecific.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by cratylus Forgive me, I missed the post where Lasher said this would not happen. Maybe his post got deleted. I'm not inclined to think that, though, so could you please point to the post I missed that says this? In any case, as I've said before, dissent is not disrespect. -Crat http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

Not everything that happens on a site happens in full public viewing. I base my belief that this isn't going to happen on the fact that it's been suggested before and hasn't been done yet, and on my own experience as a forum administrator myself. I know I wouldn't put one of these kinds of things in place for that very reason. The concept of it is stupid and would be wasteful of database space to keep crap like that around. So I think it's reasonable enough to assume I'm not the only one who thinks that.

Dissent may not be disrespect, but the way you're conducting it here has been very disrespectful. You've all but accused the staff of being fascist and nazis. You make outright demands in an effort to get your way. I think they've been more than patient with you but even in the field of customer service there comes a time when someone crosses the line and are asked to knock it off. Maybe you can't see it, but it seems clear to me that you've been asked to knock it off. The only recourse left if you refuse is to punish you in some way.

In a retail setting, security would physically escort you out of the building. I know. I worked retail for 8 years. I've seen it done on occasion. The person will protest loudly, scream abuse, brutality, and even racism, but when all is said and done, there's a mountain of evidence to support the action taken.

On a forum, unruly posters will be banned from participation. I know. I run a forum and I've had to ban someone once already for exactly that. The person will protest loudly, scream abuse, censorship, bias, make demands, and even act like a raving lunatic, but when all is said and done, there's a mountain of evidence to support the action taken.

So are you trying to help them build this mountain on purpose?


On a side note, I always get a chuckle out of seeing automated profanity filtering blot out a word. Leaves so much to the imagination even when the original word is relatively harmless

[cratylus]

It seems inescapable to me that moderation policies have to forbid resurrection of deleted posts.

Not sure I agree, but in any case, note the
title of the thread. Deletion is necessarily relevant
in a thread that discusses it.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

[cratylus]

Dissent may not be disrespect, but the way you're conducting it here has been very disrespectful.

I strongly disagree.

You make assumptions in your post that don't really bear that
much scrutiny. You assume, for example, what
the policy will be despite admitting to not being privy to
its (ongoing) development. I think I'll let that stuff lie.


What I will say is that your comparing me to a customer
escorted out of a store is not fair. A security problem or
a public disturbance is very different from a community member
who is reasonably arguing in a context that is specifically for that.

This is a forum. It's for discussion. That's what I'm doing.

I am not hurting anyone with my words. I am attempting to
contribute. You don't see that. Ok. But it is true.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

[Samson]

Originally Posted by cratylus This is a forum. It's for discussion. That's what I'm doing. I am not hurting anyone with my words. I am attempting to contribute. You don't see that. Ok. But it is true. -Crat http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

The forum is for discussion. Not for disrespectful behavior, making demands of the moderators, and making a general ass of oneself. Your words don't need to be hurtful to anyone. You don't need to be offensive, crude, rude, belligerent, sarcastic, witty, nice, a suckup, miss congeniality, or even just a regular guy. If the mods decide you're misbehaving, then that's pretty much it. They set policy. They enforce it however they see fit.

Just like being disruptive and unruly in a retail establishment. You will get kicked out eventually if you continue to be rude and abusive to the employees. If enough of them complain to management then management will take action to remove you. Penalties in "the real world" can result in being charged with disturbing the peace, disorderly conduct, and trespassing. It might even get you civil penalties if the store sues to recover costs incurred in calling the cops.

So I figure getting a few posts deleted and a warning or two that you're on "thin ice" is getting off easy, but I dare suggest that thin ice won't hold you up forever.

[cratylus]

If the mods decide you're misbehaving, then that's pretty much it. They set policy. They enforce it however they see fit.

Okay. I get it.

I don't think I've been disrespectful, an ass, etc, etc, and so on as
you list. But evidently I can't sufficiently justify my behavior
to you, so I guess I'll stop trying.

I continue to find your comparison to retail establishments
fallacious, but whatever. You're locked into it. Enjoy it.

So I figure getting a few posts deleted and a warning or two that you're on "thin ice" is getting off easy, but I dare suggest that thin ice won't hold you up forever.

I suspect that's what the "thin" part means, yep.

As I've said before, I'm not trying to get banned. I'm saying
the things I say because I think they are true. Perhaps I
will get banned (note the picture I created for the occasion).
But there's no shame in losing a fight if the fight was right.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

[Newworlds]

There are numerous styles and methods of posting. Some are sarcasm and some are outright invitations to argument. I think if you have many people complaining about your "style" or you find your posts being deleted or moderated, it might be a time to change tact or at least modify it slightly.

Offense is subjective. Some may be offended by racial slur, others by vulgarity, others by personal insults, and still others by third party insults. Expecting the moderators to accept your style is not part of these forums as far as I can tell, if your style breaks the rules.

The trouble arrises when someone plays on the grey area of the rules. Tiptoe'ing around the cutting edge and every so often stepping over the line, but then retreating so as not to get moderators on them. Just because you "feel" you are not acting agressive or offensive, doesn't mean others do not. The most obvious way to get a moderator to bring their finger near the delete button, is to direct something personal and agressive to another member.

[cratylus]

Expecting the moderators to accept your style is not part of these forums as far as I can tell, if your style breaks the rules.

My style is utterly conventional and while I am a forceful
advocate, I am neither trying to be offensive, nor do I
think I am being so. I am also not breaking rules, and
I am not playing games with them. You see me standing
right up to what I think is wrong. Tiptoeing is not what I'm doing.

I am a standard-issue forceful advocate. Blunting my
approach to discussion blunts my participation.

If this site is going to be about fuzzy pillows and rounded
edges, and forceful advocacy is not permitted, then you
can probably look forward to my ejection.

In my opinion that would be a grave sign indeed.

But since I can be wrong, maybe my ejection will
actually make the sun shine brighter and and the
grey skies blue.

Just strap in and we'll find out.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg

[Samson]

Originally Posted by cratylus As I've said before, I'm not trying to get banned. I'm saying the things I say because I think they are true.

And all I'm saying is that continuing to do so when it's been clearly pointed out as being against policy is exactly what will get you banned. You think it's a just cause, that's fine. Obviously nobody is going to be able to convince you that it's not.

The retail comparison is perfectly valid. A store is a private entity and can refuse service to a customer for any reason they see fit, even if the customer thinks it's wrong. A website such as TMS is also a private entity who can refuse service to a member for any reason they see fit, even if that member thinks it's wrong. I don't see how that's an invalid comparison.

[Xerihae]

Taken from the rules posted by Lasher a couple of days ago:

Rules in all forums: * Do not post messages that are obscene, hateful or threatening. * Debate and heated discussions are fine, however posting personal attacks, insulting comments or provocative comments adding no value to the discussion at hand is not allowed and those comments will be removed. * Posts should remain loosely on topic and related to the discussion area. * When a post is clearly outside of these rules please do not respond to it. If posts are removed, other posts quoting them or referencing them also need to be removed to maintain continuity of the discussion.

Scandums post contravened the rule about personal attacks. Cratylus' post contravened the rule about not responding to posts that contravene the rules (confused yet?). Rather than delete the post, I snipped the reference to the deleted post and left the opinion about a flame board as I felt this stood on its own as a viable contribution to this thread.

If you are still unfamiliar with the new rules posted by Lasher, you can view them HERE.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by cratylus I am a standard-issue forceful advocate. Blunting my approach to discussion blunts my participation.

There is a very fine difference between being a forceful advocate for your position, and being an annoying jerk while advocating your position. I concede it's an entirely subjective distinction and have never claimed it wasn't but that's really beside the point. Continuing to rail against it when the mods are patiently trying to give you the hint isn't going to serve any other purpose but to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that you're being a jerk.

[cratylus]

If posts are removed, other posts quoting them or referencing them also need to be removed to maintain continuity of the discussion.

The discussion is about deletion. The deletion in this discussion was relevant
to the discussion of deletion. Discussing it did not break continuity. Deleting my
statement about it did disrupt continuity. If we keep going on like this,
we're going to wind up dividing by zero.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net/banned_crat.jpg