Our forums have been upgraded to give you more control over your personal forum experience:
- Don't like the posts from a specific forum user? Select "ignore" on any post to hide that person's posts.
- Selectively reveal individual posts from ignored users as you read through the forums.
- Use the "My ignore list" link at the left of the forums to see, add or remove ignored users.
Log in or
register to take advantage of these new features.
Posted on Thu, 12/27/2007 - 16:09 — by Guest25
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 275
The poster 'Liberty' is a brain f*rt looking for a place to happen. Has been on my 'ignore' list since earliest postings.
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1251
Liberty is a "TROLL" with serious emotional problems. It would be harmless and humorous if it weren't for the fact that he is abusing the privilages on the forums. By loading so many forums with his topics he's knocking all the others off the current list so you have to click on "next 50" to find the others and not everyone is going to do that. So he's monopolizing the forums with his senseless rants. There's a fine line between freedom of speech and the abuse of that freedom. If enough of you feel he's abusing it then report it as a violation to the Times. That's your right. The Times doesn't monitor the forums but relies on us to monitor ourselves.
Added: I forgot to address that to "ALL"
Edited 12/29/2007 9:46 am by stoney4
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
Please explain what a troll is and where you derive your definition? I have always thought that a troll was a mythical creature that lives under a bridge. Blogging is not a mythical world and there are no bridges.
I do not pretend to understand everything Liberty writes, or to even care much of the time, but you have hit a very interesting topic and that is the privilege of blogging.
There's a fine line between freedom of speech and the abuse of that freedom. It is a fine line, but extensive, even over is not abuse. Using a privilege to harm others is abuse, and to date, Liberty to my knowledge, has never done this—but other posters on this blog have and they have never been censored,(again to my knowledge). I will save my violation reports for people who are expressing hatred and racism—not for people who are communicating actively.
In my humble, but educated opinion, the freedom of speech covers the right to comment on the digital version of the public soap box, the blog site. One needs neither permission nor license to employ a right, one needs either to employ a privilege.
Blogging is a right, not a privilege. Liberty has the same rights you have, and if you attempt to limit his rights then you should expect your own to be equally limited.
The bottom line is that as an American, I may not agree with what you say but I would defend your right to say it. The words may be trite but they reflect a meaning unique and special, and very much American. I am not sure the flavor of your post really supports the significance and importance of an American perspective.
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1251
The internet forum definition of a troll is someone who purposely makes insulting and provocative posts with the sole intent on starting arguments. You'd have to go back over the summer but in the East County forums Liberty at one time suggested that castor beans were edible and recommended them. Do some research on castor beans. They contain a deadly poison. He also has the habit, as he's shown here on this forum, of loading the forum with thread after thread which knocks all the others down notch after notch until they are no longer on the current page when you log on. Is that fair to the others who have started those threads? Those are two examples of abusing the privilage of participating on the forums.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
The internet forum definition of a troll is someone who purposely makes insulting and provocative posts with the sole intent on starting arguments. As I asked before, what is the source of this definition?
You'd have to go back over the summer but in the East County forums Liberty at one time suggested that castor beans were edible and recommended them. Everyone knows that castor beans are also the source of castor oil, a potent laxative as well as a source of a poison. Did it occur to you that Liberty make have been recommending an enema?
He also has the habit, as he's shown here on this forum, of loading the forum with thread after thread which knocks all the others down notch after notch until they are no longer on the current page when you log on. I have noticed this habit, but it seems no more annoying then the habit of others like Honesty to post repeated insults as disclaimers, or of the Times themselves to resize the posts they do not like. It is merely an annoyance and in the exchange of ideas you have to deal with annoyances.
Is that fair to the others who have started those threads? When you can define what is fair I might agree with you, but the old saw, life is not fair seems to apply here. Is the task of hitting the show all discussions button so difficult or cause you so much inconvenience as to deny another person the rights you enjoy?
Those are two examples of abusing the privilege of participating on the forums. A privilege is a grant of rights through a defining instrument. Driving a car is a privilege because you must apply and qualify for a license. To marry is also a privilege, (yes you must be qualified to marry and sadly the standards do not seem high enough). To blog is not a privilege since you need not qualify or be issued a license to do so, as speaking in any other public forum is not a privilege, it is a right.
In my opinion, if you needed to be qualified to blog, then a blog would not be a public forum and would not achieve the goal of truly public discussion. It would further the cause of Democracy and it would be very anti-American.
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1251
The definition has been around for a long time. I don't have time to research it for you.
The recommendation was very explicit that the beans were to be boiled slowly and then eaten.
It's not a matter of clicking "show all discussions". You have to go to the bottom of the page and click "next 50" and not everyone knows about that option.
And you're bending over backward to defend this behavior and I really don't have time to counter your arguments. If you'd bother to check the results of the number of polls that have been conducted over the last few months asking what others think about Liberty/CleanSweep I think you'll find that you're in a small minority, but that's your privilage.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
The definition has been around for a long time. So you made it up. What qualifications do you have in etymology? Would I be far from the truth to assume you have no certifications or studies in the area, nor to you hold any advanced degrees?
And you're bending over backward to defend this behavior and I really don't have time to counter your arguments. If you'd bother to check the results of the number of polls that have been conducted over the last few months asking what others think about Liberty/CleanSweep I think you'll find that you're in a small minority, but that's your privilage.
If it is in defense of something as American as the freedom of speech, I do not see the problem with being in the minority. On this one, the problem is the lack of respect for the rights of others. Being part of an ill-informed and intellectually challenged majority does not make your position correct.
Edited 1/3/2008 12:45 pm ET by Clayton
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 70
troll:
An outrageous message posted to a newsgroup or mailing list or message board to bait people to answer. Trolling is a form of harassment that can take over a discussion. Well meaning defenders can create chaos by responding to trolls. The best response is to ignore it.
Source: http://www.walthowe.com/glossary/
Trolling is annoying and unproductive, and Liberty engages in it quite frequently. I will not defend him/her.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
Walt Howe is simply another blogger. A term he created is no more and no less valid then a term you create. There is, academically, some validity to commonly used terms, but that is slang, and by definition slang is less well used and subjec to a multitude of meanings.
The problem I see with your definition is that it can be construed to cover most regular participants on the blog, including both you and I. Everyone posts for a response
My point is to defend everyone's right to participate in a PUBLIC FORUM. Labeling people as trolls because you may not like or understand what they are saying, or you dislike the way they are saying it is, in my opinion, really not acceptable. You have the right and the opportunity to not read them, but not to stop them from posting.
I understand the frustration with Liberty; I have faced it myself. But I will defend his right to speak, just as I would defend yours or mine.
Edited 1/3/2008 2:59 pm ET by Clayton
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 70
The term is universally accepted, the location that I pulled the quoted description from is a reputable, authoritative location for internet terms. I have been accused of being a troll on occasion, but never with any real substance. I typically take pains to not insult others or to engage in ad honinem attacks or arguments.
In any event, Liberty's use of the site is in fact restricting free use by something called a denial of service. (S)He posts multiple discussions on a single topic, which pushed other posts off by an automated rule that is designed to ensure that everyone gets an equal opportunity to post their thoughts. This is restricting the free speech of others. Nothing that I am aware of guarantees one the right to drown out all opposing views or to suppress all discussion beyond their own, which violates the whole intent of endoursing and facilitating a free exchange of ideas.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
My objection to the term "troll" is that it is slang and that it's definition is so loose that it can be applied to anyone as it is convenient. Thus is can be used as a means of censoring anyone.
I think that maybe why the Times, as biased as they have been proven to be, do not use this term as a potential violation.
As for the potential excessive use of the Board-the solution is really very simple, simple repost to threads you think are being endangered to bring them to the top of the list.
I still would prefer overuse of the system to underuse. The alternative is the East County site, where boredom and avoidance of controversial topics has made brisket recipes and lost dogs the hot topics of discussion. Maybe you have read the Old Fart Exchange Club(I know, a kind of rude nickname for old men with relaxed bathroom manners, but it actually fits the old men who dominate that board, and is used with some regularity in the Brentwood are to refer to the gentlemen), censoring everyone who threatens the harmony and lack of discord they revel in.
Liberty is far more challenging intellectually then that chorus of OFEC,(the nickname is also a play on OPEC).
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 29
What a pompous and arrogant condemnation of the East County site participants, particularly after you go on and on to defend Liberty's "right" to inundate any site with inarticulate and puerile tripe, which you then define as "intellectually challenging"! And you profess to be an "educator"?? Please let me know where and why you have a podium, unless it's not tax-payer provided, of course.
I'm a Central County resident, where meaningful, as well as "just for kicks and giggles" forum participants are sporatic, so I really appreciate and applaud the East County "Gang" for it's intelligence and community support and spirit, as much as for it's myriad of interesting and whimsical topics -- You. "Liberty" and "Medawhite" are just one note Samba's to me.
Snorkler
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
Point out one topic in East County which produced an intelligent or reasoned response. I actually enjoy reading the "extreme mundane" nature of East County, but I have notice that as a whole they quash or run away from controversy. Anything political is merely amplified knee jerk reactions without thought or effort. The most aggressive example of this knee jerk reaction amplified by numerous "commentaries' was the reaction to section 8 residents. Most posters did not understand the nature or the facts about the program and did not want to know;--they simply decided that everything wrong with Brentwood and Antioch can be traced back to Section 8. There was even a large degree of racism revealed on the thread that was never really condemned or questioned.
What a pompous and arrogant condemnation of the East County site participants, particularly after you go on and on to defend Liberty's "right" to inundate any site with inarticulate and puerile tripe, which you then define as "intellectually challenging"! Liberty is more intellectually challenging then Brisket recipes and lost dogs. Note that East County was the first in trying to censor him because they simply did not understand him and made no intellectual effort to understand him. The real question becomes what intellectual effort are they capable of?
What you so quaintly refer to as “the Gang†work very efficiently at outright censorship of any poster or any topic they do not like. Sounds very un American to me; censorship in any media form is something that needs to be challenged at every opportunity. That is the core of my defense of Liberty, and that is what you are opposing.
Where I teach is, really not relevant and non-of your business—why I teach is because I have earned both the degrees and preformed the research to place me in the position of Doctor, (and because I enjoy teaching since it is not a profession that pays an adequate wage). When you earn a doctorate let me know.
I actually live near the border between East County and Central; I personally know most of the people posting in East County, and as a rule they think they govern East County, (or at least represent any valuable opinion in East County, especially Brentwood). They do not, and as time goes by they are rapidly becoming less relevant. If you want to meet them go to the Brentwood Café and ask for OFEC-the usually have a table very close to the vents.
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 29
Thanks for reinforcing my point by demonstrating that your education exceedes your intelligence. And just how does one "preform" research to earn a Doctorate? I've only 2 Masters (Engineering and Business)so I'm not as credentialed as you, but I maintain my Professional Engineering registration. Life just intereferred with academia for me.
Snorkler
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
If you have a Masters degree, then you should know that the point to obtaining a doctorate is to demonstrate that you are capable of doing research and publishing in your area of study. One purpose of your Master's degree was to familarize you with research methods, (if your program was WASC credentialled, of course).
I've only 2 Masters (Engineering and Business)so I'm not as credentialed as you, you mean degreed, not credentialed.
Life just intereferred with academia for me. Lifelong education is a concept that applies to you.. The point is that education should never stop, not for life, not for retirement, not for economic or time constraints. There is numerous ways to continue to pursue higher degrees. For me the experience and thrill of doing one's own research and of publishing it was worth enormous sacrifice. I would strongly urge you to continue, because you have not hit the fun part of your education yet.
You are desperately seeking a way to insult me, but you have not succeeded-nor will you ever succeed. YOu do not have the information necessary to the task.
Edited 1/8/2008 10:45 am ET by Clayton
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1251
Although "degreed" is appropriate, the use of the participle "credentialed" to refer to certified teachers or other professionals is well established. i.e. (He became credentialed through a graduate program at a local college.)
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 29
Part of my "lifelong education" included fulfilling my military service obligation, and subsequently raising a family with my first wife, to whom I'm still happily married. This may not count in your world of "thrilling" accomplishmens, but it sure does in mine -- how does your pursuit of a "doctorate" compare?
My undergraduate and Master's Degrees in Engineering were both earned at Cal-Berkeley; I went to "B" school at night at Cal-State Hayward, upon completion of my Navy service -- so I'm familiar with the rigors of "academic research", thank you.
Lastly, I have no interest in insulting you, or anyone -- but I do take offense when someome insults me, my family and friends, or my correspondents, for no apparent reason other than their selfish need for personal stature enhancement -- you crossed that line.
Snorkler
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 29
Several of my friends are lifelong "teachers", and none have complained that their compensation was so "inadequate" (your words), nor their students so incapable, that they abandoned it for a different profession -- we all make choices, and most strive to make the best of them, rather than lament them, as you seem to be.
But more importantly to me is how a self-proclaimed dedicated and degreed educator can so blithely dismiss a community of post graduates because they don't subscribe to or match your myopic definition of significance -- you need a forced sabatical, and your students need it more.
Snorkler
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
Several of my friends are lifelong "teachers", and none have complained that their compensation was so "inadequate" (your words), nor their students so incapable, that they abandoned it for a different profession I never said I abandon education, I still teach. Is the compensation inadequate? No. Some of us live at a higher standard then others.
You seemed to have totally missed the details of the discussion. Even more curious, since the discussion is involves an attempt to censor a poster because some are not capable of understanding his/her posts. This discussion has nothing to do with my education or my profession. You have tried to divert the dialogue away from exploring your support of censorship on this blog and how a specific group on the East County uses diversionary tactics(like this) to censor any topic they are uncomfortable discussing. Maybe, like you, such discussions display their incompetency.
But more importantly to me is how a self-proclaimed dedicated and degreed educator can so blithely dismiss a community of post graduates because they don't subscribe to or match your myopic definition of significance Who, precisely did I dismiss because of their academic achievements; OFEC? On this thread I have and I continue to dismiss those cretins who support censorship.
The bottom line is that your position on the topic of this blog supports censorship of a poster who has done nothing more then confuse you. You are wrong and you are not going to divert this to a criticism of me.
Edited 1/9/2008 1:34 pm ET by Clayton
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 70
Well, we are just going to have to disagree on the use of the term troll and on whether denial of service trumps freedom of speech. I do not believe that Liberty should be booted based on what is being posted, but I do think that some sort of censure is warranted based on the exceptionally large number of duplicated discussion boards.
By the way, at what point does jargon gain the status of official use. I have noticed that the word disrespect is included in the 2006 Random House Dictionary as a verb as well as a noun, whilst in the 2006 American Heritage Dictionary it is still only a noun. In the English language that I was taught, disrespect could only act as a verb when suffixes are added, but that is not the current common usage, and such common usage is no less general that the common use of troll, nor has it been around as long.
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 97
If you don't care for what is posted on the East County Boards, I suggest you do not click on them.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
Why? I have just as much right to read and laugh at the mundane-ness as anyone else--even to comment when the stupidity reaches a profound level.
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1251
Yeah, we're really bored dealing with the out of control crime over here and trying to do our best to support the police department with neighborhood watch programs. Not to mention dealing with a horrendous commute on HWY 4, putting our kids through school and all the other hum drum crap that life in the suburbs has in hand for us.
It's a shame that you equate a little humor, in an attempt at brightening people's lives, with boredom. But then again, from what I've seen of most of your endless posts, you are completely humorless so I suppose that should come as no surprise.
There are a lot of us out here that owe a lot to the Antioch police department who are run ragged with an under-manned police force trying to keep a lid on the situation we deal with on a daily basis. So when someone like Liberty/CleanSweep engages in a mindless vendetta for month after month, we get a bit edgy about it.
You don't live here. You haven't had to put up with this person's posts as long as we have. So perhaps you'd be better off debating the handfull of like minded intellectuals over here and not be bothered with the peasants over the hills.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
SO,
East County's solution to boredom is censorship? You want a police department, or any government, that can not be challenged? You avoid local controversies, like Land Use Planning, poor academic acheivement, unemployment, and residual racism in favor of humor? You prefer to pass the time quietly and without argument, rather then improve and uplift where you live?
Maybe you will get what you are wishing for, but the one's paying the price for your contentment will be your children.
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 44
Your attempt to sound intellectual is laughable and if you find Liberty and Clean Sweep stimulating intellectually you are welcome to him. I among many am happy that he does not dominate our board any longer with his trolling drivel.
By the way what is your problem with a beef brisket recipe? I guess your "farts" don't stink and you don't have much need for eating on the Central County Bored (miss spelled intentionally).
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
You can interpret my approach any way that you are capable of. I am not trying to be “intellectualâ€, just fair minded. What you are objecting to is pointing out that your approach is censorship, is un-American, and violates the purpose of a public POLITICAL forum. A silly recipe is far more in violation of the nature of a this forum, then is a person’s opinion about the lack of ethics in a local police department. The fact that you appreciate a recipe then a complaint, which may or may not be valid, says more about the limit of your intellect, not mine.
Chances are, you will never understand that.
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 44
I am impressed you didn't leave any words out.
Where may I ask in the East Contra Costa Forum does it state it is a political forum? Why are you trying to put people in a box?
The person in question regarding the censorship would probably still be posting on ECCF if he/she did not create posts that were only to offend? When he/she posted and didn't get the attention that was hoped for they became rude and disruptive in unrelated posts. I am happy he/she has found their niche with you.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
I am impressed you didn't leave any words out. What words should have been left out? Your comment makes no sense.
Where may I ask in the East Contra Costa Forum does it state it is a political forum? Why are you trying to put people in a box? It does not state that it is any particular what type of forum it is—but a forum created by a newspaper is, by extension , should be primarily concerned with the topics of the paper. The coverage of the CCT includes politics, but the East County Board has a history of avoiding controversy at all costs. Clearly the gang known in town as OFEC is behind this. How am I putting people in a box if I am suggesting an expansion of topics on a board?
The person in question regarding the censorship would probably still be posting on ECCF if he/she did not create posts that were only to offend? Who did Liberty offend and how? If you make a charge you should support it with facts .The only offense I could find is that OFEC did not understand the context of his posts, and he introduced a lot of subjects. Are you truly supporting censorship?
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1251
Boy, that's some interesting sentence structure there, but as to what you're saying, I have no idea where you're coming up with this stuff. Our topics should be primarily concerned with topics of the paper? Then why does it say at the top of the East County forums: "Join in any discussion below or create your own topic or poll." I see no guidelines as to what those topics should be. And as for us avoiding controversial topics, you don't know what you're talking about.
I know you claim that you won't let anyone insult you but your spelling errors and grammatical mistakes on some of your replies are a giveaway that you don't take criticism well.
A few words that you should look up and give some consideration to:
1. pontificate
2. humility
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 29
Hi Stoney -- You've said it more clearly than I could, but I will add "narcissism" to the vocabulary homework assignment.
In my career, fundamental research was continuous, but on a variety of topics, not just one. Patents, not a dissertation, were the outcome, so I guess I'm less than humanitarian by Clayton's yardstick.
Snorkler
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
In my career, fundamental research was continuous, but on a variety of topics, not just one. Are you kidding, all research is multi-dimensional. Prove me wrong by citing one study, any topic, that part of a continuum of previous research, or further work doesn’t incorporate multiple topics. A Doctorate is academic certification that a person is capable of research and is ethical in performing that research. If you do not have a Doctorate, obviously you can do research, but the reporting of the results does not carry as much value in an academic setting.
Here is another question you will not answer, but what research does an Engineer with a Masters do; and how does that result in a patent but lack published results?
Patents, not a dissertation, were the outcome, so I guess I'm less than humanitarian by Clayton's yardstick. The applicability of the patent to research results is not the only measure value nor the only road to commercial viability. That is why research is published. All graduate students understand this.
Holding a patent or writing a dissertation does, automatically, define a humanitarian. Your support of censorship in a public forum does negatively impact your benefit to the human race and it lessens your contribution to the betterment of the community. It simple terms, your support of censorship makes you less of a humanitarian.
You seem to be are trying to divert the discussion from censorship to criticism of an individual poster. Seems this is the standard practice for OFEC, so are you one of the regulars at the Brentwood Cafe?
Edited 1/9/2008 1:32 pm ET by Clayton
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 29
"Engineering" is broadly defined as "Applied" Science whereby the objective and empirical conclusions of the "Hard" Sciences(e.g: Physics, Chemistry, etc.) are employed toward achievement of a particular result, or solution to a specific problem. Usually, these "objectives" reveal some unique aspect for which previously employed solutions are inadequate, or, if protected by current Patent(s), unlicenseable -- and so, the inquisitive Engineer begins his/her research, including experimentation, rather than abandon the challenge. Not surprisingly, the solution is unique, and quite often patentable. I know of no University wherein Patents are not held to be of equivalent value to a Doctoral dissertation, as you imply, as Patent applications are approved, and a Patent awarded only after rigorous evaluation by independent reviewers, including attorneys.
And no, I do not favor censorship, but I do expect civility and decorum in the CCT forum; I found neither in Liberty's attack on APD, and so registered my objection -- as I'm entitled to do. With that, I'm sure we'll continue to disagree.
Snorkler
Snorkler
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
And no, I do not favor censorship, but I do expect civility and decorum in the CCT forum; I found neither in Liberty's attack on APD, and so registered my objection -- as I'm entitled to do. What standard do you apply to define civility and decorum and how do you enforce it. In this situation you are proposing censorship to maintain your personal and arbitrary standard. You are calling for and supporting censorship.
The real ethical debate for you is that you are supporting censorship because of a complaint about a public agency and an employee, but on this board people have been far less polite, (to the point of blatant racism), and on that you have been silent. Is your silence indicative of support for that poster opinion in contrast to this “outrageâ€.
With that, I'm sure we'll continue to disagree. That is certain.
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 29
I've been registered on this Forum since 9/05, and have expressed my disgust with racists and homophobes herein more than once -- I don't, however, feel the obsession to mention such in every post. I believe Liberty's post to be both deliberately libelous and defamatory, and as such, a violation of the CCT's policy -- that's my interpretation anyway. Oh -- I also reported a racist post some time ago as well, so that makes me at least an "equal opportunity" whistle blower.
Snorkler
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
I've been registered on this Forum since 9/05, and have expressed my disgust with racists and homophobes herein more than once – And yet you have not objected to Media White’s anti-semitism? You have not tried to get him/her banned. Silence does appear to be agreement, especially when you object to someone’s whose worse offense is complaining about a local official that is, in fact, the employee of every citizen in Antioch.
I believe Liberty's post to be both deliberately libelous and defamatory, And you have never accurately explained how a complaint about a police officer can fit either category. Did he specifically mention the officer, did he reveal the personnel hearing details, did he lie about any part of his complaint?
A poll is more then reporting a violation. In this case, I restate my position that it is censorship of the most inappropriate and un-American nature. Your choice of curse but clearly a wrong and vindictive choice.
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 29
I don't expect you to go back in time to re-read all my 500+ posts, but Meda and I have gone a few rounds on many topics, not just his anti-Semitism, but like you he's intractable. When last I tried to reason with him on this board it was concerning the Annapolis meeting, and my wish that both sides would have the good sense to compromise -- he waited more than a week after the meetings to tell me that there was no hope. Earlier I took him to task for stating that Japan was a peaceful Nation, yet their attack on us was justified, as we were depriving them of access to oil and other resources. He'd conveniently forgotten their prior 10 year history of territorial aggrandizement in China, Korea, and Indo-China, not to mention their pact with Germany and Italy to divide the world into their respective sphere's of influence.
With regard to Liberty: he threw out an allegation, unsupported by a third party, that chastised not only one Officer but the entire Department of which this Officer is a member -- "Hearsay" is inadmissable as evidence, anytime, anywhere; for you to advocate otherwise is to advocate anarchy. And his subsequent ranting, without allowing the accused to present a face to face counter discussion, despite provision of an investigating Officers contact information on this forum, is nothing more than grade-school posturing. You're welcome to him, but I'm done with you both, as well as Meda.
Snorkler
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
In regard to Media White
As I continue to deal with MW, many have related their interactions with him/her and have decided that correction of his/her unreasoned reflections are hopeless. I do not give up that easily. The point is that he has expressed hateful opinions, which seemed to be restricted by the policy of the Times. Yet, he/she is never restricted. It appears that being a Liberal entitles posters to make comments that would get conservative posters to be banned. Go figure.
In regard to Liberty
He/she complained about a policeman and a police department. The public has the right to make allegations about public institutions on public forums. If you feel the charges are unsubstantiated, then do not believe them. "Hearsay" is inadmissable as evidence, Hearsay is an evidentiary rule; it only applies to test the validity of a charge. Individually, in this court of Public Opinion everyone gets to make and individual determination of validity.
for you to advocate otherwise is to advocate anarchy. What I am advocating for is everyone's right to stand up and make charges public ally. Is that anarchy? I am not sure, but I do believe it is healthier to air complaints and grievances publicly then hide them behind closed doors. The concept of open government is one I think has value and applies to this situation.
And his subsequent ranting, without allowing the accused to present a face to face counter discussion, despite provision of an investigating Officers contact information on this forum, is nothing more than grade-school posturing. The Officer had the opportunity to respond to Liberty on the thread and indicated a preference for a private, (hidden?) conversation. Liberty wanted a public conversation regarding the topic. I do not see how his/her pursuit of a different forum equates to childishness.
The two posters compared
The most Liberty has done is confused many and inconvenienced some. He has not tossed around racial epithets or been as nasty as Media white. Yet you and others are trying to ban Liberty, not Media. Do you see how your efforts might seem a little confusing and even supportive of MW paranoid assertions?
I do not want censorship on a public forum based on confusion and inconvenience, because the forum is too important for that. Censorship based on racism, (although more defensible) still harms a public forum, and should be discouraged, in my opinion.
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 70
Once again, I feel the need to wade in. As to the Liberty posts, the issue that many of us are arguing and the point that you are arguing are not the same. No one is disputing that (s)he has the right to post the discussion, or suggesting censure based on posting the discussion. The difficulty comes with the making of inflammatory comments, personal attacks, and multiple duplication of discussions.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 645
The water is warm, so wade in.
The difficulty comes with the making of inflammatory comments, personal attacks, and multiple duplication of discussions.
The difficulty I see is that Liberty has not violated any of your three items any more then anyone else,(with the exception of multiple discussions). Another poster on this blog has committed the first two far more extensively and no one is asking for that poster to be censored. So it boils down to the fact that Liberty posts a lot. At worst this has caused inconvenience. I think this attack on Liberty is wrong.
I do not like censorship of any poster on this, or any other blog. The point of a public forum is to hear from the public, all of the public. I may not like everything said, I may not understand everything said, I may not even care; but I want everyone to have the freedom to speak( or write as the case may be).
My reason is because I want the right to speak, or write as well.
Also I do not think the Times will actually censor a poster because of a poll.
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 70
I am asking that (s)he be censured, not censored. In fact you were the first to use the word or concept of censorship including this post, only three others have used the word and all clearly stating that we are not in favor of censorship.
Please note the next quoted information, specifically the parts that I have italicized. This is from the bottom of the page and relates directly to this board:
"Although we do not have any obligation to monitor this board, we reserve the right at all times to check this board and to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable to us in our sole discretion and to disclose any information necessary to satisfy the law, regulation, or government request. We also reserve the right to permanently block any user who violates these terms and conditions. All threats to systems or site infrastructure shall be assumed genuine in nature and will be report