|
Author
|
Topic: Freedom Of Speech
|
Randall
Webmaster Posts: 7876
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted April 22, 2011 06:01 PM
  
Please, keep the posts here constructive. The past is in the past. As we move toward the future, I am trying to see the whole picture and find a happy medium between freedom of expression and protecting unpopular speech (sans racial slurs and the like, of course). Should I add the words "inflammatory speech" to the sign-up Agreement? I mean, you can't yell out "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, for instance. But if I add it, how would it be enforced? How would it be determined as to what constitutes inflammatory? Where does it go from freedom of speech to censorship? Where is the line? If we can determine what that line is, we can prevent topics like Coffee's controversial one that caused us so much grief...and learn from history, so that we don't have to repeat it. IP: Logged |
LEXX
Moderator Posts: 5954
From: Still out looking for Schrodinger's cat.......& LEXIGRAMMING.♥.. is my Passion!
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted April 22, 2011 06:21 PM
No slander, libel, lies and personal insults.
No posting private communications.No fighting here at LL.
Take it into a private chat. ------------------
~The present time is theirs, but the future is mine.~Nikola Tesla
~There is no box.~H♥
~Balance is not letting anyone love you less than you love yourself.~Felipe
~I remember, therefore I am immortal~LEXX
~It is far better to regret wrong paths taken than to regret the paths not tried~Giselle
}><}}}(*>~ IP: Logged |
PlutoSquared
Moderator Posts: 4215
From: Mars
Registered: Aug 2010
|
posted April 22, 2011 06:26 PM
I think the line is AT LEAST when someone draws that line. Boundaries are good things, and many of us, myself included have and will tell someone when to get off their thread... I think people should be honest when someone is offending them.A simple, "Please stop, or do not, or no..." etc. is good enough for me. Also, simply telling someone to leave their thread for no reason, obviously not acceptable... there should be good reasons. I also think it should be observed when a thread is offensive to multiple people, and should be given over to the moderators to judge whether or not there is a valid attempt by the poster to discuss a controversial subject. Coffee was obviously NOT trying to engage others in a discussion, or arguement - and others (including me) could tell, so we did not give our honest best. The thread degraded quickly, and could have been shut down much earlier. Treating the threads themselves more respectfully will decrease the numbers of thoughtless ones, and people will probably feel more comfortable in sharing on them - seeing the moderators and members having more control over them. Moderators should observe when someone is using aggressive language and intervene when necessary to prevent things from getting worse. Nothing wrong with having an opinion, only making generalizations and discriminating against certain people, or large groups of people... This should be enforced without preference for membership - meaning, no one, regardless of length of membership gets treated poorly (on purpose) and without intervention. There should be a strict no discrimination policy - it's one thing to discuss discrimination subjects, another to perpetuate them, when it is socially unacceptable in most places in the U.S.
IP: Logged |
PlutoSquared
Moderator Posts: 4215
From: Mars
Registered: Aug 2010
|
posted April 22, 2011 06:28 PM
There should also be a strict policy of moderators not degrading or speaking negatively of other moderators.Unity and fairness has to move from the top down... IP: Logged |
Randall
Webmaster Posts: 7876
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted April 22, 2011 06:29 PM
I like the no fighting. I could forbid argumentative posts, but who determines what qualifies as argumentative? My attempt is to prevent another Coffee fiasco; however, if I go beyond "personal insults" in reigning in unpopular speech, isn't that censorship? ------------------
"All deaths are suicides, do you realize that? Every single one. The only distinction is that, with some people, suicide is a subconscious choice, and with others it's a conscious choice. Otherwise, those who commit suicide and those who succumb to accident, illness or "old age," die for exactly the same reason: belief in the inevitability of death." Linda Goodman IP: Logged |
Randall
Webmaster Posts: 7876
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted April 22, 2011 06:40 PM
What about a committee of sorts (as suggested by Betty Boop), where we could discuss whether or not a topic/string is being used to intentionally incite? IP: Logged |
Randall
Webmaster Posts: 7876
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted April 22, 2011 06:47 PM
PS, that policy would also apply to you, as you have been quick to jump in on Ami. Just sayin'. It would have to apply to all Mods equally.------------------
"All deaths are suicides, do you realize that? Every single one. The only distinction is that, with some people, suicide is a subconscious choice, and with others it's a conscious choice. Otherwise, those who commit suicide and those who succumb to accident, illness or "old age," die for exactly the same reason: belief in the inevitability of death." Linda Goodman IP: Logged |
PlutoSquared
Moderator Posts: 4215
From: Mars
Registered: Aug 2010
|
posted April 22, 2011 07:33 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Randall: PS, that policy would also apply to you, as you have been quick to jump in on Ami. Just sayin'. It would have to apply to all Mods equally.
You must know I realized this when I wrote it - but, in my defense, I've never personally insulted Ami aside from disagreement - except for off site stuff. IP: Logged |
Ami Anne
Moderator Posts: 8878
From: Pluto/house next to NickiG
Registered: Sep 2010
|
posted April 22, 2011 08:54 PM
I think Freedom of Speech has to be a top value.
In the US,we have Freedom of Speech but cannot yell "Fire" in a crowded theater so there is NEVER total freedom of speech.
For me,personally,I would rather be called a name,even a slur in the pursuit of freedom of speech than have the environment sanitized.
I think there were many issues that were at play in this last encounter.
It may help to look at them one by one in the attempts to address them.
I am not saying we have to do it ,here,and now,but just to be aware that there were a multitude of factors.------------------
In this world,you will have tribulation but do not fear I have overcome the world.
He who controls his Spirit is greater than he who controls a city
Proverbs IP: Logged |
PlutoSquared
Moderator Posts: 4215
From: Mars
Registered: Aug 2010
|
posted April 22, 2011 09:10 PM
Here we go... the exclusions begin already, for the preferential treatment of certain members...Either all personal insults are unacceptable, or they're all acceptable. IP: Logged |
Ami Anne
Moderator Posts: 8878
From: Pluto/house next to NickiG
Registered: Sep 2010
|
posted April 22, 2011 09:13 PM
I don't know how this would /could work but I will describe the situation.
There was a Mod who wrote a thread on her child and his G/f.
She wanted info about if they were soul mates.
Someone came on and said that the poster was an intrusive mother who needed to leave her child alone,in so many words.
The Mod felt bullied and ended up leaving.
I got on the thread to try to help.
I told the Mod that LL cannot be sanitized from "bullies" if this was a bully situation.
It was a half and half.
I felt that some people were attacking JUST to attack.Others were giving their POV.
I tried to tell the Mod that she needed to not pay attention to the hurtful posts but SHE felt someone should have intervened and not allowed it.
What should have been done ,here,if anything?------------------
In this world,you will have tribulation but do not fear I have overcome the world.
He who controls his Spirit is greater than he who controls a city
Proverbs IP: Logged |
Rogue Guru
Knowflake Posts: 154
From: Pleasantville, State of Euphoria, USA
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted April 22, 2011 09:17 PM
Responding to the topic-starting post, I'd like to point out that mature persons with an ounce of common sense never need to waste days and hours and weeks -- and years -- rehashing these kinds of details.The problem isn't in what you allow here, Randall, it's in who. IP: Logged |
Ami Anne
Moderator Posts: 8878
From: Pluto/house next to NickiG
Registered: Sep 2010
|
posted April 22, 2011 09:18 PM
To me,THIS is the grey area situation.
Swearing at someone is an obvious violation.
Viciousness is an obvious violation.
There are many gray areas such as the one I described.
I would rather have less censorship that more,myself.------------------
In this world,you will have tribulation but do not fear I have overcome the world.
He who controls his Spirit is greater than he who controls a city
Proverbs IP: Logged |
Rogue Guru
Knowflake Posts: 154
From: Pleasantville, State of Euphoria, USA
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted April 22, 2011 09:37 PM
An organization isn't primarily it's rules and structure.An organization is the people it's comprised of. You can either control what Lindaland is, or you can have a hands-off policy and let it become... whatever it becomes. You've been trying to do both for years now, and it has never worked. Because it cannot work. Popularity and approval from the general public mean nothing, and concerns over it just get in the way of accomplishing anything useful. Worrying about whether or not new people will join, or current people will leave, just gets in the way of accomplishing anything useful. Would you rather have a good site that enriches the lives of its ten users, or a crappy site that doesn't do squat for its 500 users? I've watched this place devolve from the former into the latter. Time to turn the ship around. IP: Logged |
Randall
Webmaster Posts: 7876
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted April 22, 2011 10:14 PM
I disagree. Lindaland provides something of value to everyone here, or they wouldn't be here. The issue is in how to handle the disruptions to a normally smooth-running site. And now that there is a concrete structure in which to deal with that, progress will ensue. Onward and upward!IP: Logged |
Randall
Webmaster Posts: 7876
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted April 22, 2011 10:21 PM
BTW, we have no trouble getting new people. Dozens sign up each day. And I accept that people will leave. Some people say I should be more concerned with it. But that is their choice. I don't worry over that. Life has many more priorities I must address than someone deciding to find different ways to pursue their happiness and/or personal development. I just try to make Lindaland the best it can be, and as the site evolves, it won't jibe with everyone. Such is life. And I'm okay with it.IP: Logged |
emitres
Moderator Posts: 287
From:
Registered: Aug 2010
|
posted April 23, 2011 09:36 PM
Rogue has made a very valid point... one that shouldn't be too quickly overlooked -
" you can either control what LL is " or let it become... i don't know that it's possible to have a happy medium - there are too many variables and quite simply, some folks here are not interested in even being remotely civil to one another... and asking people to not fight - well, i do believe it's been tried before... it would be nice if the "playing field" were equal for everyone but it quite simply can't be - that's like asking and expecting everyone to get along... it's sad that threads require closing because of behaviour but there you have it... it's disheartening to realize that more and more people require "policing" and that fewer and fewer are willing to simply let things go - most of the discussions here would run out of steam if we were less interested in being RIGHT all the time... i don't envy your position Randall... and i think that, in the end, you will have to make choices that are bound to upset - separate the wheat from the chaff...IP: Logged |
Randall
Webmaster Posts: 7876
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted April 23, 2011 10:03 PM
I choose to allow LL to grow and evolve while reigning in those who can't play nice and doing so quickly.IP: Logged |
RIAFC
Knowflake Posts: 32
From: Cardiff
Registered: Mar 2011
|
posted April 25, 2011 10:41 PM
There's freedom of speech, and then there's one individual being at the heart of yet another childish argument everytime i log on, and playing the 'little girl lost' routine into the bargain. Randall just an observation and i hope you don't mind but what i've just described seems to be a bit all-pervading here and makes the forum look silly. It's like a one person 'show'. I s'pose it's mildy entertaining but it definately detracts from the maturity and credibility of the forum. My advice would be to have a section just for them where they can post and post to their hearts content and people can go there to argue with them about non-astro stuff and emotionally charged garbage if they wish, but it gets contained just in that section. Like a 'play area' or padded cell section if you like. Then the rest of the forum can be free of it. I know you won't do it because it would single that person out but it would seriously clean the forum up imo. I sometimes find it hard to find a sensible and interesting thread to read because this one person posts in every thread. And when they're not playing innocent in a row they're wittering and chuckling strangely to theirself. I've seen some threads started by them where they've been the only one replying for the first two or three pages! So maybe my suggestion might work?------------------
Trying to be good, feels good. IP: Logged |
Randall
Webmaster Posts: 7876
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted April 25, 2011 11:50 PM
That's not very nice.IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
