I'd like you all to have a look at this

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Deudalus
-snip-
Honestly, if my ignore button worked on members I'd be pretty happy around here.

My "ignore button" works just fine.

It's not a fusetalk feature, it's my own personal ignore button. I don't believe every post deserves a response, particulary if it's nothing but personal insults/flamming.

If the post has both content and insults, I'll usually edit out the insults and go on to address the content in my reponse as if the insults were never there.

I suggest others might try their own ignore button. There's no need to go tit-for-tat and carry on little flame wars to see who can get in the last word.

Fern

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Deudalus
-snip-
Honestly, if my ignore button worked on members I'd be pretty happy around here.

My "ignore button" works just fine.

It's not a fusetalk feature, it's my own personal ignore button. I don't believe every post deserves a response, particulary if it's nothing but personal insults/flamming.

If the post has both content and insults, I'll usually edit out the insults and go on to address the content in my reponse as if the insults were never there.

I suggest others might try their own ignore button. There's no need to go tit-for-tat and carry on little flame wars to see who can get in the last word.

Fern

Actually i found my own "ignore" button consistently only this year

You are actually asking for self-restraint and for a display of maturity from many that view posting in P&N as a Game?
:Q

--really?
:shocked:

i respectfully ask you to consider that you are a Moderator - by nature .. "moderate" - there is a *balance* ... and you apparently view this Forum at the least with all seriousness; although we DO all realize it IS also entertainment. i happen to share your Personal PoV and view our forums as an superb place to make "contacts", friends, and to LEARN what other people from all over the world think - besides putting out my own "stupid view that i am really proud of" - if you remember my very first sig here - and i also enjoy giving my reasons for the way i believe as i do and i also enjoy the spontaneous 'off-the-cuff' fisticuffs here and in Video; especially in Video as i am very HW/Video-game oriented and i love everything computer-related that is graphics and my passion is to delve into the technical and dissect just about everything with a view to becoming Expert and i am quite certain i will only like it more as i grow old here.

But i do not tolerate Trolls very well nor will i accept Chaos and Dissention for its Own Sake ... i may be "apoppin" - Chaotic Neutral at ATF, but my Friends know me as "Mark" - "Lawful Neutral"
-it is the way I live ... and i dare not expect anything of my fellow man nor will i judge them as i cannot yet ascertain motive with absolute certainty.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: apoppin
You are actually asking for self-restraint and for a display of maturity.....

Yeah, I thought it fit in nicely with the overall theme of the thread.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: apoppin
You are actually asking for self-restraint and for a display of maturity.....

Yeah, I thought it fit in nicely with the overall theme of the thread.

i am certainly not arguing with you. i fully agree with you. i think you already know that.

i am just asking you to realize that there are those among us that do not agree with you at all and they active work to sabotage and undermine this forum's credibility and they take delight in watching their handiwork cause another's otherwise good thread to go up in flames.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Guess you could say when you get attacked on a regular basis you adapt

Best example of Darwin's survival of the fittest

Actually you have given a correct assessment of part of it ...

In this case, the 'attackee' has to cooperate to some extent with the attacker to allow Darwin's theory to fully apply.
-and i have seen higher animals lay a trap for their would-be predators sometimes even to provoking an attack.

Censorship is Censorship no matter how you wrap and package it.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Guess you could say when you get attacked on a regular basis you adapt

Best example of Darwin's survival of the fittest

Actually you have given a correct assessment of part of it ...

In this case, the 'attackee' has to cooperate to some extent with the attacker to allow Darwin's theory to fully apply.
-and i have seen higher animals lay a trap for their would-be predators sometimes even to provoking an attack.

Censorship is Censorship no matter how you wrap and package it.

Let me please dispute and dismiss your completely blanket statement with something you should NOT attempt:

Yell Fire in a crowded theater!

Afterward, use your defense about "censorship" and "freedom of speech" in the face of very hard consequences

In my analogy as presented above, let me know how far - practically - you think you will get.

i want your analysis
.. after you are finished .. *apply* my extreme example to P&N and your situation - if you can make that leap.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Guess you could say when you get attacked on a regular basis you adapt

Best example of Darwin's survival of the fittest

Actually you have given a correct assessment of part of it ...

In this case, the 'attackee' has to cooperate to some extent with the attacker to allow Darwin's theory to fully apply.
-and i have seen higher animals lay a trap for their would-be predators sometimes even to provoking an attack.

Censorship is Censorship no matter how you wrap and package it.

Let me please dispute and dismiss your completely blanket statement with something you should NOT attempt:

Yell Fire in a crowded theater!

Afterward, use your defense about "censorship" and "freedom of speech" in the face of very hard consequences

In my analogy as presented above, let me know how far - practically - you think you will get.

i want your analysis
.. after you are finished .. *apply* my extreme example to P&N and your situation - if you can make that leap.

Posting something on an Internet forum != "Yell Fire in a crowded theater!"

Show how it possibly can.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Guess you could say when you get attacked on a regular basis you adapt

Best example of Darwin's survival of the fittest

Actually you have given a correct assessment of part of it ...

In this case, the 'attackee' has to cooperate to some extent with the attacker to allow Darwin's theory to fully apply.
-and i have seen higher animals lay a trap for their would-be predators sometimes even to provoking an attack.

Censorship is Censorship no matter how you wrap and package it.

Let me please dispute and dismiss your completely blanket statement with something you should NOT attempt:

Yell Fire in a crowded theater!

Afterward, use your defense about "censorship" and "freedom of speech" in the face of very hard consequences

In my analogy as presented above, let me know how far - practically - you think you will get.

i want your analysis
.. after you are finished .. *apply* my extreme example to P&N and your situation - if you can make that leap.

Posting something on an Internet forum != "Yell Fire in a crowded theater!"

Show how it possibly can.

i did not say "equals" .. i said it was an extreme analogy

let me try again without giving up on it ... perhaps my analogy was too just extreme for you to make that leap to your situation in P&N as i had hoped. .. i will further elaborate

Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater - is what humans refer to as "anarchy"
- it is the pinnacle of expressing Darwin's theory practically in that the Strongest and/or Smartest of Us can Do it and Laugh as they 'get away with it' while the 'lesser' creatures - in their opinion - trample, injure and perhaps kill themselves. A real predator could plan, precipitate even use the confusion for his own motive, perhaps to eliminate someone.

what yelling 'fire' ultimately accomplishes is a planned *chaos* and it is the ultimate expression of one's personal freedom to act completely uncensored and unrestrained.

P&N actually has societally imposed "rules" - as well as rules imposed by a private organization acting through their ToS and with their moderators to enforce it - that allow individuals of all beliefs to interact - it is a "watering hole" of sorts ... and predation and attacks are far more restricted than in the "wild"

better?


or shall i start over with a less extreme example of what you yourself brought up - the Law of Survival vs. the Law of the Jungle

we are not operating under strict Jungle rules as you appear to wish

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Guess you could say when you get attacked on a regular basis you adapt

Best example of Darwin's survival of the fittest

Actually you have given a correct assessment of part of it ...

In this case, the 'attackee' has to cooperate to some extent with the attacker to allow Darwin's theory to fully apply.
-and i have seen higher animals lay a trap for their would-be predators sometimes even to provoking an attack.

Censorship is Censorship no matter how you wrap and package it.

Let me please dispute and dismiss your completely blanket statement with something you should NOT attempt:

Yell Fire in a crowded theater!

Afterward, use your defense about "censorship" and "freedom of speech" in the face of very hard consequences

In my analogy as presented above, let me know how far - practically - you think you will get.

i want your analysis
.. after you are finished .. *apply* my extreme example to P&N and your situation - if you can make that leap.

Posting something on an Internet forum != "Yell Fire in a crowded theater!"

Show how it possibly can.

i did not say "equals" .. i said it was an extreme analogy

let me try again without giving up on it ... perhaps my analogy was too just extreme for you to make that leap to your situation in P&N as i had hoped. .. i will further elaborate

Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater - is what humans refer to as "anarchy"
- it is the pinnacle of expressing Darwin's theory practically in that the Strongest and/or Smartest of Us can Do it and Laugh as they 'get away with it' while the 'lesser' creatures - in their opinion - trample, injure and perhaps kill themselves. A real predator could plan, precipitate even use the confusion for his own motive, perhaps to eliminate someone.

what yelling 'fire' ultimately accomplishes is a planned *chaos* and it is the ultimate expression of one's personal freedom to act completely uncensored and unrestrained.

P&N actually has societally imposed "rules" - as well as rules imposed by a private organization acting through their ToS and with their moderators to enforce it - that allow individuals of all beliefs to interact - it is a "watering hole" of sorts ... and predation and attacks are far more restricted than in the "wild"

better?


or shall i start over with a less extreme example of what you yourself brought up - the Law of Survival vs. the Law of the Jungle

we are not operating under strict Jungle rules as you appear to wish

You're awfully winded in your quest to simply state it's censorship.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
It is no secret that we here on P&N are opinionated and sensitive to the news around us regarding US and world issues. It's also well known that we can get carried away with things. Some people like to use shock value by using inflammatory lead-in titles. Controversy, like sex, sells.

We recently had a thread here which typifies what I mean. This is not an invitation to "critique" the poster, however I am pointing out that titles like this immediately get people ruffled and looking for a fight.

It's no trick to do this on the internet, where in real life it may get us a punch in the face.

Here is the bottom line. My suggestion is that before you post try to think how your title will be perceived by someone coming into this forum who does NOT usually do so, then phrase the title in a way that would have people want to look at it, but not leave in disgust and may even want to post a response but not in anger.

I think it may make for a more lively forum in a constructive way since others may want to participate. I could be wrong, however why don't you give it a try.

Now for the disclaimer. You people have known me for some time. I'm a straight shooter, non PC guy. I tell you how I see it. Because I am a member AND a mod I want you to know this is MY idea. As such there has been NO CHANGE in how this forum is moderated. I am not coming in with a hammer to beat on you. On the contrary, it is no trick to lock and make a comment. It's not about we moderators enforcing rules, but you using common sense.

Will you give it a try?

Topic Title: Clinton Caught In A Lie. Again.
Topic Summary: Ohio Hospital Tells Mrs. Clinton's Campaign To Retract One Of Their Fairy Tales

Originally posted by: Pabster
Story here.

Deplorable. That's really the only word for it.

This is part of a continued pattern on the part of Hillary and her surrogates. Lie, mislead, spin, deny, rinse, repeat.

This the the kind of posts your looking for? :roll:

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Guess you could say when you get attacked on a regular basis you adapt

Best example of Darwin's survival of the fittest

Actually you have given a correct assessment of part of it ...

In this case, the 'attackee' has to cooperate to some extent with the attacker to allow Darwin's theory to fully apply.
-and i have seen higher animals lay a trap for their would-be predators sometimes even to provoking an attack.

Censorship is Censorship no matter how you wrap and package it.

Let me please dispute and dismiss your completely blanket statement with something you should NOT attempt:

Yell Fire in a crowded theater!

Afterward, use your defense about "censorship" and "freedom of speech" in the face of very hard consequences

In my analogy as presented above, let me know how far - practically - you think you will get.

i want your analysis
.. after you are finished .. *apply* my extreme example to P&N and your situation - if you can make that leap.

Posting something on an Internet forum != "Yell Fire in a crowded theater!"

Show how it possibly can.

i did not say "equals" .. i said it was an extreme analogy

let me try again without giving up on it ... perhaps my analogy was too just extreme for you to make that leap to your situation in P&N as i had hoped. .. i will further elaborate

Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater - is what humans refer to as "anarchy"
- it is the pinnacle of expressing Darwin's theory practically in that the Strongest and/or Smartest of Us can Do it and Laugh as they 'get away with it' while the 'lesser' creatures - in their opinion - trample, injure and perhaps kill themselves. A real predator could plan, precipitate even use the confusion for his own motive, perhaps to eliminate someone.

what yelling 'fire' ultimately accomplishes is a planned *chaos* and it is the ultimate expression of one's personal freedom to act completely uncensored and unrestrained.

P&N actually has societally imposed "rules" - as well as rules imposed by a private organization acting through their ToS and with their moderators to enforce it - that allow individuals of all beliefs to interact - it is a "watering hole" of sorts ... and predation and attacks are far more restricted than in the "wild"

better?


or shall i start over with a less extreme example of what you yourself brought up - the Law of Survival vs. the Law of the Jungle

we are not operating under strict Jungle rules as you appear to wish

You're awfully winded in your quest to simply state it's censorship.

You are the one that pretended not to understand me the first time
-i am as succinct as the matter requires

After our little encounter - right here and just now - i have to believe that what you are doing what you do here is because of some rreversal in you own life .. i don't remember you being a genuine troll before, so i suspect it is just something completely unrelated to ATF and i hope it is just a 'phase'. However, your apparent self-destructive bitterness and martyr-complex coupled with delusions of persecution appears to be your own personal blind-spot that keeps you from posting anything constructive anymore. Too bad .. i used to like to read your posts - long ago - when you weren't so obviously cynical and bitter.

i wish you well

... and to confirm for you what you already know .. Yes it IS censorship here .. most of us are "smart enough" [i am not talking about intelligence] to censor our own posts as we accept *consequences* - not to cry and whine like an immature child because we got exactly what we knew we would get - by breaking rules

By Strict Jungle "rules" you would have been dead a long time ago .. it is only by grace that you continue to post here in the hope you will figure out what everyone else can see and laughs about behind your back.

If you want complete true FREEDOM - you must find a way around the Law of Gravity first - then we will all take you seriously when you post about "censorship" here.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Guess you could say when you get attacked on a regular basis you adapt

Best example of Darwin's survival of the fittest

Actually you have given a correct assessment of part of it ...

In this case, the 'attackee' has to cooperate to some extent with the attacker to allow Darwin's theory to fully apply.
-and i have seen higher animals lay a trap for their would-be predators sometimes even to provoking an attack.

Censorship is Censorship no matter how you wrap and package it.

Let me please dispute and dismiss your completely blanket statement with something you should NOT attempt:

Yell Fire in a crowded theater!

Afterward, use your defense about "censorship" and "freedom of speech" in the face of very hard consequences

In my analogy as presented above, let me know how far - practically - you think you will get.

i want your analysis
.. after you are finished .. *apply* my extreme example to P&N and your situation - if you can make that leap.

Posting something on an Internet forum != "Yell Fire in a crowded theater!"

Show how it possibly can.

i did not say "equals" .. i said it was an extreme analogy

let me try again without giving up on it ... perhaps my analogy was too just extreme for you to make that leap to your situation in P&N as i had hoped. .. i will further elaborate

Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater - is what humans refer to as "anarchy"
- it is the pinnacle of expressing Darwin's theory practically in that the Strongest and/or Smartest of Us can Do it and Laugh as they 'get away with it' while the 'lesser' creatures - in their opinion - trample, injure and perhaps kill themselves. A real predator could plan, precipitate even use the confusion for his own motive, perhaps to eliminate someone.

what yelling 'fire' ultimately accomplishes is a planned *chaos* and it is the ultimate expression of one's personal freedom to act completely uncensored and unrestrained.

P&N actually has societally imposed "rules" - as well as rules imposed by a private organization acting through their ToS and with their moderators to enforce it - that allow individuals of all beliefs to interact - it is a "watering hole" of sorts ... and predation and attacks are far more restricted than in the "wild"

better?


or shall i start over with a less extreme example of what you yourself brought up - the Law of Survival vs. the Law of the Jungle

we are not operating under strict Jungle rules as you appear to wish

You're awfully winded in your quest to simply state it's censorship.

You are the one that pretended not to understand me the first time
-i can be as succinct as the matter requires

after our little encounter - right here and just now - i have to believe that you are doing what you do here because of some recent bitterness due to some reversal in you own life .. i don't remember you being a genuine troll before, so i suspect it is just something completely unrelated to ATF and i hope it is just a 'phase'. However, your apparent self-destructive bitterness and martyr-complex coupled with delusions of persecution appears to be your own personal blind-spot that keep you from posting anything constructive. Too bad .. i used to like to read your posts - long ago - when you weren't so obviously cynical and bitter.

i wish you well

... and to confirm for you what you already know .. Yes it IS censorship here .. most of us are "smart" [i am not talking about intelligence] to censor our own posts as we accept *consequences* - not to cry and whine like an immature child because we got exactly what we knew we would get - by breaking rules

By Strict Jungle "rules" you would have been dead a long time ago .. it is only by grace that you continue to post here in the hope you will figure out what everyone else can see and laughs about behind you back.

If you want complete FREEDOM - you must find a way around the Law of Gravity first - then we will all take you seriously when you post about "censorship"

Do I kiss your golden shoes?

 

[apoppin]

you'd have to buy me a pair first .. size 11
:gift:

obviously you didn't read my posts with any understanding nor application .. i am sorry to have wasted your time and i wish you well
... and i am done talking about it with you as it will do no good for me .. i am OK with the situation in P&N and i'd like to see more self-moderation

we can just continue to disagree .. and i am also OK with that

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: apoppin
you'd have to buy me a pair first .. size 11
:gift:

obviously you didn't read my posts with any understanding nor application .. i am sorry to have wasted your time and i wish you well
... and i am done talking about it with you as it will do no good for me .. i am OK with the situation in P&N and i'd like to see more self-moderation

we can just continue to disagree .. and i am also OK with that

Have you seriously looked at any of the other posters such as one I posted a couple of posts up?

What makes him and others like him so special?

Does he pee or sh!t differently than I so? Do you pee or sh!t differently than I do?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin
you'd have to buy me a pair first .. size 11
:gift:

obviously you didn't read my posts with any understanding nor application .. i am sorry to have wasted your time and i wish you well
... and i am done talking about it with you as it will do no good for me .. i am OK with the situation in P&N and i'd like to see more self-moderation

we can just continue to disagree .. and i am also OK with that

Have you seriously looked at any of the other posters such as one I posted a couple of posts up?

What makes him and others like him so special?

Does he pee or sh!t differently than I so? Do you pee or sh!t differently than I do?

What if we do? .. and i hope you do not see me as "special"



i meant what i said .. everything i wanted to say to you [and a lot more because you pretended to not understand] i did already say. i would be repeating myself - for what a "post count"? You can re-read my posts and take this up in PMs with me if you sincerely want to discuss this without bringing "me and you" into this thread.

I am done here disputing with you and i also mean it when i say i wish you well

aloha

Mark

aka apoppin

edited

 

[TallBill]

Why not make users post article titles if they are quoting articles?

 

[Madwand1]

I'm all for self-restraint, but "self moderation" is a problematic term as there's really no such thing. We need moderators to do what they do -- big stick, little stick, whatever, as appeals to politeness or PC-ness won't work at times, for which we need moderation.

I understand that the OP tried to make the point that moderation is not going to be changed, but I still feel that this was an unfortunate choice of terms, and that the perspective of moderation as moderation and user behavior as a random variable which needs to be encouraged to the right and forcibly so in some cases should be clearly maintained.

I also feel that the referenced thread appears to be an example of some hand wringing by the moderators and some sort of relief when it apparently triggered a different violation. That OP and title was clearly offensive, and that alone could have been enough to trigger moderation. So from that point of view, this entire discussion amounts to moderators looking for an out from having to deploy the sticks. Well, that's never going to happen, so if that means whacking some borderline cases, and sometimes not, I think we can all live with that as human limitations.

If we're going to appeal to better behavior by the user community here, I'd appeal to honesty first. Requiring proofs or links or whatever backups aren't going to accomplish much when posters are intellectually dishonest and don't seriously consider the perceived other side regardless of content. I think this is more of a root cause; more easily defended than some notions of political correctness, and also deals with gross exaggeration, attention seeking, flame-baiting, etc.. In this, I'd be for honesty over political correctness.

As some have noted, it's often better to portray bigotry as bigotry rather than to cover it up and falsely deny its existence. That however does not excuse the dishonestly of portraying a potential bigotry in others as a real one of your own.

Of course, appeals to honesty are only going to work for a few who are inclined to truth over perceived political gains, so to some would be obvious and self-imposed to some degree, while to others technical details to somehow circumvent for the desired ends. But it's a stronger foundation which can lead to better behavior by all, and can also be included in a limited degree in moderation activity.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Madwand1
I'm all for self-restraint, but "self moderation" is a problematic term as there's really no such thing. We need moderators to do what they do -- big stick, little stick, whatever, as appeals to politeness or PC-ness won't work at times, for which we need moderation.

I understand that the OP tried to make the point that moderation is not going to be changed, but I still feel that this was an unfortunate choice of terms, and that the perspective of moderation as moderation and user behavior as a random variable which needs to be encouraged to the right and forcibly so in some cases should be clearly maintained.

I also feel that the referenced thread appears to be an example of some hand wringing by the moderators and some sort of relief when it apparently triggered a different violation. That OP and title was clearly offensive, and that alone could have been enough to trigger moderation. So from that point of view, this entire discussion amounts to moderators looking for an out from having to deploy the sticks. Well, that's never going to happen, so if that means whacking some borderline cases, and sometimes not, I think we can all live with that as human limitations.

If we're going to appeal to better behavior by the user community here, I'd appeal to honesty first. Requiring proofs or links or whatever backups aren't going to accomplish much when posters are intellectually dishonest and don't seriously consider the perceived other side regardless of content. I think this is more of a root cause; more easily defended than some notions of political correctness, and also deals with gross exaggeration, attention seeking, flame-baiting, etc.. In this, I'd be for honesty over political correctness.

As some have noted, it's often better to portray bigotry as bigotry rather than to cover it up and falsely deny its existence. That however does not excuse the dishonestly of portraying a potential bigotry in others as a real one of your own.

Of course, appeals to honesty are only going to work for a few who are inclined to truth over perceived political gains, so to some would be obvious and self-imposed to some degree, while to others technical details to somehow circumvent for the desired ends. But it's a stronger foundation which can lead to better behavior by all, and can also be included in a limited degree in moderation activity.

i think i also fell into the trap of using "self-moderation" for the better term - self restraint.

Sorry

i was a moderator for HW's P&N - Video last Summer. Because i had such a reputation there as one of the most controversial posters, *anything* i said as mod or member - no matter my intentions, no matter "how innocent" it actually was; my posts would be seized upon and nitpicked to death to show that i was somehow "biased" toward AMD and against whoever needed disciplining [actually i am biased, look at my sig ]. And no matter what i did, it would be "wrong" to someone and would offend them and they would run off complaining and Video forum's Harmony suffered.

After a very short time, i actually just stopped posting in Video while i just moderated - and it was peaceful ... and it killed me .. i was quiet and i learned to stay quiet realizing that my opinion really doesn't matter to any discussion as long as it would stay 'on track' and not deteriorate into "personal" insults, flaming or blatant trolling.

But i was selfish .. i could not do what the mods here do in P&N - i am amazed they actually made this a relatively "safe" place to post in a relatively short time - for the majority of us - while they still themselves post here and manage to successfully retain the "flavor" of P&N - my hat is off to most of 'em! ..

Anyway, i gave up my position as a mod to post as freely as i wanted to. Then i realized that freedom was an illusion - also ... and i am now posting here.

My own personal experience is possibly unrelated to this thread but i thought i'd mention it since at the time of posting it somehow seemed relevant

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: apoppin

i could not do what the mods here do in P&N - i am amazed they actually made this a relatively "safe" place to post in a relatively short time - for the majority of us - while they still themselves post here and manage to successfully retain the "flavor" of P&N - my hat is off to most of 'em! ..

Anyway, i gave up my position as a mod to post as freely as i wanted to. Then i realized that freedom was an illusion - also ... and i am now posting here.

My own personal experience is possibly unrelated to this thread but i thought i'd mention it since at the time of posting it somehow seemed relevant

At least you said "majority".

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it of course but not all would agree.

Tis the question and the answer, for a Democracy does the majority rule or the minority rule?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

i could not do what the mods here do in P&N - i am amazed they actually made this a relatively "safe" place to post in a relatively short time - for the majority of us - while they still themselves post here and manage to successfully retain the "flavor" of P&N - my hat is off to most of 'em! ..

Anyway, i gave up my position as a mod to post as freely as i wanted to. Then i realized that freedom was an illusion - also ... and i am now posting here.

My own personal experience is possibly unrelated to this thread but i thought i'd mention it since at the time of posting it somehow seemed relevant

At least you said "majority".

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it of course but not all would agree.

Tis the question and the answer, for a Democracy does the majority rule or the minority rule?

to be or not to be, that is the question .. would you like an answer to yours? it may be more than you are prepared for

Did i also mention that i really DO believe that the "needs of the many are greater than the needs of the one" - in *general* ?


there are exceptions of course .. but they are exceptions

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

At least you said "majority".

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it of course but not all would agree.

Tis the question and the answer, for a Democracy does the majority rule or the minority rule?

1) Anandtech isn't a Democracy...
2) See #1

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

At least you said "majority".

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it of course but not all would agree.

Tis the question and the answer, for a Democracy does the majority rule or the minority rule?

1) Anandtech isn't a Democracy...
2) See #1

Well, take it the next step ... there are NO "true democracies" on planet earth - unless you count anarchy as the ultimate expression of personal freedom - perhaps even in a broken down democracy - and it is certainly destructive - not constructive.

We the majority don't want "how to break it here" in P&N .. we ultimately appear to be looking for "solutions" .. or at least a way to air our views without offending the sensibilities of the majority unnecessarily - like yelling 'fire' in a half-crowded theater .. less consequential, to be sure than in a packed theater - but damn annoying all the same. Nor are personal attacks, name calling and flames useful at an Internet "watering hole". In nature lesser disrupters are also dealt with most severely.

There are places for anarchists to discuss .... and possibly surprising, they also have "rules" ... the violators of those rules are met with extreme prejudice and real permanent consequences. Most un democratic.

We have choice of "rule" besides democracy .. and it appears that democracy is the best thing that mankind has yet to come up with that somewhat practically works for the societies of this planet. Ultimately the UN was supposed to be a forum to air national, regional and planetary issues and work out differences between nations.

Rules make society function or it ceases to be a society

 

[Sinsear]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Guess you could say when you get attacked on a regular basis you adapt

Best example of Darwin's survival of the fittest

Actually you have given a correct assessment of part of it ...

In this case, the 'attackee' has to cooperate to some extent with the attacker to allow Darwin's theory to fully apply.
-and i have seen higher animals lay a trap for their would-be predators sometimes even to provoking an attack.

Censorship is Censorship no matter how you wrap and package it.

Let me please dispute and dismiss your completely blanket statement with something you should NOT attempt:

Yell Fire in a crowded theater!

Afterward, use your defense about "censorship" and "freedom of speech" in the face of very hard consequences

In my analogy as presented above, let me know how far - practically - you think you will get.

i want your analysis
.. after you are finished .. *apply* my extreme example to P&N and your situation - if you can make that leap.

Posting something on an Internet forum != "Yell Fire in a crowded theater!"

Show how it possibly can.

Drive for 5.


------------------------------------------
This post is not applicable to this thread and it triggered theses comments and the post below.

Any more similar posts will be moved or this thread locked as a hijacking

Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Sinsear

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Guess you could say when you get attacked on a regular basis you adapt

Best example of Darwin's survival of the fittest

Actually you have given a correct assessment of part of it ...

In this case, the 'attackee' has to cooperate to some extent with the attacker to allow Darwin's theory to fully apply.
-and i have seen higher animals lay a trap for their would-be predators sometimes even to provoking an attack.

Censorship is Censorship no matter how you wrap and package it.

Let me please dispute and dismiss your completely blanket statement with something you should NOT attempt:

Yell Fire in a crowded theater!

Afterward, use your defense about "censorship" and "freedom of speech" in the face of very hard consequences

In my analogy as presented above, let me know how far - practically - you think you will get.

i want your analysis
.. after you are finished .. *apply* my extreme example to P&N and your situation - if you can make that leap.

Posting something on an Internet forum != "Yell Fire in a crowded theater!"

Show how it possibly can.

Drive for 5.

Prove they are not holding back. Based on $50 to over $100 it should be well above $5, actually closer to $8


------------------------------------------
This post is not applicable to this thread - It belongs in the Fuel thread if at all.
Any more similar posts will be moved or this thread locked as a hijacking

Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy