Would ye consider modifying this forum rule? The rights to freedom of speech should apply almost everywhere in the country. Too often political topics are squelched, nixed, censored, erased etc under the guise of "protection". This form of censorship was (and somewhat still is) in most parts of the world and shouldnt be tolerated in the US. Advertising & porn should be the only topics shunned on a forum such as this (maybe even they should be confined to their own separate locale within the board but I digress). I will cite Orwells work and the Bill of Rights as grounds for this important request.
Forum rules change request
- Thread starter SLAAKMAN
- Start date
Would ye consider modifying this forum rule? The rights to freedom of speech should apply almost everywhere in the country. Too often political topics are squelched, nixed, censored, erased etc under the guise of "protection". This form of censorship was (and somewhat still is) in most parts of the world and shouldnt be tolerated in the US. Advertising & porn should be the only topics shunned on a forum such as this (maybe even they should be confined to their own separate locale within the board but I digress). I will cite Orwells work and the Bill of Rights as grounds for this important request.
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
Your rights to freedom of speech do, in fact, apply here. You will never (or almost never) face political reprisal or imprisonment for the things you say here. However the forum administration is also not obligated to endure whatever insipid bullcrap you feel is so important to say if it runs contrary to the established rules of the forum.
If Donald Trump rents out space to give a speech, and someone comes into the space to remind him that Muslims are humans too, he is perfectly within his rights to have that person escorted off the premises for what he said.
Attachments
Freedom of thought should be protected in every public forum. Too many are run with totalitarian methods that censor opposition or controversial views. Chomsky made a good point when he said that freedom of speech should be protected even for dedicated liars-
Noam Chomsky - Interview w/ Israeli News 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BM7IFBIfQ1M
Noam Chomsky - Interview w/ Israeli News 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BM7IFBIfQ1M
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
This is not a public forum.
Noble Zarkon
Elite Quattromaster - Immortal (BTS)
Super Moderator
Hall of Fame Staff
GOTM Staff
Supporter
The forum rules are sensibly balanced already IMO.
Btw we don't all live in the U.S.!
Btw we don't all live in the U.S.!
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
Except this is the entire crux of the [fornicating] issue. This is a private business owned by private citizens. They pay the bills for the hosting, and they run and arrange the legwork to keep the place running, so they get to make the rules. If you don't like it you can go somewhere else. Or start your own forum were anything goes. To reiterate the "right to freedom of speech" only means that the government will not jail you or censure your privileges for things you say. And even then that is not an unlimited right - you can and will face prosecution if you make genuine threats of violence against the state or an individual, or if you yell "bomb!" in a movie theater without cause. You can and will get fined if you go on tv and say things against the regulations of the FCC. Just because you have "freedom of speech" doesn't mean that you are thereby entitled to say whatever you want whenever you want and demand that people pay attention to you. In much the same way that just because you, as an individual above the age of 21, have the right to drink alcohol, doesn't mean that barkeeps are obligated to pour you a glass of beer gratis every time you walk into the establishment.
If you come into my house and say things about my grandma that I don't like, I can demand you leave my house, and if you refuse, I can call police officers to come and remove you. This is no different.
Yeah, yeah, I know they can but does that mean they should? Its a public forum so what constitutes and who determines what is fair and not arbitrary? You sound like you approve of cesnoring views that you oppose. Is that correct? If so what is it about totalitarianism that is so appealing? Millions ended up in the Gulags because fanatic control freaks made themselves God. What is considered politically incorrect?
Really this is a matter of the sanctity of property rights. For true free speech to apply here, you would have to deprive Thunderfall of his property in this site, making it some sort of members' collective. Under the current proprietary setup, any loosening of speech restrictions would still be ultimately subject to the absolute control of the site owner. He may choose to allow all manner of opinions, but that would not make speech protected from the exercise of his property rights. It would simply be a sign of his benevolent attitude toward speech, which benevolence could come to an end at any time and for any reason.
It should be noted that not all people can join this site. Children under the age of 13 cannot. It is difficult to imagine corporations doing so within the terms of use (particularly in relation to advertising). Of course, some may breach the terms of use of the site and register regardless, but that is a matter of capacity to fill automatic forms, not a matter of entitlement.
It should be noted that not all people can join this site. Children under the age of 13 cannot. It is difficult to imagine corporations doing so within the terms of use (particularly in relation to advertising). Of course, some may breach the terms of use of the site and register regardless, but that is a matter of capacity to fill automatic forms, not a matter of entitlement.
Thank you for your response. However Im not questioning the owners property rights. Im questioning the policy. Ive noticed that the trend on most political or historical gaming forums is that censorship of controversial views is commonplace but that only a minority of participants actually make arnbitrary rulings most of the time and usually in spite of what appears to be a silent majority. I make the case that topic guidelines should be broadened regardless of their political content. Perhaps limited to a specific forum maybe? If this decision is up to the owner/management then as far as I can tell, I have the right to ask.
Nobody is taking away your freedom of thought. Even here in Canada, where our hate laws say there are certain things we cannot say or do in public, we're still free to think whatever nasty, hateful thoughts we might want to think.
You're hardly the first, nor will you be the last, to complain that you can't just open your virtual mouth and say stuff that violates the rules that make this place work. You'll have noticed by now that you're not getting a lot of sympathy from people, whether they're current staff, former staff, or regular members.
Political discussion typically happens in Off-Topic, and I think you'll find that very few opinions are outright banned there. The only real "forbidden" opinions there are the blatantly racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise discriminatory ones. Posters run the gamut from hard right to Communist. The average OT poster is somewhat left of center but not extremely so (approximately social democratic), but the range of opinions you can find there is quite broad.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Personally, I'd rather see a forum that restrict (and thus drive off) people with so-called "controversial opinions" (which seems to largely amount to hatemongering) than a forum that drive off (by letting those opinions be posted) people who are on the receiving end of those controversial opinions, and don't particularly feel like being told that they're inferior/horrible/abominations/etc when they're trying to relax and have fun.
Ultimately, a forum has to decide which potential audience it wants to appeal to, since it fundamentally can't have both.
Ultimately, a forum has to decide which potential audience it wants to appeal to, since it fundamentally can't have both.
I didnt ask for permission to violate rules and I wasnt asking for your sympathy. I only asked for a change in one rule to improve free discussion.
That is why Im making the request because those doublespeak abstractions are part of the language that I despise most. How do you define them? Theyre decepetions utilized to squelch dissent. Political Correctness is ugly & abusive.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Or possibly, they're simple facts used to keep certain users from making life hell for other members by rattling off how awful certain groups (of which several members happen to be part) are, and what things should be done about them.
Living in the same neighborhood is in no way comparable to sharing the same forum.
The point of being here is to discuss with other members (as part of a hobby, ie something relaxing). If you can't do that without certain individuals jumping up and down to say how horrible you, as a black/muslim/gay/trans/woman/whatever, are...then frankly you have better places to be and better people to talk to. Whereas, the point of living in a neighborhood is having somewhere to live - you don't have to talk to your neighbors.
People also don't have a choice living somewhere. They can't just up and say "well, I'm going to stop living anywhere". And, of course, moving to another neighborhood involves efforts and money that people often can't spare, while moving to another forum takes about five minutes. Heck, starting your own site takes far less time than moving apartment.
In short, your entire comparison is a fat load of nonsense.
Living in the same neighborhood is in no way comparable to sharing the same forum.
The point of being here is to discuss with other members (as part of a hobby, ie something relaxing). If you can't do that without certain individuals jumping up and down to say how horrible you, as a black/muslim/gay/trans/woman/whatever, are...then frankly you have better places to be and better people to talk to. Whereas, the point of living in a neighborhood is having somewhere to live - you don't have to talk to your neighbors.
People also don't have a choice living somewhere. They can't just up and say "well, I'm going to stop living anywhere". And, of course, moving to another neighborhood involves efforts and money that people often can't spare, while moving to another forum takes about five minutes. Heck, starting your own site takes far less time than moving apartment.
In short, your entire comparison is a fat load of nonsense.
The portion of the forum rules you quoted which notes that your right to freedom of speech does not apply here, is simply a statement of the site owner's property rights, for the sake of anyone who might think that what they are and are not allowed to say here is not ultimately up to the site owner. That portion of the forum rules makes no statement as to the limits that the site owner has actually decided to place on the limits of speech. The rest of the rules outline those limits. Is there a particular aspect of those rules which you believe should be loosened, or specific guidelines that you believe are too narrow? Raising the issue of arbitrariness seems to imply that you believe there is some portion of the rules or some policy which we have implemented, which is prone to arbitrariness.
Similar threads
