An Observation/Question

[Gunny]

Last thread I started ended up in the flame zone. If a mod had bothered to read the content (instead of the thread header) it would have stayed in the politics forum where it belonged. Maybe mods should sit back and read the first ten posts in a thread before moving it?

If the header is inflammatory, that is reason enough to move it. A thread can also be moved to the Flame Zone because of the behavior of others; which, might have nothing to do with the original poster. A thread that is nothign but OTT flaming doesn't belong in the political section.

I don't recall the thread in question, but I will say I will move a perfectly good article with an OTT inflammatory header without hesitation.

That sucks...

Why?

Remember, the intent of the Flame Zone was to keep me from having to either censor, stifle or ban every rowdy that comes along. There was never any intent to allow the rowdies to turn the entire board into the Flame Zone. Granted, we let a lot go, but in general, the Flame Zone and other subforums are not supposed to be identical.

As far as headers go, the article header works nicely in most cases. The purpose of the header is to inform the reader of the contents of the article, not give the poster yet another shot at tossing in some partisan blather. I've seen perfectly legit, good topics messed up on this board time and again because someone had to put some 3rd grade, inflammatory crap in the header.

If you want to flame, I built you a place to go ....

 

[strollingbones]

ahh the flame zone....whats not to like?

 

[Gunny]

ahh the flame zone....whats not to like?

It isn't what it was supposed to be. It began life as a place to move flames to, and/or for one member to call out another. I created it, as I mentioned before, because there was no outlet. A member either STFU or ended up getting banned.

I'm not in the business of banning people. The Flame Zone gave another option. Since that time, others have turned it into something it was never intended. Mostly manifold was behind this, but he did a pretty good job and I'll give credit where it's due. He made it more entertaining than it was.

 

[Dr Grump]

Why?

Remember, the intent of the Flame Zone was to keep me from having to either censor, stifle or ban every rowdy that comes along. There was never any intent to allow the rowdies to turn the entire board into the Flame Zone. Granted, we let a lot go, but in general, the Flame Zone and other subforums are not supposed to be identical.

As far as headers go, the article header works nicely in most cases. The purpose of the header is to inform the reader of the contents of the article, not give the poster yet another shot at tossing in some partisan blather. I've seen perfectly legit, good topics messed up on this board time and again because someone had to put some 3rd grade, inflammatory crap in the header.

If you want to flame, I built you a place to go ....

Fair point to a degree. This is where I get a little arrogant/uppity. I think mods should treat each poster as individuals.

I rarely start threads, but whenever I do, you can be assured the underlying subject is serious. Ditto the likes of Kathi (although, IMO, she starts way too many, you can almost guarantee they are not inflamatory), Kevin K, Xeno and quite a few others.

They you have the likes of Mani, ozzmjd and JBeuk who seem to start thread after thread after thread.

As an aside, how come new posters can start threads? I thought the whole idea of making them wait a few posts was to sort the spammers from the rest. Back in the day I thought they had to make 15 posts before starting threads. Has that gone by the way side? just interested..........

 

[editec]

I am the lucky individual who, for the most part, moved the threads around in the board. I can't imagine why I would think yet another thread on healthcare reform belongs in the healthcare subforum, but there you have it.

A trend I have noticed ... and for you literalists not each and every instance -- in general ...
is that the majority of rightwingnut threads get moved to conspiracy theories while the majority of leftwingnut threads get moved to teh Flame Zone, Lame Zone, or Trash. Only because we don't have a "Outright Stupid Partisan Blather" subforum.

Anyone want to take a stab at why this trend might exist?

Because this is not a free speech forum?

 

[Xenophon]

I gave up trying to figure out why threads got moved after my thread on Nicholas Cage not paying taxes was moved to the flame zone.

I just assumed everyone is a huge 'national treasure' fan and let it go at that.

 

[Gunny]

Why?

Remember, the intent of the Flame Zone was to keep me from having to either censor, stifle or ban every rowdy that comes along. There was never any intent to allow the rowdies to turn the entire board into the Flame Zone. Granted, we let a lot go, but in general, the Flame Zone and other subforums are not supposed to be identical.

As far as headers go, the article header works nicely in most cases. The purpose of the header is to inform the reader of the contents of the article, not give the poster yet another shot at tossing in some partisan blather. I've seen perfectly legit, good topics messed up on this board time and again because someone had to put some 3rd grade, inflammatory crap in the header.

If you want to flame, I built you a place to go ....

Fair point to a degree. This is where I get a little arrogant/uppity. I think mods should treat each poster as individuals.

I rarely start threads, but whenever I do, you can be assured the underlying subject is serious. Ditto the likes of Kathi (although, IMO, she starts way too many, you can almost guarantee they are not inflamatory), Kevin K, Xeno and quite a few others.

They you have the likes of Mani, ozzmjd and JBeuk who seem to start thread after thread after thread.

As an aside, how come new posters can start threads? I thought the whole idea of making them wait a few posts was to sort the spammers from the rest. Back in the day I thought they had to make 15 posts before starting threads. Has that gone by the way side? just interested..........

For the most part, you are treated as individuals. If it comes down to something borderline/questionable, I ALWAYS give the benefit of doubt based on who the member is.

However, an inflammatory thread title is an inflammatory thread title and it would not be fair of me to not treat them all the same.

I don't know why the thread in question was moved, nor who moved it. Like I said, it could be because some people around here just won't let others have a decent conversation and jacked-up the thread; which, would have nothing to do with the header and/or your participation.

New posters cannot post links until after their 15th post. They have always been able to start threads.

 

[Gunny]

I am the lucky individual who, for the most part, moved the threads around in the board. I can't imagine why I would think yet another thread on healthcare reform belongs in the healthcare subforum, but there you have it.

A trend I have noticed ... and for you literalists not each and every instance -- in general ...
is that the majority of rightwingnut threads get moved to conspiracy theories while the majority of leftwingnut threads get moved to teh Flame Zone, Lame Zone, or Trash. Only because we don't have a "Outright Stupid Partisan Blather" subforum.

Anyone want to take a stab at why this trend might exist?

Because this is not a free speech forum?

Define "free speech." If you mean you are not free to just say whatever the hell you want, anywhere on the board you want, you are correct. A true "free speech" forum would have one forum and no rules. To succeed, each and every member would have to actually hold themselves accountable for what they posted.

Not going to happen. Rules are for people who don't hold themselves accountable for their actions, not those that do.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I am the lucky individual who, for the most part, moved the threads around in the board. I can't imagine why I would think yet another thread on healthcare reform belongs in the healthcare subforum, but there you have it.

A trend I have noticed ... and for you literalists not each and every instance -- in general ...
is that the majority of rightwingnut threads get moved to conspiracy theories while the majority of leftwingnut threads get moved to teh Flame Zone, Lame Zone, or Trash. Only because we don't have a "Outright Stupid Partisan Blather" subforum.

Anyone want to take a stab at why this trend might exist?

Because this is not a free speech forum?

"Free speech."

Are you so ignorant as to think you're entitled to free speech on someone else's private property? Your 1st Amendment protects your speech against government action, not private.

 

[Gunny]

I gave up trying to figure out why threads got moved after my thread on Nicholas Cage not paying taxes was moved to the flame zone.

I just assumed everyone is a huge 'national treasure' fan and let it go at that.

Again, that can be decided based on several things, and doesn't necessarily include the topic nor the OP.

 

[Gunny]

I am the lucky individual who, for the most part, moved the threads around in the board. I can't imagine why I would think yet another thread on healthcare reform belongs in the healthcare subforum, but there you have it.

A trend I have noticed ... and for you literalists not each and every instance -- in general ...
is that the majority of rightwingnut threads get moved to conspiracy theories while the majority of leftwingnut threads get moved to teh Flame Zone, Lame Zone, or Trash. Only because we don't have a "Outright Stupid Partisan Blather" subforum.

Anyone want to take a stab at why this trend might exist?

Because this is not a free speech forum?

"Free speech."

Are you so ignorant as to think you're entitled to free speech on someone else's private property? Your 1st Amendment protects your speech against government action, not private.

An argument that has come and gone for as long as I have been on message boards. There is merit to each side of the argument.

On one side, you always have some that you know by their posts accept the responsibility that goes with free speech arguing against any restriction. The flaw to their argument are the people who see an internet message board as a way to act like complete asses without being held accountable for their actions. Nothing REAL is going to happen to them. They get banned and move on. In the meantime, they've left a pile of shit in our sandbox.

On the other side, you have those that want speech restricted to only that which they agree with and label everything else "trolling" and ban-able.

 

[Terry]

BOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSS fault, Gunny. Obbbbbbbbbbama fault, Gunny

 

[007]

Because the right argues with FACTS, and the left argues with EMOTIONS.

The rights arguments have veracity, the left's have... well... how do you feel about that? ...

 

[del]

Because this is not a free speech forum?

"Free speech."

Are you so ignorant as to think you're entitled to free speech on someone else's private property? Your 1st Amendment protects your speech against government action, not private.

An argument that has come and gone for as long as I have been on message boards. There is merit to each side of the argument.

On one side, you always have some that you know by their posts accept the responsibility that goes with free speech arguing against any restriction. The flaw to their argument are the people who see an internet message board as a way to act like complete asses without being held accountable for their actions. Nothing REAL is going to happen to them. They get banned and move on. In the meantime, they've left a pile of shit in our sandbox.

On the other side, you have those that want speech restricted to only that which they agree with and label everything else "trolling" and ban-able.

say it ain't so!

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Because this is not a free speech forum?

"Free speech."

Are you so ignorant as to think you're entitled to free speech on someone else's private property? Your 1st Amendment protects your speech against government action, not private.

An argument that has come and gone for as long as I have been on message boards. There is merit to each side of the argument.

On one side, you always have some that you know by their posts accept the responsibility that goes with free speech arguing against any restriction. The flaw to their argument are the people who see an internet message board as a way to act like complete asses without being held accountable for their actions. Nothing REAL is going to happen to them. They get banned and move on. In the meantime, they've left a pile of shit in our sandbox.

On the other side, you have those that want speech restricted to only that which they agree with and label everything else "trolling" and ban-able.

Ones who see message boards which are owned by for-profit companies or private individuals as "free speech zones" don't know the first flippin thing about our Constitution. One would suppose they would not only invite me into their home, but they would have no problem with me smearing my shit on their walls, pissing on their carpet, fucking their wife and kicking their dog.... Drinking all their beer, and kicking holes in their walls. All because I have "free speech."

This is how stupid the "free speech" argument on message boards is.

 

[007]

"Free speech."

Are you so ignorant as to think you're entitled to free speech on someone else's private property? Your 1st Amendment protects your speech against government action, not private.

An argument that has come and gone for as long as I have been on message boards. There is merit to each side of the argument.

On one side, you always have some that you know by their posts accept the responsibility that goes with free speech arguing against any restriction. The flaw to their argument are the people who see an internet message board as a way to act like complete asses without being held accountable for their actions. Nothing REAL is going to happen to them. They get banned and move on. In the meantime, they've left a pile of shit in our sandbox.

On the other side, you have those that want speech restricted to only that which they agree with and label everything else "trolling" and ban-able.

Ones who see message boards which are owned by for-profit companies or private individuals as "free speech zones" don't know the first flippin thing about our Constitution. One would suppose they would not only invite me into their home, but they would have no problem with me smearing my shit on their walls, pissing on their carpet, fucking their wife and kicking their dog.... Drinking all their beer, and kicking holes in their walls. All because I have "free speech."

This is how stupid the "free speech" argument on message boards is.

You've hit on something MM... is what you described as "free speech" what you think "free speech" is?

 

[Gunny]

"Free speech."

Are you so ignorant as to think you're entitled to free speech on someone else's private property? Your 1st Amendment protects your speech against government action, not private.

An argument that has come and gone for as long as I have been on message boards. There is merit to each side of the argument.

On one side, you always have some that you know by their posts accept the responsibility that goes with free speech arguing against any restriction. The flaw to their argument are the people who see an internet message board as a way to act like complete asses without being held accountable for their actions. Nothing REAL is going to happen to them. They get banned and move on. In the meantime, they've left a pile of shit in our sandbox.

On the other side, you have those that want speech restricted to only that which they agree with and label everything else "trolling" and ban-able.

Ones who see message boards which are owned by for-profit companies or private individuals as "free speech zones" don't know the first flippin thing about our Constitution. One would suppose they would not only invite me into their home, but they would have no problem with me smearing my shit on their walls, pissing on their carpet, fucking their wife and kicking their dog.... Drinking all their beer, and kicking holes in their walls. All because I have "free speech."

This is how stupid the "free speech" argument on message boards is.

A little crude, but point made.

 

[WillowTree]

Because this is not a free speech forum?

"Free speech."

Are you so ignorant as to think you're entitled to free speech on someone else's private property? Your 1st Amendment protects your speech against government action, not private.

An argument that has come and gone for as long as I have been on message boards. There is merit to each side of the argument.

On one side, you always have some that you know by their posts accept the responsibility that goes with free speech arguing against any restriction. The flaw to their argument are the people who see an internet message board as a way to act like complete asses without being held accountable for their actions. Nothing REAL is going to happen to them. They get banned and move on. In the meantime, they've left a pile of shit in our sandbox.

On the other side, you have those that want speech restricted to only that which they agree with and label everything else "trolling" and ban-able.

and for that Democratic Underground was borned..

 

[xsited1]

"Free speech."

Are you so ignorant as to think you're entitled to free speech on someone else's private property? Your 1st Amendment protects your speech against government action, not private.

An argument that has come and gone for as long as I have been on message boards. There is merit to each side of the argument.

On one side, you always have some that you know by their posts accept the responsibility that goes with free speech arguing against any restriction. The flaw to their argument are the people who see an internet message board as a way to act like complete asses without being held accountable for their actions. Nothing REAL is going to happen to them. They get banned and move on. In the meantime, they've left a pile of shit in our sandbox.

On the other side, you have those that want speech restricted to only that which they agree with and label everything else "trolling" and ban-able.

Ones who see message boards which are owned by for-profit companies or private individuals as "free speech zones" don't know the first flippin thing about our Constitution. One would suppose they would not only invite me into their home, but they would have no problem with me smearing my shit on their walls, pissing on their carpet, fucking their wife and kicking their dog.... Drinking all their beer, and kicking holes in their walls. All because I have "free speech."

This is how stupid the "free speech" argument on message boards is.

For the record, I NEVER smeared shit on your walls, pissed on your carpet, kicked your dog, drank your beer or kicked holes in your walls.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

An argument that has come and gone for as long as I have been on message boards. There is merit to each side of the argument.

On one side, you always have some that you know by their posts accept the responsibility that goes with free speech arguing against any restriction. The flaw to their argument are the people who see an internet message board as a way to act like complete asses without being held accountable for their actions. Nothing REAL is going to happen to them. They get banned and move on. In the meantime, they've left a pile of shit in our sandbox.

On the other side, you have those that want speech restricted to only that which they agree with and label everything else "trolling" and ban-able.

Ones who see message boards which are owned by for-profit companies or private individuals as "free speech zones" don't know the first flippin thing about our Constitution. One would suppose they would not only invite me into their home, but they would have no problem with me smearing my shit on their walls, pissing on their carpet, fucking their wife and kicking their dog.... Drinking all their beer, and kicking holes in their walls. All because I have "free speech."

This is how stupid the "free speech" argument on message boards is.

You've hit on something MM... is what you described as "free speech" what you think "free speech" is?

If you are in MY home or on my property, your "free speech" is what I SAY it is at any given time. If I don't like what you have to say, how you act, what you do or how you look, I am well within my rights to remove you.

Same thing holds true for message boards and their owners and staff.