Debate Now Is "Structured Debate" another Euphemism for Censorship?

[Mertex]

We're not looking to ban people off the site, we're just asking that people please respect the guidelines in there or be removed from the section. Just like the CDZ.

But that isn't all that happens, sometimes. I had a thread in the CDZ and someone decided to get snarky. I reported it, and all that happened was that my thread got closed. There was no explanation...I then wrote you and two Mods and asked for clarification....got nothing back.

The problem is that in the SDZ, the OP can call out a person for posting what the OP considers ad hominem or snark, when clearly others are using the same terminology and not being told they are posting ad hominem or snark. It's a way for the OP to get rid of those the OP doesn't want to deal with while allowing those that the OP likes to use ad hominems and snarks toward others. Doesn't seem fair to me. Why I probably won't post much in the SDZ.

 

[cereal_killer]

Care to explain how quoting the exact words of the OP and asking straightforward questions constitutes "destroying the thread so no one can have a discussion"?

And yes, I was reported by FF for doing exactly that.

Is that what you believe constitutes a "structured discussion"? No legitimate criticism allowed?

I don't remember who I reported but I do give a reminder of the thread rules and if a member persists in breaking them, I do report it. I would very much like to know how you know it was me who reported though.

I welcome and encourage all points of view but everybody has to stay within the thread rules.

And I'm pretty darn sure that if the thread rules are not legitimately violated, no mod action of any kind will take place due to a report.

The post was well within the thread rules and I am not going to discuss mod actions since that is a violation of the USMB rules.

Well the only way you could know who reported your post is because a mod told you. And you discussed that.

You are free to make whatever fallacious assumptions you like but kindly refrain from egregiously accusing me of something I never did.

You are the one who said Foxfyre reported you. I didn't accuse you of it. You posted it. How do you know that? I would appreciate the courtesy of a response.

cereal_killer, I think this is something we need to know if the report function is to be useful. Are reports made public? The person who is reported is advised of who reported them? If that is the way it is, so be it, but I do think members need to know. I have never been advised if I have been reported, so I have no frame of reference to go by.

Never do we do such things. We appreciate reports and I will challenge anyone that says we tell people who reports who to prove it.

 

[Foxfyre]

We're not looking to ban people off the site, we're just asking that people please respect the guidelines in there or be removed from the section. Just like the CDZ.

But that isn't all that happens, sometimes. I had a thread in the CDZ and someone decided to get snarky. I reported it, and all that happened was that my thread got closed. There was no explanation...I then wrote you and two Mods and asked for clarification....got nothing back.

The problem is that in the SDZ, the OP can call out a person for posting what the OP considers ad hominem or snark, when clearly others are using the same terminology and not being told they are posting ad hominem or snark. It's a way for the OP to get rid of those the OP doesn't want to deal with while allowing those that the OP likes to use ad hominems and snarks toward others. Doesn't seem fair to me. Why I probably won't post much in the SDZ.

Again that is your prerogative. Some of you hate the fact that I start threads in the SDZ but I don't start one every day. I wanted the forum to succeed yes and have done what I can to help that happen. I also have utilized the ability to shut down those who time and gain have come into threads with the pure intention of disrupting and derailing as much as possible. And yes I have deliberately done that and have appreciated the ability to do it. And yes I have on occasion reported really flagrant or repeated violations of the rules, but I don't keep score on those.

But I defy anybody to show me ANY post of mine where I shut down somebody who was posting within the rules and disagreed with me. There are some who consider any disagreement or any comment they don't like to be a personal affront and/or become immediately angry and hostile, but I usually include a rule to disallow the anger and hostility.

Bottom line: unless somebody can show how they personally are being harmed, hurt, disadvantaged, or disrespected by the OP and rules in the CDZ, and they simply hate the thread or the person who started it, the grown up thing is just go find something else to do.

Or start their own thread and show us how to do it right.

 

[Mertex]

Again that is your prerogative. Some of you hate the fact that I start threads in the SDZ but I don't start one every day.

I don't care that you start threads in the SDZ or how many. What I care about is that some have started threads in the SDZ and then when I have refuted what they say, they accuse me of being snarky or using ad hominem when clearly others have clearly been snarky and used ad hominem and the OP doesn't accuse them of such....and I didn't say it was you, you're not the only one that has started threads in the SDZ.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Care to explain how quoting the exact words of the OP and asking straightforward questions constitutes "destroying the thread so no one can have a discussion"?

And yes, I was reported by FF for doing exactly that.

Is that what you believe constitutes a "structured discussion"? No legitimate criticism allowed?

I don't remember who I reported but I do give a reminder of the thread rules and if a member persists in breaking them, I do report it. I would very much like to know how you know it was me who reported though.

I welcome and encourage all points of view but everybody has to stay within the thread rules.

And I'm pretty darn sure that if the thread rules are not legitimately violated, no mod action of any kind will take place due to a report.

The post was well within the thread rules and I am not going to discuss mod actions since that is a violation of the USMB rules.

Well the only way you could know who reported your post is because a mod told you. And you discussed that.

You are free to make whatever fallacious assumptions you like but kindly refrain from egregiously accusing me of something I never did.

You are the one who said Foxfyre reported you. I didn't accuse you of it. You posted it. How do you know that? I would appreciate the courtesy of a response.

cereal_killer, I think this is something we need to know if the report function is to be useful. Are reports made public? The person who is reported is advised of who reported them? If that is the way it is, so be it, but I do think members need to know. I have never been advised if I have been reported, so I have no frame of reference to go by.

Your paranoia is not my problem.

It was an elementary deduction on my part given that we were the only two posters in that thread exchange at that time and you were clearly pissed off at me for daring to ask legitimate questions about your inept OP.

I didn't need it to be confirmed because no one else was around and no one else had any motivation whatsoever to report what was clearly well within the SDF rules.

You false assumption about it coming from the mods was refuted by cereal_killer. It is clearly stipulated in the USMB Rules and Announcements that mods never share what they do. I have reminded you several times now that I won't discuss what transpired on that occasion because that is a rule violation.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I don't remember who I reported but I do give a reminder of the thread rules and if a member persists in breaking them, I do report it. I would very much like to know how you know it was me who reported though.

I welcome and encourage all points of view but everybody has to stay within the thread rules.

And I'm pretty darn sure that if the thread rules are not legitimately violated, no mod action of any kind will take place due to a report.

The post was well within the thread rules and I am not going to discuss mod actions since that is a violation of the USMB rules.

Well the only way you could know who reported your post is because a mod told you. And you discussed that.

You are free to make whatever fallacious assumptions you like but kindly refrain from egregiously accusing me of something I never did.

You are the one who said Foxfyre reported you. I didn't accuse you of it. You posted it. How do you know that? I would appreciate the courtesy of a response.

cereal_killer, I think this is something we need to know if the report function is to be useful. Are reports made public? The person who is reported is advised of who reported them? If that is the way it is, so be it, but I do think members need to know. I have never been advised if I have been reported, so I have no frame of reference to go by.

Never do we do such things. We appreciate reports and I will challenge anyone that says we tell people who reports who to prove it.

For the record I have never claimed that the mods would ever do such a thing either.

It is FF who is making this absurd allegation based upon nothing more than her own paranoia.

Thanks for confirming what is already stipulated in the Rules and Announcements forum.

 

[RKMBrown]

I don't remember who I reported but I do give a reminder of the thread rules and if a member persists in breaking them, I do report it. I would very much like to know how you know it was me who reported though.

I welcome and encourage all points of view but everybody has to stay within the thread rules.

And I'm pretty darn sure that if the thread rules are not legitimately violated, no mod action of any kind will take place due to a report.

The post was well within the thread rules and I am not going to discuss mod actions since that is a violation of the USMB rules.

Well the only way you could know who reported your post is because a mod told you. And you discussed that.

You are free to make whatever fallacious assumptions you like but kindly refrain from egregiously accusing me of something I never did.

You are the one who said Foxfyre reported you. I didn't accuse you of it. You posted it. How do you know that? I would appreciate the courtesy of a response.

cereal_killer, I think this is something we need to know if the report function is to be useful. Are reports made public? The person who is reported is advised of who reported them? If that is the way it is, so be it, but I do think members need to know. I have never been advised if I have been reported, so I have no frame of reference to go by.

Your paranoia is not my problem.

It was an elementary deduction on my part given that we were the only two posters in the thread at that time and you were clearly pissed off at me for daring to ask legitimate questions about your inept OP.

I didn't need it to be confirmed because no one else was around and no one else had any motivation whatsoever to report what was clearly well within the SDF rules.

You false assumption about it coming from the mods was refuted by cereal_killer. It is clearly stipulated in the USMB Rules and Announcements that mods never share what they do. I have reminded you several times now that I won't discuss what transpired on that occasion because that is a rule violation.

Maybe I reported you. Just because people are not posting does not mean no one is reading. Your ability to "deduct" is apparently inept.

 

[Derideo_Te]

But I defy anybody to show me ANY post of mine where I shut down somebody who was posting within the rules and disagreed with me.

Debate Now - White Privilege and an Institution of Racism Page 5 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

If you open up post #147 you will find the following content posted by me. The actual post itself was deleted after you reported it.

Who else created the poll and the OP for this thread if it wasn't you?

View attachment 38033

Those are your words in #2 and #4 in the poll, right?

No one else posted them, did they?

Are you backtracking on your own statements now?
​

It is patently clear to anyone reading that exchange that you were extremely annoyed that I was daring to question your own words in your OP. Since no one else was involved in that exchange between ourselves and there is nothing whatsoever in the rules that is violated by asking those questions about the OP there is no one else who would have reported it.

But the post was deleted even though it was entirely legitimate to question your own words in the OP poll which is what was shown in the attachment!

So yes, you did try to shut me down for no other reason that that I dared to disagree with you while posting within the rules.

FTR I only stopped posting in that thread because my post had been reported by you.

Now I have no doubt whatsoever that you try and deny that you were the one who reported me but that is exactly what I expect from someone who cannot defend their own words in their own OP.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The post was well within the thread rules and I am not going to discuss mod actions since that is a violation of the USMB rules.

Well the only way you could know who reported your post is because a mod told you. And you discussed that.

You are free to make whatever fallacious assumptions you like but kindly refrain from egregiously accusing me of something I never did.

You are the one who said Foxfyre reported you. I didn't accuse you of it. You posted it. How do you know that? I would appreciate the courtesy of a response.

cereal_killer, I think this is something we need to know if the report function is to be useful. Are reports made public? The person who is reported is advised of who reported them? If that is the way it is, so be it, but I do think members need to know. I have never been advised if I have been reported, so I have no frame of reference to go by.

Your paranoia is not my problem.

It was an elementary deduction on my part given that we were the only two posters in the thread at that time and you were clearly pissed off at me for daring to ask legitimate questions about your inept OP.

I didn't need it to be confirmed because no one else was around and no one else had any motivation whatsoever to report what was clearly well within the SDF rules.

You false assumption about it coming from the mods was refuted by cereal_killer. It is clearly stipulated in the USMB Rules and Announcements that mods never share what they do. I have reminded you several times now that I won't discuss what transpired on that occasion because that is a rule violation.

Maybe I reported you. Just because people are not posting does not mean no one is reading. Your ability to "deduct" is apparently inept.

So are you tacitly admitting that you are so inept that you cannot tell the difference between a legitimate post and one that violates the rules?

FYI the term is deduce, not deduct.

 

[RKMBrown]

Well the only way you could know who reported your post is because a mod told you. And you discussed that.

You are free to make whatever fallacious assumptions you like but kindly refrain from egregiously accusing me of something I never did.

You are the one who said Foxfyre reported you. I didn't accuse you of it. You posted it. How do you know that? I would appreciate the courtesy of a response.

cereal_killer, I think this is something we need to know if the report function is to be useful. Are reports made public? The person who is reported is advised of who reported them? If that is the way it is, so be it, but I do think members need to know. I have never been advised if I have been reported, so I have no frame of reference to go by.

Your paranoia is not my problem.

It was an elementary deduction on my part given that we were the only two posters in the thread at that time and you were clearly pissed off at me for daring to ask legitimate questions about your inept OP.

I didn't need it to be confirmed because no one else was around and no one else had any motivation whatsoever to report what was clearly well within the SDF rules.

You false assumption about it coming from the mods was refuted by cereal_killer. It is clearly stipulated in the USMB Rules and Announcements that mods never share what they do. I have reminded you several times now that I won't discuss what transpired on that occasion because that is a rule violation.

Maybe I reported you. Just because people are not posting does not mean no one is reading. Your ability to "deduct" is apparently inept.

So are you tacitly admitting that you are so inept that you cannot tell the difference between a legitimate post and one that violates the rules?

Please point out how you made the leap that my post had anything to do with the difference between a legitimate post and one that violates the rules. Then please explain to the class what you think the word legitimate means and why you think that means something related to rules violations.

 

[Derideo_Te]

You are free to make whatever fallacious assumptions you like but kindly refrain from egregiously accusing me of something I never did.

You are the one who said Foxfyre reported you. I didn't accuse you of it. You posted it. How do you know that? I would appreciate the courtesy of a response.

cereal_killer, I think this is something we need to know if the report function is to be useful. Are reports made public? The person who is reported is advised of who reported them? If that is the way it is, so be it, but I do think members need to know. I have never been advised if I have been reported, so I have no frame of reference to go by.

Your paranoia is not my problem.

It was an elementary deduction on my part given that we were the only two posters in the thread at that time and you were clearly pissed off at me for daring to ask legitimate questions about your inept OP.

I didn't need it to be confirmed because no one else was around and no one else had any motivation whatsoever to report what was clearly well within the SDF rules.

You false assumption about it coming from the mods was refuted by cereal_killer. It is clearly stipulated in the USMB Rules and Announcements that mods never share what they do. I have reminded you several times now that I won't discuss what transpired on that occasion because that is a rule violation.

Maybe I reported you. Just because people are not posting does not mean no one is reading. Your ability to "deduct" is apparently inept.

So are you tacitly admitting that you are so inept that you cannot tell the difference between a legitimate post and one that violates the rules?

Please point out how you made the leap that my post had anything to do with the difference between a legitimate post and one that violates the rules. Then please explain to the class what you think the word legitimate means and why you think that means something related to rules violations.

So you just report posts without any actually having any legitimate basis in the rules for doing so?

 

[RKMBrown]

You are the one who said Foxfyre reported you. I didn't accuse you of it. You posted it. How do you know that? I would appreciate the courtesy of a response.

cereal_killer, I think this is something we need to know if the report function is to be useful. Are reports made public? The person who is reported is advised of who reported them? If that is the way it is, so be it, but I do think members need to know. I have never been advised if I have been reported, so I have no frame of reference to go by.

Your paranoia is not my problem.

It was an elementary deduction on my part given that we were the only two posters in the thread at that time and you were clearly pissed off at me for daring to ask legitimate questions about your inept OP.

I didn't need it to be confirmed because no one else was around and no one else had any motivation whatsoever to report what was clearly well within the SDF rules.

You false assumption about it coming from the mods was refuted by cereal_killer. It is clearly stipulated in the USMB Rules and Announcements that mods never share what they do. I have reminded you several times now that I won't discuss what transpired on that occasion because that is a rule violation.

Maybe I reported you. Just because people are not posting does not mean no one is reading. Your ability to "deduct" is apparently inept.

So are you tacitly admitting that you are so inept that you cannot tell the difference between a legitimate post and one that violates the rules?

Please point out how you made the leap that my post had anything to do with the difference between a legitimate post and one that violates the rules. Then please explain to the class what you think the word legitimate means and why you think that means something related to rules violations.

So you just report posts without any actually having any legitimate basis in the rules for doing so?

No, I don't. I've only reported a few posts since I've been here. In each case it was due to some flagrant violation of the rules that I felt was way way out of line. For example, posting ndty pron etc...

 

[Foxfyre]

The post was well within the thread rules and I am not going to discuss mod actions since that is a violation of the USMB rules.

Well the only way you could know who reported your post is because a mod told you. And you discussed that.

You are free to make whatever fallacious assumptions you like but kindly refrain from egregiously accusing me of something I never did.

You are the one who said Foxfyre reported you. I didn't accuse you of it. You posted it. How do you know that? I would appreciate the courtesy of a response.

cereal_killer, I think this is something we need to know if the report function is to be useful. Are reports made public? The person who is reported is advised of who reported them? If that is the way it is, so be it, but I do think members need to know. I have never been advised if I have been reported, so I have no frame of reference to go by.

Never do we do such things. We appreciate reports and I will challenge anyone that says we tell people who reports who to prove it.

For the record I have never claimed that the mods would ever do such a thing either.

It is FF who is making this absurd allegation based upon nothing more than her own paranoia.

Thanks for confirming what is already stipulated in the Rules and Announcements forum.

Paranoia? You flat out said it was me who reported you and it is paranoia to take notice of that? Show your evidence for your unqualified statement that I reported you--you are so big on demanding evidence or admonishing people that their posts are facts not in evidence. Well the fact is you stated that I reported you. So show your evidence or admit that you were stating a fact not in evidence.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Well the only way you could know who reported your post is because a mod told you. And you discussed that.

You are free to make whatever fallacious assumptions you like but kindly refrain from egregiously accusing me of something I never did.

You are the one who said Foxfyre reported you. I didn't accuse you of it. You posted it. How do you know that? I would appreciate the courtesy of a response.

cereal_killer, I think this is something we need to know if the report function is to be useful. Are reports made public? The person who is reported is advised of who reported them? If that is the way it is, so be it, but I do think members need to know. I have never been advised if I have been reported, so I have no frame of reference to go by.

Never do we do such things. We appreciate reports and I will challenge anyone that says we tell people who reports who to prove it.

For the record I have never claimed that the mods would ever do such a thing either.

It is FF who is making this absurd allegation based upon nothing more than her own paranoia.

Thanks for confirming what is already stipulated in the Rules and Announcements forum.

Paranoia? You flat out said it was me who reported you and it is paranoia to take notice of that? Show your evidence for your unqualified statement that I reported you--you are so big on demanding evidence or admonishing people that their posts are facts not in evidence. Well the fact is you stated that I reported you. So show your evidence or admit that you were stating a fact not in evidence.

Did you miss post #288 above?

Debate Now - Is Structured Debate another Euphemism for Censorship Page 10 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

It lays out all of the evidence for everyone to see and make up their own minds about what you did.

No one else had any motive to report a perfectly legitimate post asking questions about what you had written in the OP Poll.

 

[Foxfyre]

But I defy anybody to show me ANY post of mine where I shut down somebody who was posting within the rules and disagreed with me.

Debate Now - White Privilege and an Institution of Racism Page 5 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

If you open up post #147 you will find the following content posted by me. The actual post itself was deleted after you reported it.

Who else created the poll and the OP for this thread if it wasn't you?

View attachment 38033

Those are your words in #2 and #4 in the poll, right?

No one else posted them, did they?

Are you backtracking on your own statements now?
​

It is patently clear to anyone reading that exchange that you were extremely annoyed that I was daring to question your own words in your OP. Since no one else was involved in that exchange between ourselves and there is nothing whatsoever in the rules that is violated by asking those questions about the OP there is no one else who would have reported it.

But the post was deleted even though it was entirely legitimate to question your own words in the OP poll which is what was shown in the attachment!

So yes, you did try to shut me down for no other reason that that I dared to disagree with you while posting within the rules.

FTR I only stopped posting in that thread because my post had been reported by you.

Now I have no doubt whatsoever that you try and deny that you were the one who reported me but that is exactly what I expect from someone who cannot defend their own words in their own OP.

I have no clue what was in the post that was removed. I have no clue whether I reported the post or somebody else did. I have no idea what your beef is here. It is quite obvious that I was engaging numerous members in that thread, some who I agreed with and some that I did not so the idea that I shut down anybody because I did not agree with him or her is a fact not in evidence to use your favorite phrase. For the most part it was a good discussion.

I get annoyed with people who ignore the rules in a disruptive way, and if they do it enough I do report them. So if that was you, and I don't remember whether I reported you or not in that thread, then so be it.

I do know that I trust the moderators to remove only posts that are a violation of the rules. I would prefer that they flag them with a red warning or some such but it is their prerogative of how they enforce the rules.

Again if you object to my OPs, if you don't like my topics, if you think they are partisan or rightwing or libertarian or whatever problem you have with them, if my libertarian leanings are going to be a constant thorn in your side, then simply find something else to do. That is all I ask. And then everybody can be happy.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I have no clue what was in the post that was removed.

It was quoted in blue in the post you just replied to!

 

[Dot Com]

I think the intent of the SDZ may have been benign but the end result is anything but. All one need do is look at 80% of the thread titles in there.

 

[Foxfyre]

I have no clue what was in the post that was removed.

It was quoted in blue in the post you just replied to!

So what was the attachment? Is that the whole post? I do vaguely recall that you had been accusing me of making offensive (or some such) statements because of a couple of the poll options that people could check if they agreed with or not. I didn't check those two options myself. But if the post was reported by me, and I don't recall whether I reported it, it was because I believed it was clearly outside the rules for the thread. Apparently it was too if it was in fact removed.

That was a really good thread though--lots of pertinent and thoughtful comments by a number of members who really wanted to discuss the topic instead of whatever problems somebody had with me or the way I expressed myself. We need a whole lot more of that on USMB.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

FOXFYRE SAID:

“Again if you object to my OPs, if you don't like my topics, if you think they are partisan or rightwing or libertarian or whatever problem you have with them, if my libertarian leanings are going to be a constant thorn in your side, then simply find something else to do. That is all I ask. And then everybody can be happy.”

You only want people to post in your threads who agree with you, to tell you you're correct with regard to all your positions on the issues.

That's not going to happen.

The resolution to your problem is to stop posting altogether, not admonishing those who disagree with you to stay out of your threads.

This has nothing to do with your being partisan or rightwing or libertarian or your political dogma being a 'constant thorn' in anyone's side, it has to do with the fact that your positions are often factually wrong, inaccurate, inconsistent, or otherwise invalid due to faulty reasoning common to reactionary libertarians.

Consequently, when you start a thread on a public message board, and the premise of your thread fails as a logical fallacy, is predicated on inaccurate information, or is factually incorrect, expect other posters to respond pointing out the errors, inaccurate information, and fallacies.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I have no clue what was in the post that was removed.

It was quoted in blue in the post you just replied to!

So what was the attachment? Is that the whole post? I do vaguely recall that you had been accusing me of making offensive (or some such) statements because of a couple of the poll options that people could check if they agreed with or not. I didn't check those two options myself. But if the post was reported by me, and I don't recall whether I reported it, it was because I believed it was clearly outside the rules for the thread. Apparently it was too if it was in fact removed.

That was a really good thread though--lots of pertinent and thoughtful comments by a number of members who really wanted to discuss the topic instead of whatever problems somebody had with me or the way I expressed myself. We need a whole lot more of that on USMB.

The attachment was a screenshot of your poll questions which is what I was asking questions about.

That you believe that asking legitimate questions about the OP poll is "outside the rules for the thread" then you have just admitted to reporting it.

"But if the post was reported by me, and I don't recall whether I reported it, it was because I believed it was clearly outside the rules for the thread. Apparently it was too if it was in fact removed."​

Another fallacious assumption on your part.

"...instead of whatever problems somebody had with me or the way I expressed myself."​

And another!

It is perfectly legitimate to question the OP in a "structured discussion". That doesn't mean that someone has "problems" with you or the "way you express yourself". It means that they want answers to what you wrote in the OP.

If you cannot defend your own OP's and require inane "rules" in order to protect them from being questioned otherwise you will report them as imaginary "violations" then you are not participating in any semblance of a "structured discussion" because what you are actually doing is de facto censorship.

Structured discussions include questions and legitimate criticisms of the positions. That you cannot separate your personal feelings from the points under discussion and take everything personally is not my problem.

Yes, I enjoy legitimate structured discussions where everyone is treated equally and respectfully. When someone violates those principles and files a false report then they should be held accountable IMO.