I find it increasingly difficult to participate in a public forum that allows such arbitrary censorship of postings. I accept Dale’s absolute ownership of this site. But censorship by one individual is always arbitrary. Bruised feelings are not sufficient criteria for censorship.
If we value an inclusive society we must learn to be more tolerant, especially of those who offend us most deeply. Is Dale Wisely The Jew in Skokie? Because, “…putting up with obnoxious Nazis in our midst is the price we pay for freedom of speech.” [http://www.lib.niu.edu/ipo/ii781111.html]
In law school the right of free-speech is posed against the right to shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater. Did Andrew shout “Fire?” Did he harm anyone? In Swiftian fashion Andrew enjoys skewering those who are fatuous or ignorant.
Discussion of flutes does not exist in a vacuum. To pretend that politics has no part in any discussion of flutes is as foolish as to insist that politics be discussed in every exchange. Sometimes politics is relevant and sometimes not.
Dale’s rigid insistence on control of the forum puts those participating in a bad light. To participate is to accept Dale as judge, jury, and policeman in our tiny world. The political parallel should be obvious and unacceptable.
The real shame is that Dale is a decent person who knows better.
So you’re saying the real question is, does Mr. Blair play a Rudall & Rose or a Pratten? Because of course President Bush plays a Pratten.
In actuality, Mr. Wisely, if you are still bothering to read these threads, I don’t know if it is hard to do, but you might want to just move them to the Poststructural Pub, where they would be less distracting and more in place. Just a thought, and of course, I accept your role as “judge, jury, and policeman in our tiny world” to use David’s apt phrasing.
You can get the software to run your own forum here. I wish you the best of luck with it.
-Rich
I work as a bartender, haven’t followed this thread very closely. But, just like when I’m working, Dale has the right to refuse service to anyone. I don’t see it as a freedom of speech issue at all, nothing done on this board will affect that right. We have an area on the internet that’s mostly harmless, and sometimes informative and useful, I’m just saying I think it’s run well is all.
-George
Good call, George. I think this was my point; that the call of “freedom of speech” is absurd and dishonest here. A much better translation of the situation is that if someone in a pub (since we find ourselves in such places, now and again) is disruptive and rude and is irritating the customers, the management asks them to leave. Nothing to do with restriction of speech at all. Nothing said was censored. The rude person was tossed.
I’ve probably said all I’m going to on this matter – I will fight to the death over someone’s right to an opinion. I just don’t need to feel harassed and belittled at a place I go to enjoy myself, by a mean-spirited bore.
Best,
Gordon
ARTICLE I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I personally would rather play the “freedom of speech” card for something less trivial, and perhaps something that involves the US Congress abridging it, of which Dale Wisely is not a member thereof, I dont think.
There is a reason the Founding Fathers did not write the First Amendment as “Freedom of Speech for everyone, regardless”.
I like to think that in their infinite wisdom they did not want future generations of Americans to peacably assemble and be subjected to village idiots, braggards,windbags, loudmouths, oafs, boors, ne’er-do-wells and others without a sense of decorum and not having some type of recourse to shut them up.
What on earth???
There are plenty of places to talk about Nazis and Jews and escalate
petty arguments. We are about whistles,flutes, and music.
What we need to defend is cordiality, good manners and professionalism.
I’m with Dale. Get back on subject.
Did this get moved here or what? I could swear it was on another Forum this a.m.
That said, Dale’s very few actions of locks/censorship/bans could not be called arbitrary, imo. They have been infrequent, well-considered after lengthy exasperation etc etc.
At least in my three years here anyway.
As I understand it, it’s not exactly as if the man were just arbitrarily tossed from the room. He refused to abide by the few, simple and necessary rules that govern a public gathering space (privately owned).
His error, not Dale’s.
Had Mr K seen fit to speak civily, he would not have been asked to leave. He did not, so he’s outta here. So be it.
I am all for genuine freedom of speech, but that doesn’t make it OK for me to beat people over the head with my views. I can express them anyway I like, but there are certain ways that are going to get me booted. I choose, I think wisely, not to sink to those depths… that does not in any way diminish my ability to hold or express an opinion… it just raises the odds that folks will tolerate my presence and may actually listen to my views.
I am a recognized expert in a couple of areas (at least by a few) that doesn’t make me above the rules of civil discourse. In fact, it behooves me al the more to expand my ability to reach folks.
edited once to correct spelling… sigh
At the risk of putting this thread at the top of the forum, 
It should also be pointed out that the 10th or 11th Amendment states that all US governments, i. e., state and local, are subject to all the limitations placed on the Federal government. Note that, unless something bizarre has happened, Dale, Rich, and Alan are not a government, and Rich isn’t even in the US, nor is the computer that hosts the C&F, so nothing in our Constitution applies to him/it.
Yikes. So you mean my write-in votes didn’t count? Dang!
Carol
We have incredible amounts of free speech here. I recently joined a board for a different hobby, and I posted a new topic there about an hour ago. I just got this in my PM box (edited here for anonymity):
Hi -
Unfortunately this forum has been threatened with legal action from [name of owner of rival board] several times when allowing freedom of speech around all [common interest of the boards] topics. Therefore Admin have had to take the unfortunate decision to disallow all postings that are directly about or vaguely relate to [owner’s name], and/or organisations related to him. At present this is;
- however this list is not exclusive
Due to this I have removed your post from the forum. If you have a problem with this, please contact myself, other moderators or the forum admin with your comments
Thank you for your understanding
Now, I’m new to that forum. Been there about three days. I haven’t said anything outrageous to provoke such a response - I quoted a comment from an informational site, credited it, and asked for opinions on the content. I suppose I could cry “help, help, I’m being repressed!” but - - I’m not.
Forums are not the same as street corners. On a street corner, you can shout and rant all you like, express extreme displeasure at something, spit on the sidewalk and watch people tread in it, but when the police come along you can scatter. This forum is owned and maintained by Dale and Rich and they have a responsibility to it, because when trouble comes knocking they are the ones answerable. We abide by their rules just like I have to abide by the rules laid out in the above quote, and frankly I think it’s quite reasonable to be expected to do so.
I also think it’s a bit silly to quote the U.S. Consititution as relevant here, because the hardware hosting the board is not located in the United States.
I find it increasingly difficult to participate in a public forum that allows such arbitrary censorship of postings.
Okee dokee… :roll:
I accept Dale’s absolute ownership of this site.
So are you saying that you accept that it’s Dales and therefore isn’t “public”?
apparently not because you go on to lecture:
But
HMMMM…always a but when you hear 2 statements like that cancelling eachother out
censorship by one individual is always arbitrary. Bruised feelings are not sufficient criteria for censorship.
If we value an inclusive society we must learn to be more tolerant, especially of those who offend us most deeply. Is Dale Wisely The Jew in Skokie? Because, “…putting up with obnoxious Nazis in our midst is the price we pay for freedom of speech.” [> http://www.lib.niu.edu/ipo/
ad-nauseum. you don’t have freedom here. You don’t have rights here. It’s a messageboard owned by Dale. He doesn’t dole out human rights to you and there is no sacred document here to define what everybody is entitled to. If you’re not happy about something, you don’t get to march around and get your say or have a sit in. Nothing wrong with that stuff, mind you, but this is a messageboard. sheesh. If somebody is asked to follow Dale’s rules or else and he or she doesn’t then they will get the boot. So what? They get the boot. If there are a lot of people who disagree about it then why the hell can’t you do like Rich said and follow the link above and go start your own damn messageboard. I for one am tired of all this drivel and I’m sure I’m not alone. A lot of really great members have already disappeared from here because of all this crap and I know because I’ve spoken to some of them about it. [/rant]
I think that MarMil put it quite well in another thread:
Hmm. Let’s say that you’re hosting some people in your home, everybody just hanging out, drinks in hand, noshing on goodies, shooting the breeze, etc. etc…and someone starts sticking it to someone else with the ad hominem stuff and generally fouling the air of the occasion (I’ve actually had this happen, so I know whereof I speak) for no apparent better reason than for personal pleasure; or maybe it’s sheer perversity; maybe it’s a matter of personal suffering getting the better of one. Why doesn’t really matter at all. Leave “why” to a therapist. Under your roof, does that person have the right to stay and exercise “free speech”? Do you just stand by wringing your hands and hope everyone else will gaily ignore the situation? I certainly hope not. Under my roof, if anyone were to suggest that it’s their “right” to do whatever they want on the premises, I’d seriously consider ushering them out right then and there and with little standing on ceremony about it. It’s my home, and hospitality demands that a big portion of my responsibility is to my guests, certainly, but not at the expense of my home and its dignity. If, afterward, someone were then to suggest that I had been unreasonable, I might actually bother myself to discuss the matter.
I see a parallel here.
Oh. I just read Dale’s post on another thread concerning the “Dale’s Party” analogy.
At least he bothered to discuss the screamingly obvious.
Hi David
in law school the right of free- speech does not mean that we should insult people at every beck and turn,
john.
Does most of the editing not get done by rich (in Canada) and Alan (on Mars), though?
I mean, I know Dale tells them to, but I thought Dale actually did little of it? Minor point, I know, but I’ve always wondered…
You want free speech?
Try MSN Spaces http://spaces.msn.com/members/whitenationalistlady/
It’s mind boggling what free speech can spawn in the wrong hands.