And since FR enables anonymity then the only issue is a handle being misused. Meanwhile,any position is sets one in opposition from a contrary one, and since those of like mind tend to congregate, then dissent from "group think" typically results in various degrees and forms of disparagement, whether it be atheists on Quora or Reddit, etc. to Catholic sites to Slate and the DU, etc.. Yet conservatives overall are more tolerant than libs. And FR is far more mature with its judicious moderation than any other forum i have been on. But the most intolerant are such as oppose FR owner's statement that FR is
"pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.
Free Republic stands for God, family, country. We generally look to Judeo-Christian* guidance on issues of law, morality, justice, freedom, life, family and civil society. And we have a Christian self-governing, self-reliant, individual accountability & responsibility, you gotta work if able-bodied and want to eat attitude on cultural and societal issues. And a Christian pro-Constitution, original intent, pro-liberty, pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, restricted government, small government, states rights, individual rights, free enterprise position on political and civil matters.
“But the most intolerant are such as oppose FR owner’s statement that FR is”
You are spinning the context of “intolerance” completely 180 backwards from what I said and it is not honest. That statement is a prime example of intolerance. Jim’s statement is a disclaimer of intolerance for those who do not hold the exact same lockstep purist values. And those like yourself use it with intolerance to persecute against anyone who even hints of not being an absolute purist to each and everyone of those purist mandates in the list.
Thankfully Jim IS a wise and intelligent tolerant person. He does understand that humans are just not going to be completely in agreement with everyone of those items in the list like uniform robots without some personal deviation or compromise about certain values. I mean get real, who would expect everyone to believe in everything on that check list without any coloring outside lines at all period. He is intelligent and wise enough to know this is just not possible...
And those who want to use that check list to judge and determine who should be here and who should not be here are being selfish and not considering the welfare of the site and domain it’s self. They are only concerned about their own personal wishes and fetishes and not what is best for the site and domain as a whole. Think about it. If you went strictly by that check list and got rid of everyone who was not absolutely pure and did not stand absolutely lockstep with every item in that checklist there would only be about five pure good old boy members left here...
Are five good old boy purists going to keep the site supported and up? No... So for good reason Jim is tolerant even though the purist members are not and want to get rid of anyone and everyone who does not “think lockstep just like them”. I mentioned this I think yesterday. If the FR just banned everyone somebody thought was a troll at their persoanal word then there would not be anybody left. Every member here has their own personal “troll” they would like to be banned. So everyone is a personal “troll” to someone else on the board just because they “do not think exactly the same as they want then to”.
But in all this the main point is everyone selfishly and personally cares more about themselves than they do about the domain, site, and community as a whole. They do not consider the end cause and effect of getting rid of everyone who does not follow the herd ideology absolutely lockstep item by item. Thankfully Jim is more intelligent than all these selfish users and understands the negative ramifications and end product if he did do that. It is his best virtue from what I have observed here. His tolerance is backed by real example. Too bad many users here do not learn from his own wise example of tolerance.
We should trust his wise example of tolerance. If he is not cracking down on everyone who violates even one of those items then there is a reason why. We should trust his judgement and reasons why. Not continually put him on the spot to “do something about this guy” just because we personally do not like another user because they do not follow that checklist exactly. I really do not believe he meant for that checklist to be absolutely lockstep. Because it would be self defeating and he is much more intelligent than that.
He knows that he may as well close the doors because there would be no one left to support it if he did. So we should follow his wise example and think of the domain as a whole before we think of ourselves or we are going to lose it with our own personal selfishness.
I know he is extremely busy with the Credit Card issues right now and I do not expect any replies. But I am going to tag him in on this because it is important to me that he does not get this exchange and conversation after it has been twisted completely out of context and used against me later. Because someone will... They always do.
Thank you for your wisdom Jim...