Replies

Was there discussion of targetting specific posters for banishment or censure because they did not adhere to a specific "conservative" or "republican" ideology?

For not being conservatives? Yes. We ban liberals and other leftists all the time. Jim doesn't want this forum to be a place to debate them. That's been his direction since I came aboard. For not being "republican"? No. Doesn't happen.

"Were libertarians targeted in particular?"

Nope.

And all of the teeth gnashing about me or any of the moderators goes with the territory, I guess. I am not fond of people making assertions about me that aren't true, but such is life. It doesn't change the fact that who stays and who goes is ultimately Jim's decision.

I have to say I find those accusations particularly credible.

Fair enough. I'll just point out that the implication of this is that you are basically saying that Jim has decided to target libertarians.

I don't find that accusation to be particularly credible.

I think you and others have a bit of a broad brush when it comes to what you consider "leftist". I'm about as far right as one could ever be... Far enough in fact, that I believe that government should have NO power to take funds by force, and redistribute them.. and yet I've been labeled a leftist by some of the hardcore "keepers of the flame".

"Were libertarians targeted in particular?"
Nope.

So Badjoe's claim that Jim intervened to curtail the particular focus on libertarians is untrue?

And all of the teeth gnashing about me or any of the moderators goes with the territory, I guess. I am not fond of people making assertions about me that aren't true, but such is life.

The accusations stem from secrecy.

It doesn't change the fact that who stays and who goes is ultimately Jim's decision.

Ultimately being the key word.

Fair enough. I'll just point out that the implication of this is that you are basically saying that Jim has decided to target libertarians. I don't find that accusation to be particularly credible.

I didn't say that... you did.

I pretty much see things politically the way you do, I think, but from my experience in life, I have to go with Dales on this one.

As a somewhat radical libertarian type, I have never felt the hot breath of a hounding mod on my case, even though I have enraged some active posters of the more 'white-shoe' persuasion.

Although no human being can be completely objective and unprejudiced by past experience, I think that a group of people such as those volunteering to be moderators here can do a reasonably just job, provided that they do not work in isolation.

Given that a review process exists, I don't see how a single moderator's spiteful day could really change the balance of debate here. Undoubtedly, some individual posters were treated injudiciously, but out of a feuding cast of thousands, how could this reasonably be prevented?

Secondly, why would a person in a mod role want to have every opinion they express subject to parsing by those with a bone to pick? The job is thankless enough as it is, it seems to me.

I hope that JR does not allow the moderator system to become bureaucratized, but rather keeps it somewhat in a state of flux, and let the natural energies of the people refine the review process over time.

Sort of a Burkean approach. ;^)

Yes. We ban liberals and other leftists all the time. Jim doesn't want this forum to be a place to debate them. That's been his direction since I came aboard.

OWK has already covered this, but here is the root of the problem. Once you open the door to ban on idealogy, than the point of this place is badly limited. You leave people no choice but to turn on each other a fight over the small differences rather than focus on the true opposition.

We ban liberals and other leftists all the time. Jim doesn't want this forum to be a place to debate them.

Nor should this site be a sounding board for their ideas. And I think the mods on this forum have done an outstanding job in keeping this site on track.

Libertarians ask the right questions (although their answers are usually utopian/outlandish/pro-drug-agenda), and because of this they work well with this forum. Liberals, OTOH, almost without exception, base their opinions on feelings and thus they are incapable of intelligent discourse.

Liberals and socialists are a cancer and would ruin this site faster than they run this country. If a liberal wishes to discuss things intelligently, I observe that the mods do not interfere. However, all liberals who attempt intelligent discussion on this forum always end up promoting conservatism because their arguments do not hold up well under scrutiny.

Again - well done FR mods!