Death Knell for FreeRepublic?(Banned Sierratimes Forum Poster Comments)

Sagebrush Saloon, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Sierra Times (www.sierratimes.com) ^ | 26 Feb. 2005 | Henrietta Bowman

[tadowe]

Posters Comment #1

The "death knell" is for sites such as this "moderator's" who attempt to raise their popularity by attacking competitors for their success.

The internet is NOT subject to any governmental "enforcement" of the putative "freedom of speech". The various blogs and "news" sites are PRIVATELY owned and no "owner" can be forced to accept the unwelcome words or commentary of another. To lead that inference, as the article attempts to do, is hypocritical in the extreme! That is even more apparent, when I noticed the article because I had been banned from posting on that site (sierratimes) in disagreement with their inference that armed revolution is what you should do with unlimeited funds. . .

Of course, now I am banned again, since I "signed-up" to post on the site under the title "Abannedposter" to highlight their hypocrisy. And, naturally, I was banned again and *threatened* with retaliation if I continued. . .something about the (scary) "Spam Commission" and hints/threats of "federal" felony this-and-that.

I must laugh-out-loud because this site literally *hates* Homeland Security and the Patriot Act, but will NOT hesitate to use it as a threat against an individual who notices what a bunch of two-faced individuals they are, indeed.

Article:

Freerepublic.com has over the years filled a unique and valuable niche for conservatives. In the past, I was also a Freeper, but I ceased posting when Freerepublic.com founder Jim Robinson first began censoring and banning members for any criticism of George Bush. I knew then the handwriting was on the wall for Freerepublic.com; that the situation would only grow worse with time. . .

[nopardons]

I read it. I understand it. I still stand by my remarks!

There is NO reason to care what is said or done on that site and posting it here,is utterly ridiculous! Should every post from LP,that complains about FR or Jim,or named FREEPERS be posted to FR? That would make what Todd does,over there,valid; which it isn't.

And then there are the other anti-FR sites. How about posting anti-FR threads from those as well?

The poster of this thread is a troll. Posting about the hypocrisy of Sierra Times and sending people over there to read this posting, just increases their traffic. WHO CARES WHAT A BANNED FREEPER WROTE OVER THERE AND WHY SHOULD WE CARE THAT THE POSTER OF THIS THREAD GOT BANNED FROM S.T. ?

You and the others who have claimed that people didn't read post #1 are dead wrong! I read it. I "get it"; something you don't.

[MEG33]

#119

[nopardons]

Ummmmmmmmm..okay, so? What was the purpose of writing to me to read post #1 then? I admit it...I'm confused.

[MEG33]

I erred?

[nopardons]

Yes,I think you did.

[MEG33]

My apologies..I erred..

[nopardons]

You did,but now, you also get one of my rare pardons. Wear it with pride. :-)

[MEG33]

;)

[nopardons]

:-)

[tadowe]

Hi Net,

"There are certain sites that people are not supposed to post from. Could add sierratimes to the list?"

If you are asking if you should avoid posting on Sierratimes, then I would ask, "Why not?"

Reasoned correspondence to ST could only help others who read and post there. Indeed, it might even improve their philosophy and, once again, direct them towards constitutional issues, instead of paltry political bandwagoneering -- like trying internet warfare as this issue indicates. For that matter, it might show them that the principle of free speech is important to them after all, and that they only damage themselves by *banning* dissent for mere personal convenience.

Loyalty is a very fine virtue but it shouldn't be elevated above constitutional principles they are supposedly created (the website) to teach and reinforce with their effort to inform.

However, from my personal experience, I don't think they are true conservatives and that they allow some sort of 'tribalism' rule their emotions, and which emotions overrule their judgements. If you read the links provided in another post, above, you will see the group chauvanism attacking out of spite and resentment -- not any effort to address the reality of the situation.

The same with the idiot spammers, here. They aren't conservatives -- they're gang members and can only 'think' as a mob. . .

[tadowe]

Hi, again:

"It was not a clear post. My humble opinion was that we may have misfired. Many agree. Many disagree. Make the post more clear next time and you won't be flamed. Then put some ice on it."

Once again, I am not your willing subject for discussion. Each time you attempt that, I will reply.

Your 'opinion' is NOT 'humble'. Got that? Don't lie with cliches. Got that?

You are arrogantly continuing to make me the subject by criticising me for YOUR misunderstanding. Got that?

Go point your finger in the mirror, Ms. Humble. . .

[MEG33]

I do think posting the criticism of FR here is old news ..

There are special anti FR sites..There are special places on some forums set aside to criticize FR and JR..I read one occasionally for laughs..

It is nothing new and certainly the hypocrisy, handwringing or jealousy is nothing new.

Banned FR posters are particularly prone to this phenomenon. They always find a home and some are banned and must move on again..

I won't be posting on Sierra Times..I won't be reading the Sierra Times..I imagine after this thread dies..I will not think about Sierra Times at all..

[tadowe]

Dear Meg,

"I do think posting the criticism of FR here is old news .."

My example of their hypocrisy (Sierratimes/Sagebrush Saloon) was a current event; that is, it hadn't happened before then, because the ST had not made an issue of it up to that time.

You make the mistake in assuming that everything posted is for *your* particular enjoyment -- it isn't. I posted the information and my opinion for MY ENJOYMENT, my entertainment and my effort to provide an example of this critism's hypocrisy. . .for anyone who might find it interesting, too.

And, in my opinion, you have a very inflated idea of what others should do and say; apparently at your 'direction(s)'. Why don't you go patronize someone else? I'm sure you would find it a little less embarrassing. . .

[MEG33]

"I posted the information and my opinion for MY ENJOYMENT, my entertainment and my effort to provide an example of this critism's hypocrisy. . .for anyone who might find it interesting, too."

Hmmmmmm

[MEG33]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?id=55685
FYI..henrietta has complained here..

[Hi Heels]

Pretty sure you know where to put YOUR finger.

[Hi Heels]