Most definitely not. However, supporters regularly post things about Perry and Palin that are not backed up by facts or evidence. Why allow one but not the other? Ideally, neither should be allowed.
One anti-Perry person posted a link to a court ruling about a contract arbitration agreement between Muslim parties in news/activism, edited the title to imply that Texas had a legal Sharia Court and included information about Perry's "relationship" with Khan in an attempt to tie Rick Perry to a Sharia court that didn't even exist. Perry has no authority over contract law. The "court" was a panel of three imams chosen by the parties to the contract. It was as dishonest as dishonest gets. Was the thread pulled? Nope. It was moved to chat.
Yeah, they complained nonstop about how Perry was being treated. And now they are unleashing the same tactics against Cain.
I was referring to the treatment of Perry supporters themselves not Perry. Perry is a candidate and needs to be vetted. So does Cain. I don't see anything wrong with posting information about candidates and expressing an opinion about the subject matter.
When you engage in the very tactics that you have earlier decried, it's called hypocrisy.
Yes, it is and it shouldn't be tolerated. It is also hypocritical to condemn personal attacks on one group and say nothing about the same on others. It's natural for things to get heated in a political discussion and the mods shouldn't have to be babysitters but I have seen personal attacks launched that should not be allowed.
We need basic standards to be followed on FR. If you make a claim, back it up with a link. If you claim a quote implies something about a candidate, you should be willing to explain why. Otherwise, FR becomes a cesspool for political hacks.
I couldn't agree more. We absolutely need that. The problem I see is that with several mods, who have different personalities, that standard is not enforced equally by all. Mods are human; they're subject to emotional decisions. We have to recognize that and accept it. But there doesn't seem to be a standard enforced by all mods. I don't believe JR will hand down such a rule. He seems to prefer to allow FReepers to work it out amongst themselves and get involved only when absolutely necessary. I respect that.
I am interested in the worst of the trolls being pulled to the curb -and that applies across the board for the supporters of all candidates who refuse to follow basic standards of veracity.
Well, I wish you were a mod! Seems like you'd be fair and balanced. I don't see the worst anti-Perry trolls being pulled to the curb. It sure seems one-sided. I tried to raise the level of discourse and gave up. The vitriol was offensive. I mostly stay off these threads because of the unchecked vitriol.
And as I recall, the Perry supporters had ample opportunity to on that thread to call it out as BS.
Jim can't pull all threads where veracity is contested. What he can do is allow folks to debate the issue and call out posters who do not adhere to basic standards of veracity, while pulling claims that are blatant whoppers that cannot be explained as differences of opinions over the underlying facts.
But that does not change the underlying standard. If you make a claim of fact, back it up. If you state an opinion, you should be willing to support that opinion as well.