Replies

FR is privately owned. You and I are here as guests.

Hi Darksheare,

Thank you very kindly, and I understand that precisely. That is why I chose my words very carefully:

that looks to the rest of the world like arbitrary censorship and intellectual cowardice.

I mentioned nothing about "my rights" or anything remotely related to the concept. I was talking specifically about the perception of FR both internally and externally, and specifically about the value of being less restrictive in content. Or how about this - having a "Moderator Disavows This Article or Author" flag for the tin foil hat or leftie stuff. These are just my thoughts, and Jim Robinson will do whatever he feels like doing, and it won't make any difference to me one way or another. My goal is simply to get important, valuable information to as many people as possible, and I consider FR a fantastic resource as it is, but submitted my opinion to make it even better (admittedly, my subjective opinion).

I'm being quite genuine about this.

that looks to the rest of the world like arbitrary censorship and intellectual cowardice.

That is your opinion, we do not exist for appearances, we exist for Conservative values. If you exist for appearances, you are nothing but pop-culture. All forums have topics and themes. We are a Conservative site for Conservatives. Democrat Underground is a liberal site for liberals. Architectural Digest is an Architectual site for architects and designers. EGullet is a food related website for foodies and chefs. We offer a service to a specific clientele- Conservatives. You don't go to The Tavern on the Green and say they are censoring food because they don't serve McDonald's hamburgers.

"Jim Robinson will do whatever he feels like doing...

Damn right I will.

And here's what I feel like doing:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103363/posts

Sorry, Lew Rockwell, antiwar.com, Alex Jones, and their allies Code Pink, InternationalANSWER, et al, do not fill the bill (unless your bill includes offering aid and comfort to the enemy that is).

I was talking specifically about the perception of FR both internally and externally, and specifically about the value of being less restrictive in content.

So what?

This is a PRIVATE forum, certainly a libertarian (I assume) like yourself should understand that First Amendment rights have NOTHING to do with private property.

My goal is simply to get important, valuable information to as many people as possible,

There are other places to post.

Who cares what the rest of the world thinks?
When the rest of the world cares what we think, then I will give that statement consideration.

I mentioned rights because only governments censor, and rights are in place in counter to that.
Again, the perceptions of the rest of the world be damned.

Counter point is that such sites are disallowed due to the perceptions of the world being that if you allow such sites, then you are affiliated and or openly support such nonsense.