Posted on 05/16/2004 12:59:53 PM PDT by jmstein7
There is now a debate raging on FR about trolls, honest dissent, and the value of free speech. I would like to weigh in on this and then solicit opinions from all of you on the subject.
The First Amendment was a response to the English experience of viewpoint suppression by requiring licensing of the press – i.e. requiring pre-approval of books – the doctrine of construction treason, which held that writing can constitute treason, a capital offense, and the law of seditious libel, criminalizing unfavorable reporting of the government. However, the debate in the United States did not truly reach maturity until the early half of the 20th Century.
Justice Holmes (in, I believe, Abrams v. United States) famously averred that “[t]he best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.” Even opinions which we “loathe and believe to be fraught with death” should not be suppressed, “unless they so imminently threaten immediate interference with the lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an immediate check is required to save the country.”
Alternatively, the self governance rationale posits that, because the general welfare depends on the citizens making enlightened decisions, in a democratic society, free expression and discussion are essential to deciding matters of public policy. The autonomy rationale holds that for an individual to regard himself as autonomous, he must see himself as free to decide which beliefs to hold. The First Amendment is also justified on the basis that it checks the abuse of power by public officials, it diffuses dissent by creating an atmosphere of open discussion, and it fosters a tolerant society.
I am inclined to agree with Justice Holmes – and that is why I support, as I think most FReepers do – honest dissent. Although such expression of opinion may make us angry, as the Court insinuated in Terminiello v. Chicago, the most valuable expression may well be that which because it is provocative and challenging, produces these emotions. This type of debate aids us in our perpetual search for the truth.
There is no such thing as a false idea. However pernicious an opinion may seem, we depend for its correction not on the conscience of judges and juries, but on the competition of other ideas. However, what we are concerned with is false statement of fact – this type of speech, particularly speech that is intended to be deceptive, adds nothing to public debate. False statements of fact, e.g. intentionally deceptive or libelous utterances, are not within the area of constitutionally protected speech. Deceptive or defamatory speech is “low value speech,” and it adds nothing constructive to the marketplace of ideas. This is why trolls are prohibited – because they add nothing to the debate and exist only to deceive and distort the truth we are seeking.
In a nutshell, we at FR do not support viewpoint discrimination. However, what we do ask for, at a minimum, is open and honest debate as we, together search for the truth. That is, per se, the value of free speech in a Free Republic.
Hmmmm.... this one's hard. I'm just looking for a taste of insincerity. I don't know that I see it. The Mods' job isn't easy is it?...:-)
I still think -- especially now -- that this person is sincere. Just, for lack of a better word, "misguided." Perhaps the best way to tell would have been for a follow-up email to her, and just, simply, ask. It seems a response would surely be telling.
I mean... come on, we can't be so completely jaded and cynical by current events to be unable to dig our way out of the leftist onslaught, and not find a way to reach people like this.
FReep is a habit (albeit, a good one...:-). We know what current events are; maybe this young girl does not. At the very least, she is ill-informed. If she's fresh out of college, she's had a four-year assault on whatever senses she had beforehand.
I contend that there is not enough here to dismiss her as a "DU activist." Give her a way out of the darkness, people!...:-)
LOL
She said she sent her resume to the White House three times with no response. I believe it is at least possible that they too concluded she is not making a sincere request.
Would they respond to a "sincere" request of that sort? Obviously, it's an idiotic request. I just think she is young and dumb. And, she'll stay that way no help from us.
Havoc..I beieve you are off base using that particular vanity as your platform..I am hearing many accusations from you and personal attacks of others..perhaps a history explains. I know that particular thread was not worth it. You saw things that were not written in that vanity.
Yes, I misread your post about comparing Saddam's treatment of Iraqi with ours..I do have a high school education and do apologize for not reading more carefully.
If they felt she was sincere I think they might send some kind of form letter. Maybe or not. OTOH, I don't think any of it happened.
I have approx. 3 troll pelts to my credit without ever having to raise my voice. I merely pointed and clicked on the abuse horn and left it up to the mods.
Right now I'm battin' a thousand.......
As for hominems, do you fillet 'em first before you boil 'em or fry em?
It isn't my place to grade her on how smart she is. She obviously came here to talk, express an opinion, seek guidance and or help. It isn't her intelligence that is at question, it's the level of conversation. I have to assume that the person is being forthright in presentation and deal with it on the ground unless it becomes clear something else is going on.
I've met college grads that can't write clear enough to be legible, can't speak publicly to save their lives, etc. What do you want, browny points for being presumeably more intelligent than someone else, thus giving you presumeably mor right to be heard than someone else - what does that sound like?
Do you stop and think about what you're saying before saying it? Because the mindset you're intoning is something I'd be ashamed of having - much less admit to openly. If she were unintelligent, does that mean she should deserver more or less patience, more or less understanding, more or less respect. Are we to discount the handicapped as being viable human beings because of your estimation of their mental or physical prowess? Are we just to beat them all down, push them aside and tell them they have no say in our society and no right to be heard? You're assuming a great deal based on how poorly someone writes. For cryin out loud, one of the most brilliant scientists on the planet can't even speak for himself without aid of a device. Do we discount him from society because he can't talk legibly or do we give him a chance to become one of the leading scientific minds on the planet despite his abilities.
Ok. That's what this thread is about: being able to tell. I'll admit I may not be the best at that.
A Raging debate? Where? Since I haven't seen it, maybe it is in the vanity section. I'll go check over there.......
Sorry, but after that much twisting and deciet, I've nothing to say to you.
No... the mindset I'm intoning doesn't relate that at all. If anything, I've been advocating reaching out to her. I was looking for sincerity, not advocating her dismissal because she doesn't sound too bright.
Do YOU read people's posts before slamming them?
And this ban is dedicated to all who wish we would be more tolerant of trolls.
Dec31,1999 wrote:
FR is the only safe harbor in a sea of Liberal traitors.
WE are the victims here! :)
;O)
The quality of debate has fallen. I have my opinions as to why; but, I don't blame Mr. Robinson for it. On the contrary, I'm familiar with the lengths and patience he went to in order to establish fairness, balance and a toning down of the rhetoric in the religious subs. Even having the religious subs says something for him in that he, I believe, wanted to do away with them altogether.
Mr. Robinson isn't responsible for people coming here to make buttheads of themselves. What he is responsible for is putting this site together and giving us a voice on the web.
I don't figure the best way to repay him is to act like jackasses and give ground to the press to drag his name and or this site through the mud - tarring all of us and our party with us. They lie about us enough without giving them something to point to. We don't all have to agree; but, I think we can disagree without lies, deciet, character assasination, etc.
I enjoyed that troll like I do someone's kid throwing a tantrum, spouting obscenities, in a check out line...and I am stuck with listening.
Here's my answer:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103363/posts
Other than that, Lycaon, aka AiasBig, Carl Carlson, Lenny Leonard, JoeyJoeJoeJr...Shabadoo, Atrides, RefusenixRefusenix, g.leibniz, Raskolnikov, raskol, raskolnik, AiasMedium, gagortion, El Bombastic, refusenixx, priam, Kali, cronus, iliketheconstitution, freedomlovingamerican, s.pepys, christopherwren, c.wren, leibniz, r.hooke, sminder, dourtboy, indiependance, dirtbouy, PeteyCoops, petecoop2, supermann, superslaw, peteycooper, frostilicus, capt.amer., dirtboi, PeteCoop, PeterCooperRules, refusenix, S.Pajamas, ericnoyes, johnnythrilldo, t.frost2, T.D.Frost, T.Frost, et al, zotted again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.