Posted on 05/27/2005 8:31:06 AM PDT by JoeV1
I wonder if the rules on this forum are applied equally? Several weeks ago I was denied posting privileges because I jokingly advocated a "plan b" in fighting the so far failed war on illegal immigration. My "plan b" was to have border guards retreat to within 200 yards of the border and while fitted with night vision goggles simply drop any illegals attempting to gain access to America.
Now frankly I am not concerned with the fact I was denied posting privileges for a day(reason given was "advocating violence")but I wonder if the folks who post pictures of exploding nukes over text that calls for turning the middle east, or N Korea into a glowing heap of slag. were also denied the ability to post. I did a cursory check and found the names of the posters associated with the nuke threats posting regularly after the aforementioned posts appeared.
Is it possible that some are more equal then others here? I have been referred to as a "newbie" as if that somehow makes what I say less credible then someone here a longer period of time. I believe opinions are opinions and the length of forum membership does not serve to make ones credibility stronger.
It does seem that there is a "good old boy's" network operating here and the old timers are given more leeway as far as the rules then are the newer arrivals. While I have been a FR member for only 8 months I have been an avid political forum debator for 8 or 9 years on places such as the NYT, WP, LAT and others.
There was another incident in which I was accused of a personal attack although I was merely responding to an attack on myself. I never used profanity and merely responded in kind to another whose main complaint was that I was wrong in criticizing the post of another person because that person was a 5 year member. I was also told I didn't know what I was talking about. This resulted in a few back and forth retorts which I frankly found amusing and in no way took as an insult.
I thoroughly enjoy verbal jousting and never shrink from a confrontation. It appears that others see fit to run to the moderator at the first sign of getting back what it is they dish out. It is at that time that I believe the good old boys network comes into play.
If any of you would like to see the posts that caused this simply ask and I will happily post them.
If I remember correctly, it happened in the live thread for the Miguel Estrada hearings. Howlin got into it with TLBSHOW and evidently posted something over the line. I did not see what was posted, it probably was pulled; but I remember several posters begging the mod to remove Howlin's suspension.
I know what you mean. I have so much humility I can't stand myself sometimes.
This is a private website. The moderators use their judgment arbitrarily and let their views influence their decisions. Learn to live with it.
17
______________________________________
Well said Sir..
And I would caution you to not say it too often.
Boy !! Ain't THAT the truth !
Nam Vet
I would have to answer that it is my firm observation that Jim has a lot of patience, but certainly has to make a lot of "call-them-as-I-see-them" judgments as a lone individual running a large forum that is his baby. He does have a core group of volunteer moderators that have been with him long enough to develop his trust and have his general guidelines to try and enforce.
This is a big forum. Disrupters and those who loose a sense of perspective in their roll and begin to think that majority rules on a privately owned site have been putting themselves in conflict since the start of the Whitewater era.
I think that a good rule is to carry on extended debate only with posters you respect on the other side of an issue and in other instances make your point, have one follow-up if necessary to correct misunderstanding and then move on. It is not a debating society and we don't keep score.
Jim does grant latitude to long standing posters based upon their contributions and history. I would hope that he would.
That being said, he has come to his limit with many in that category and has lost friends of long-standing just trying to be consistent.
Don't let your feelings get hurt. Its only one website.
Additionally, remember that we are well read by the internet at large and what you post reflects upon all the participants. Joking tone, satire, hyperbole don't come across on the short posts that we offer in the manner we might intend for them. This is serious business and irony and the like sometimes need to be advertised with adverbial emphasis.
The conservative movement has been painted as bigots, racists, killers, uncaring, theocratic dictators and ignorant. Let's not let ironic, joking and hyperbolic comments lend themselves to the continuance of that portrayal.
Jim Robinson has done an extremely difficult job about as well as can be expected. I respect his efforts even when we don't agree. Find an article that is from those services we can quote, make your comments and post away. but remember, you can't take back imprudent posts and as Russell Kirk and other great conservatives taught, Prudence is the first virtue of conservatism.
Hey, at one point I myself was smacking Laz around about badmouthing the GOP. Now I find myself a registered member of the Constitution Party.
He means that Republicans are gutless cowards when it comes time to actually use the power given them. (ie: the Filibuster.)
He's a Prophet, our Laz!
Is there a code ring for this also?
And you did hit the abuse button each time, right? The mods don't usually see those unless someone points them out. They can't read every thread.
yep. What you said.
I would think that it would make the moderator's job a lot easier. It wouldn't take long to find out who the real whiner's are around here. Growing up we were always told to perform our tasks as though we had to sign our names to them.
If someone feels so strongly that they need to hit the abuse button then they shouldn't be ashamed of their having done so. jmho
Someone that runs to the Moderator as many have here for such an infantile reason because of JoeV1's post?
Lets just think of this as a Suggestion Box.
To even quip at violence on this thread, I agree, is reason for reprimand. It's Jim's neck on the chopping block here and there are those that would love to "repost" any threats they found on here to discredit FR.
To be threatened with suspension because you were not familiar with the indexing on the side when posting and have a nasty comment before the threat of suspension--I feel was not professionally done. (yes thats personal to me) But as I said you move on. I only ask if a moderator has a problem with my post to contact me and professionally alert me...not with some snide comments threatening suspension. Intent was never there and the activism indexed slot was never quite clear to others as well, I was told, so we just keep away from it altogether and realize it is some kind of "personal club" thing going on. Now I have become to personal in my comments..(just some of us relate just a little bit-immigration or non immigration issues..but seems all this falls under the topic of immigration) ;)
Have a good day
F_T_D
What you said that he said, too.
Your banned posting came off like those we've heard of from Stormfront or other Nazi like sites. We want to reduce and stop illegal immigration, not murder a bunch of folks who are trying to make a life for themselves(albeit in an illegal fashion).
Self defense issues and the protection of Western civilization are other more complicated issues that may involve the use of force in a justifiable manner. For example if an illegal alien, in a US border town were to attack a farmer's wife, it would be justifiable to shoot this individual in self defense. For a freeper to post a picture with a nuclear cloud over the mid-east in connection with a posting on Islam's latest assault on western culture is an acknowldgement that we may have to fight other wars in the future to protect western culture.
What you did was to advocate a wanton slaughter of individuals who are unarmed and mostly ignorant but desperate. If you don't see the differance in what you posted versus some older posters' macro-political musings then you deserve to be banned!
*shrugs*
You missed my point I'm afraid.
The DU has the reputation of gorillas ranting and spewing. I don't ever want to spend this much time on a site like DU.
We are far better than DU and IMHO each of us should respect the gift this site has been to conservatives all over the country and protect it by our actions as we post.
I get really tired of the old "oh, be careful going there, there are some weirdo's posting there". Which is what I was told years ago when I happened to mention FR at work.
And, this is why I am sensitive to trash and vulgar talk, and other embarrassing stuff at times here. We can make FR a very respected, credible site for conservatives all over the country to work together or we can make it a ranting DU.
It is up to the posters and the mods.
BTW, thanks for your assessment of my manhood. I suppose now I'll accept your critique in full by bending over and grabbing my ankles.
Honestly, I have had more of my own posts pulled than have been pulled by the moderators. Excepting, of course, the many entire drug warrior threads that have been pulled while I was part of the fray.
Isn't it about time you posted an Opus?
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.