Replies

"But to make the kind of disruptive posts the zotted Big Barbee made is unneccessary."

I dunno...I've always had a problem with the bannings and "disruptor" ID given towards people. It's too easy too use the "Disruptor" label, then banning said "disruptor" as the quick fix. But that has a tendency to squelch the free and easy exchange of ideas. I believe that if debate isn't squelched, the truth will always out, even if there's some harsh badinage and wounded feelings. When people are quick to ban and label "disruptors" I think it's sorta like the "chilling effect" the ACLU likes to bandy about, and in my opinion it hurts the dialogue.

Not that I'm a liberal, though...I'm far from it! It's just that I see that same paradigm in other areas. At work, at our monthly meetings, the managers always try to keep people's opinion at bay, silent. They want to hear the glad-handing "Attbaoy's!" even if the majority of the workers think a new policy is senseless and/or counter-productive. I always voice my opinion, and, even if it's contrary to stated policy, and isn't what the management wants to hear, my opinions usually bring up agreeing, if reluctant, viewpoints, and the issue gets talked about in greater depth than if the "Disruptors" (i.e. ME!) had been asked to stop speaking.

I can even see the same effect on the emailing lists I'm on. I collect Glocks, and there's two lists out there that have a lot of subscribers. One of them allows NO "disruptors" i.e. if anyone express an opinion outside what the list moderator wants, the subject is censored and the person told "we don't talk about this." Now the other list basically allows anyone who wants to give an opinion, gun-related or not, to give their opinion! Sometimes this brings rancor, but not usually. And that list is by FAR the better list, the more popular list and the one where the real experts convene.

In essence, I would much rather have people of opposing viewpoints be able to give their opinions freely, without worrying about being "Zotted" or banned, simply because I believe that the Truth WILL prevail and in the heat of debate the truth will more quickly come to the forefront than if harsh, strident and/or "Disrupting" viewpoints, threads and opinions are disallowed.

Of course, it goes without saying that this is Jim Robinson's site, and he can set up whatever rules he wants, and enforce them however he wants, and I am glad to follow them...I simply do not know what I would do if Free Republic weren't around!

Ed