“Do not post to me”

Free Republic ^ | 8/28/07 | Admin Moderator

[Admin Moderator]

We've received many requests from freepers requesting that other freepers not post to them. There are several problems with this.

1. It's impossible for us to enforce.
2. We don't have the time to enforce these requests.
3. We don't have the software to keep track of these requests.
4. Thick skin helps.
5. Ignore the poster, if you don't reply, they won't reply.

Free Republic does not need a bozo filter, bozo filters are for wimps.

Final note: Trolls, troublemakers, disruptors, forum pests, malcontents, RINOs, liberals, stalkers, et al, would continue posting to (harassing) someone after being asked to stop. Conservative FReepers would not.

[evets]

I hate Bill O'reilly.

[Billthedrill]

If you two don't stop it right now I'm going to stop the car!

I'm not entirely sure what would have happened then. We never chanced it.

[Tijeras_Slim]

How do I get A+bert to stop sending me snail mail?

LOL!

[PigRigger]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment #384 Removed by PigRigger
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[SunkenCiv]

;’)

[sauropod]

Long see no time, h’up.

How’s that Obama shrine you got going?

[fortunecookie]

Anyway, if someone can't conduct a rational discussion, they have no place on here. Free Republic is for sane minded people with their heads screwed on straight!

Well put. I second that.

[sauropod]

I always enjoyed his posts.

[Badeye]

Its amusing this thread was copied at a website the featurs a bozo filter....(chuckle)

[zeugma]

..but please tell—will any tinfoil be required?

Lots. and ducktape. 

[Old Professer]

Bush had it removed.

[SmithL]

I thought that feature was only available with the Premium Membership.

[Helen]

Quidam is my all-time favorite.

[Reply to 179] Yes, they were great days. I feel quite fortunate to have been around during that time frame.

[1L]

>>Trolls, troublemakers, disruptors, forum pests, malcontents, RINOs, liberals, stalkers, et al, would continue posting to (harassing) someone after being asked to stop. Conservative FReepers would not.<<

While I generally agree with this statement, there is (or can be) one exception: I have on rare occasion continued posting to someone who has attempted to insult me, been a smart ass, spoken up without knowing or even caring about all the facts, etc. Jerks that are run and hide behind mommy weenies after they’ve been exposed should be dealt with — not with name calling, but with the inconvenient truth.

[stevio]

IBTZ?

[Andonius_99]

I’ve had that happen, too. I’ll be really surprised when, one day, I post a thread that no one responds to...

[Madame Dufarge]

I remember that one time my peas touched my mashed potatoes; I pressed "Abuse" and you fixed it.

I know you can't be everywhere at once, but thanks for being there when I needed you.

[Alex Murphy]

We've received many requests from freepers requesting that other freepers not post to them. There are several problems with this.

1. It's impossible for us to enforce.
2. We don't have the time to enforce these requests.
3. We don't have the software to keep track of these requests.
4. Thick skin helps.
5. Ignore the poster, if you don't reply, they won't reply.

Great stuff, Mods! Thank you! I agree - Free Republic shouldn't become a Nanny State!

[tpaine]

Old_Mil wrote:

Most of the time I've seen the "don't post to me" rule used, it's because someone (usually someone less than conservative to begin with) loses a debate with a conservative.
They then hide behind this rule to spread their less than conservative views on other threads free from rebuke.

Quite true. -- The real problem is that the 'rule' says, -- " do not post to or about" whomever.
-- Thus protecting the political views of the person complaining from rebuke.

AppyPappy agrees:

I've been warned not to post to a person by mods. It's usually not something I said to them but that they disagreed with my position.
I was shocked when the moderator got involved. I wasn't even posting to the person anymore. The thread was over.

Exactly. As long as the complainant is not being personally attacked, remarks about the position he takes should be open for discussion.

I just figured they were a 'bigwig' to warrant such a reaction. I can't imagine running to the mods and saying "Make him stop posting to me. It's upsetting me'.

Yep, the "about" rule does seem to be selectively enforced - as, in its effect, it is being used [by the complainants] to protect some pretty weird non-conservative viewpoints.

[San Jacinto]

Is it Okay if I post to you as long as I am not logged on?