Replies

I hate to say it, but the problem is probably that there is TOO much leeway given on FR to people whose main focus in life is to hate.

We used to have high-toned discussions on FR almost exclusively. But that has long since ceased to be the case, and as usual the vocal, radical minority--those who because of their radicalism are going to be the loudest and most strident voices--tend to make up more space on FR than their numbers would otherwise warrant.

IMO, exteme, radical points of view should be limited here. FR should not be the dumping-ground for every axe-to-grind that these pissant megalomaniacs have.

I hate to say it, but the problem is probably that there is TOO much leeway given on FR to people whose main focus in life is to hate.

I would take a different approach. There are a lot of people who get very active on FR to pursue their own personal power agendas. As long as JimRob and FR march in the same direction as they wish things to go, they are some of the most active Freepers. Once JimRob and FR goes in a different direction, they turn on FR. Sadly enough, I've seen way too many instances of this happening...

We used to have high-toned discussions on FR almost exclusively.

I joined FR recently, and have found the network to be extremely informative and lively. Perhaps, after 9-11, there has been a greater degree of emotional release through this venue, but this is impossible for me to say for I was not a member then. However, I have used this venue for this purpose, to be sure. I have seen, participated in, and enjoyed both high-tone discussion and rough-and tumble, emotionally charged debate here. I do not believe that emotionally motivated debate is inherently undesirable. For example, hate can be a constructive motivating force, if used for good, wouldn't you agree?

I have not been a member of the club for enough time to understand the situations that Jim has outlined, but I believe, from what I have experienced of the character of most members of FR, that whatever challenges are on the way, that FR will survive and grow as a force for good. I for one hope that spritely debate, including the occasional Curley eye gouge, will not become a casualty in the fight to stay on track in promoting conservative causes.

And thanks Jim, for a job well done.

RE: Post # 14. You do not have the right to go about banning "extreme" positions. You haven't been here that long.

IMO you have been defending Islamist since 9/11 and taken
to task for it over and over. There're things that must be
said here and that's the beauty of the site. Sad to hear
your preference to shut people out.

Define your idea of radical points of view. Most of us are Freepers because our opinions are demonized as radical, by the liberal, politically correct, ememies of the Republic sites.

I don't believe we are radical, just because we choose not to tiptoe around every opinion that may be offensive to some thin skinned entity or individuals who are entirely insensitive to everyone else. I do believe we need to accept without bitterness, the decisions of Jim Robinson and his chosen monitors, when our posts are deleted or we are temporarily banned from posting. I do wish that along with banishment, you weren't also rendered mute as well. Sometimes the banishedee feels the need to discuss the offending subject with someone in authority and defend their position. Doesn't have to be public, it can be by private e-mail. Truly loyal Freepers feel that we are family, and feel totally isolated and rejected, when banned with no way to talk it over with our kin-that's the pill that ferments bitterness.

I'm just a minor member of this great and wonderful Creation of Jim Robinson, that makes it possible for us to express our opinions, beliefs and values upon a screen observed by almost everyone we wish to make aware of them. Let's not make enemies of friends, until it becomes a case of: "With friends like these, we need no enemies."

Check out Sungirl's posting history... reckon she's a conservative that belongs here?