The beauty of freedom of speech and forums

[Deleted]

One great thing about free conversation is that ideals can spread around civilization and influence different people. Some people can be racist, hating of a certain race, but through the persuasion of words over a long period of time, this country has become more open minded. So if there is a person who says something that some deem unacceptable, they shouldn't be silenced, and the conversation shouldn't be hidden, for the simple fact that the idea in question can do nothing but good. We can either persuade that person to think like us, or they can persuade us to think like them.

At one time, slavery was acceptable, and talking about a white man and a black woman having a relationship together was disgusting and despicable. Yet here we are today. Just because we are on an internet forum, doesn't mean we should ignore this simple fact.

[jfeathe]

I agree with what you are saying JP. However, I am almost certain I know which thread you are referring to, and I believe the correct action was taken.

There are certain topics that involve populations that are defenseless. In those cases, the population being attacked cannot defend itself or persuade anyone to think differently.

Dealing with almost any other topic, I'd say the conversation should have continued, but to allow someone to continue speaking so harshly of a helpless population would do nothing but harm.

[Deleted]

So instead of trying to persuade them to change opinions, we should just let them be? That person could've easily realized what he/she was doing was wrong.

I used to say "retarded" all the time, but I don't anymore, because someone else told me that it's a pretty mean thing to do... although sometimes I unfortunately forget, especially on the internet.

Had no one told me, or if I was unsocial and the only people to tell me were on the internet, and I had never reached that topic, I would've never learned, and my moral ground on the word would've never changed.

If I kick a dog, we shouldn't ignore the dog, and instead defend it. That's what we were doing in that thread. But now the dog kicker will continue to kick because they weren't told at all that it was bad.

[TCM]

The very first post after the OP's was stating how poor his opinion was and his very next reply was worse than the first. That's not ignoring it, that's nipping it in the bud before it gets worse. He's stated many times about his personality. Some things you just can't try to "fix".

[Deleted]

Aug 3, 2011 22:07:33 GMT -5 TCM said:

The very first post after the OP's was stating how poor his opinion was and his very next reply was worse than the first. That's not ignoring it, that's nipping it in the bud before it gets worse. He's stated many times about his personality. Some things you just can't try to "fix".

Locking and Deleting the post are two different things. Although I prefer neither, if it DID get worse, meaning not ASSUME it would get worse, but seeing it did get worse, a lock would be in order.

We shouldn't be in the mindset that we can't "fix" personalities. We've fixed PLENTY of personalities on this forum, most don't even realize it. We can fix more, and if there is one we can't fix, we shouldn't assume we can't.

[RiderLeangle]

I just got to say about that topic... I thought "Retarded" has been the actual medical term for forever, when exactly did it get offensive anyways?...
Or was it more about the rest of the words he said with it?

[TCM]

It's not that he said just retarded, people have said that before in plenty of thread, regardless of opinions on the word. It was everything else. Threads are deleted when the subject or the fighting went too far, and it did here, thus both the lock and delete.

[supersheep]

Locks are used when the conversation was useful, but got off track and was no longer salvagable or is outdated and no longer needed.

Deletetions are used when the conversation has no useful purpose at any time, or is clearly in violation of the forum ground rules.

[Deleted]

I don't think it did.... the responses from his radical point of view were generally positive. Sure, he got owned, but the words of other users, one in particular, was very insightful for someone as hateful as he was.

[Deleted]

Aug 3, 2011 23:12:13 GMT -5 supersheep said:

Locks are used when the conversation was useful, but got off track and was no longer salvagable or is outdated and no longer needed.

Deletetions are used when the conversation has no useful purpose at any time, or is clearly in violation of the forum ground rules.

Doesn't apply to the thread I'm talking about. It wasn't a guy trying to troll, that was his actual opinion on a group of people. Regardless of how gross that post was, the post that followed, especially from one user, was VERY useful, and had a CLEAR purpose.

[TCM]

One post isn't going to save a thread, regardless of the message involved.

[SuperTiger]

Aug 3, 2011 23:13:49 GMT -5 @jpjuice23 said:

I don't think it did.... the responses from his radical point of view were generally positive. Sure, he got owned, but the words of other users, one in particular, was very insightful for someone as hateful as he was.

I'm all for freedom of speech, but there is a reason we have censorship. It exists to to prevent people from seeing or hearing things they find highly offensive. In this case, the posts that were made were extremely offensive to a large group or people and had to be removed from existence. Even if you have an opinion that some might find radical or off the wall, it should be taken with care and not into a bashing thread.

[supersheep]

I was not the one that deleted this thread, I was not online when this was occurring, but I got multiple complaints in my box about it. Clearly people were offended by what was said.
I know free speech and all, but you still can't shout FIRE in a movie theater, there are limits to what we can and can't do.

Note: G4 nice job on post 2222 right before this.

[Deleted]

Aug 3, 2011 23:21:58 GMT -5 TCM said:

One post isn't going to save a thread, regardless of the message involved.

All the post seemed reasonable, even yours. That user in particular just had a really good point considering his experience.

My point here is I would've liked for him to be embarrassed by what he had written, and with that negative reaction to his post, I would hope it would've persuaded him otherwise... or at least let him know that what he said is not well received.

[supersheep]

He got his account suspended, I think thats pretty not well received.

[Deleted]

Aug 3, 2011 23:28:14 GMT -5 SuperTiger said:

Aug 3, 2011 23:13:49 GMT -5 @jpjuice23 said:

I don't think it did.... the responses from his radical point of view were generally positive. Sure, he got owned, but the words of other users, one in particular, was very insightful for someone as hateful as he was.

I'm all for freedom of speech, but there is a reason we have censorship. It exists to to prevent people from seeing or hearing things they find highly offensive. In this case, the posts that were made were extremely offensive to a large group or people and had to be removed from existence. Even if you have an opinion that some might find radical or off the wall, it should be taken with care and not into a bashing thread.

But why censor that? Freedom of speech is a two way street, if someone can say something hateful, other people should be able to retaliate. If we censor it, those people are STILL going to be hateful. Lets convince these people they're dumb rather than shun them, which doesn't help anybody... including the people we are "trying to protect."

Aug 3, 2011 23:28:41 GMT -5 supersheep said:

I was not the one that deleted this thread, I was not online when this was occurring, but I got multiple complaints in my box about it. Clearly people were offended by what was said.
I know free speech and all, but you still can't shout FIRE in a movie theater, there are limits to what we can and can't do.

The limit to what we can and can't do ends waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay further down than offensive.

The only time when freedom of speech should be restricted is when peoples lives are in danger. You can't say fire in a move theater because your action risked lives. Someone could be trampled. I never heard of a story where someone up and died because he or she was offended.



What is the point of freedom of speech when we block what someone says because the rest of us think it's offensive. That isn't freedom of speech anymore. My point is we should be influencing our beliefs onto others, not shunning them or pretending they don't exist.

[Deleted]

Aug 3, 2011 23:31:24 GMT -5 supersheep said:

He got his account suspended, I think thats pretty not well received.

If you banned me for calling someone on this forum a retard, I'd still use retard.

If people told me that calling someone a retard is wrong, there's a higher probability that I'd stop using the word retard.

[TCM]

I'd say his belief was locked down once he was sent to a remedial class.

[supersheep]

Again, I did'nt see exactly what was said, but from what I have gathered the context was the bigger problem,

[Deleted]

Aug 3, 2011 23:45:01 GMT -5 supersheep said:

Again, I did'nt see exactly what was said, but from what I have gathered the context was the bigger problem,

His post was indeed offensive. But the post that argued his were constructive and meaningful.

And yeah, I give you too much crap sheep, I just want to show you what I'd like the role of a mod to be, and I'd like it to trust the community a little more. The thread that was deleted, and that's fine. What's done is done.