That's because his intent is just to disrupt. It took him a while to settle on this tack, but it's not a real concern for him, it's just a means to accomplish his goal: to disrupt.
Free speech shouldn't be allowed to be invoked here as a cover for an intent to destroy. Why can't you mods do something about this? Atlanticmike and Binger are exercising their "free speech" by destroying a community. Why can't they be limited to only starting threads in S. Prison or Telestial? Shades explained quite clearly what ldsfaqs did to warrant such a limitation, and these two have far exceeded that. Why can't Shades' words to ldsfaqs be used to guide moderation now?
If you'd like me to post this in the rules thread as a question, I'd be happy to.
The question is legit. There’s a difference between what freedom of speech means, and the methods by which it is propagated, and the effect that has on the same right exercised by others.
The reason ostensibly given by both Atlanticmike and Binger for their behavior has always been a legitimate goal on this board - which is why there are rules that govern it. But, co-opting what already exists as a reason to harass for harassment’s sake doesn’t follow. If rules were tightened to the point supposedly argued for by either of them, then they’d be the first to be booted from the board for being unable to comply.
But this isn’t about ‘the rules’, anyway. It’s about how both of them feel endangered because they perceive that more folks here disagree with them than agree. And that causes both of them to lose control, more often and more radically than anyone else that they’d point a finger at.
If you'd like me to post this in the rules thread as a question, I'd be happy to.
The question is legit. There’s a difference between what freedom of speech means, and the methods by which it is propagated, and the effect that has on the same right exercised by others.
The reason ostensibly given by both Atlanticmike and Binger for their behavior has always been a legitimate goal on this board - which is why there are rules that govern it. But, co-opting what already exists as a reason to harass for harassment’s sake doesn’t follow. If rules were tightened to the point supposedly argued for by either of them, then they’d be the first to be booted from the board for being unable to comply.
But this isn’t about ‘the rules’, anyway. It’s about how both of them feel endangered because they perceive that more folks here disagree with them than agree. And that causes both of them to lose control, more often and more radically than anyone else that they’d point a finger at.
Actually, for many here, it IS "about ‘the rules' ".
It IS about the rules that are continually being broken by the two. While I appreciate your discussion of their motives, I honestly feel once their intent to disrupt has been established, there needs to be a solution. They themselves have indicated multiple times their intent to continue disrupting this board. Repeatedly.
And while I appreciate you acknowledging that my "question is legit," I, and many, many others, in my opinion, are FAR more interested in the answer. To that end, I ask again:
Free speech shouldn't be allowed to be invoked here as a cover for an intent to destroy. Why can't you mods do something about this? Atlanticmike and Binger are exercising their "free speech" by destroying a community. Why can't they be limited to only starting threads in S. Prison or Telestial? Shades explained quite clearly what ldsfaqs did to warrant such a limitation, and these two have far exceeded that. Why can't Shades' words to ldsfaqs be used to guide moderation now?
Marcus
Free speech shouldn't be allowed to be invoked here as a cover for an intent to destroy. Why can't you mods do something about this? Atlanticmike and Binger are exercising their "free speech" by destroying a community. Why can't they be limited to only starting threads in S. Prison or Telestial? Shades explained quite clearly what ldsfaqs did to warrant such a limitation, and these two have far exceeded that. Why can't Shades' words to ldsfaqs be used to guide moderation now?
That is so powerful, I will repeat it. Also I note at one point even Shulem was banned and his posts banned to the Telestial only if they included certain kinds of words, content, etc. Surely control of that sort can also be used on the trolls. It is actually inconsistent to not do it. And I mean even if the trolls protest they are being biased against, put THAT complaint in the banned area as well so the ONLY way to even read them is if ***WE*** decide they are worth looking at and conversing with. They put tigers, lions, and bears in cages for valid reasons, lets do this with trolls. They still have a board they can complain about without disrupting all the rest of it. Now THAT would be a valid use of powers here in my opinion.
Actually, for many here, it IS "about ‘the rules' ".
‘For many here’, I agree. But my statement is referring specifically to Atlanticmike’s and Binger’s assertion, which is just meant to act as cover for their own agenda.
This is exactly what you refer to in your bolded paragraph that follows.
Marcus
Free speech shouldn't be allowed to be invoked here as a cover for an intent to destroy. Why can't you mods do something about this? Atlanticmike and Binger are exercising their "free speech" by destroying a community. Why can't they be limited to only starting threads in S. Prison or Telestial? Shades explained quite clearly what ldsfaqs did to warrant such a limitation, and these two have far exceeded that. Why can't Shades' words to ldsfaqs be used to guide moderation now?
That is so powerful, I will repeat it. Also I note at one point even Shulem was banned and his posts banned to the Telestial only if they included certain kinds of words, content, etc. Surely control of that sort can also be used on the trolls. It is actually inconsistent to not do it. And I mean even if the trolls protest they are being biased against, put THAT complaint in the banned area as well so the ONLY way to even read them is if ***WE*** decide they are worth looking at and conversing with. They put tigers, lions, and bears in cages for valid reasons, lets do this with trolls. They still have a board they can complain about without disrupting all the rest of it. Now THAT would be a valid use of powers here in my opinion.
This is a great point about Shulem, because it illustrates how even some of our best and most prolific members might find themselves outside of the goals of the rules, therefore resulting in action taken to make the community function better for everyone.
By example, similar measures can be taken with any one of us, be it Binger, Atlanticmike, or myself. None are exempt. : )
But - to Marcus’s point/question, the mods are more or less the police squad on the board, and mods must stick to what rules or conditions have been created by the Legislature and Judiciary (Shades). Mods don’t have the ability to partition new kingdoms (Legislative function) or possess complete ability to place folks into certain rehabilitative or parole conditions (Judicial function).
That is so powerful, I will repeat it. Also I note at one point even Shulem was banned and his posts banned to the Telestial only if they included certain kinds of words, content, etc. Surely control of that sort can also be used on the trolls. It is actually inconsistent to not do it. And I mean even if the trolls protest they are being biased against, put THAT complaint in the banned area as well so the ONLY way to even read them is if ***WE*** decide they are worth looking at and conversing with. They put tigers, lions, and bears in cages for valid reasons, lets do this with trolls. They still have a board they can complain about without disrupting all the rest of it. Now THAT would be a valid use of powers here in my opinion.
This is a great point about Shulem, because it illustrates how even some of our best and most prolific members might find themselves outside of the goals of the rules, therefore resulting in action taken to make the community function better for everyone.
By example, similar measures can be taken with any one of us, be it Binger, Atlanticmike, or myself. : )
I understand your attempts at diplomacy, but come on, canpakes. That last sentence is ludicrous.
You know full well who is trolling, and you've identified it as such yourself. Bending over backward to be fair in allowing free speech should end when the 'free-speechers' clearly and repeatedly acknowledge they are here to destroy a community.
Can the moderators PLEASE do some research into trolling, the damaging effects of trolling on established communities, and the relationship between trolling and the abuse of free speech? Shades is being taken advantage of here. His free speech position is not well thought out, and he's a sitting duck for the abuses trolls look for when attempting to take down communities. His gullibility and apparent refusal to educate himself is destroying a community. I understand he is not mentally in a position to deal with this now, all the more reason to let others handle it. The captain can get well without sinking the ship.
...Shades is being taken advantage of here. His free speech position is not well thought out, and he's a sitting duck for the abuses trolls look for when attempting to take down communities. ... I understand he is not mentally in a position to deal with this now, all the more reason to let others handle it. The captain can get well without sinking the ship.
I heartily agree. He needs to delegate authority now.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
I understand your attempts at diplomacy, but come on, canpakes. That last sentence is ludicrous.
Guilty as charged for being diplomatic. But, I am being purposefully ludicrous with that last sentence.
Of course, if you ask Binger, it’s I who needs to be banned because I don’t roll over for him. You can probably guess how seriously I take his reasoning. ; )
