James R., whereas I have no problem with you as a person and indeed, in general find you a good chap, I object to both your banning of the individuals you announced in the thread "Nambla Poll" as well as your closure of said thread. I object to this on the premise that it seems to me that you have placed tolerance instead of honesty and free speech as a necessity for discussion here, specifically in that I also view the comments as appropriate, for the thread itself specifically asked what one's views, favourable or disfavourable, were towards certain practices.

That homosexuality both sickens and offends people ought to be able to be expressed, no? Similarly, that certain races, and various other sensitive topics, may do the same should also be tolerated, should it not? Or should we only have people that agree with one another and find nothing wrong with various things? For if we accept tolerance as this virtue to end all virtues, as you seem to be doing, do not we end up with something that utterly reduces the entire capacity for discussion here? That the people who have certain viewpoints, woudl be immune to having their opinions attacked, even though their viewpoints are no more rational, inherently, than another's?

Are we simply going to turn SciForums into PCforums?

Now, do know that I mean no disrespect by announcing my objection to you in public, as opposed to a discrete manner privately, but I thought to bring this topic up in a public venue because it is really a part of a larger public matter, that is, whether or not we should allow contrary views to be allowed a voice here.

I myself affirm that "being offended" does not make one immune to the views of others and therefore there is no reason why the voices of those whom hold "objectionable" opinions ought to be silenced.

Both D'ster and Woody were banned for hurling personal insults in addition to their repulsive views. I can understand your objection to banning people whose views are controversial. But do you think people should be allowed to get away with repeated personal abuse?

p. james
you are forgetting that this is not your board.
james r. can ban you just because he has a wild hair up his ass.

Prince James, nobody is forcing you to tolerate anything. If you don't like it here you are free to leave.

Leopold99:

Nor is it James R's. Unless he is Dan Watanbe in disguise. That not withstanding, yes, he could ban me if he so wished, but still I raise an objection as it deserves to be so objected to.

Redarmy11:

Considering James R. went out of his way not to reference just simply "personal insults" but also their viewpoints, it would stand to reason that his decision was not based on just one.

But do you think personal insults should be tolerated or not?

If yes: please give reasons.
If not: the other reasons hardly matter.

Yes, because it simplifies discussions.

see as reference:

When the insults start it tells me that I have won the point, and the set, and the match. PSM Buffalo & Steve,

Ever since our rightwing extremist friends set the new rule they have been losing every discussion!

It's great! No more silly logic. Or knowledge. Or research! Just make them mad.

It's better than sliced bread...

I have to admit. I never thought that this 'man' (for lack of a better word that isn't an insult) would ever contribute anything useful to this forum or to the world. But he did! It shows how wrong you can be about people.

Redarmy11:

Personal insults are not appropriate, no.

How can insults be personal if you don't even know one another? You know shit diddly about each other, you're writing on a forum where everyone has assumed names, how the heck can things get 'personal'?

If you find the moderators of sciforums intolerable and their decisions objectionable, you have two choices. Accept it or don't accept it. The overall consensus among sciforums members, however, will be 'good riddance' with regard to Woody. I couldn't really comment on D'star since I had him/her on ignore and never really read his/her comments.

There is no guarantee of freedom of speech on sciforums. If you don't like the culture, don't visit, read or post here. Dave has given James R authority to moderate and he's doing a damn fine job. If anything, he and the other mods are too lenient.

Finally, its not as if either were forever banished from sciforums the way Spookz (a.k.a. Gustav) was. The get to come back in three days. The clear purpose of a 3-day ban is to send a message that their behavior is unacceptable for the overall well-being of the forum.

i got banned for saying "retard"...for 3 days.

i absolutely deserved it, and it probably should have been a 7 day ban, given the tone with which i spewed the words.

i agree absolutely with skinwalker in saying that the moderators are WAAAY too lax regarding ridiculousness.

This is a public forum. Though I have yet to try, is there an option to <i>ignore</i> a member?

Prince James, most people will agree that Woodster and D'ster were not posting their 'facts' and 'statistics' in order to discuss. Especially when you consider that they regularly ignored/overlooked contrary objections and data and repeatedly regurgitated the same tripe. For D'ster, everything was a chance to mention some correlation between low IQ, high crime rates, and minorities and for Woody, well, Woody was just doing his Christian duty and being ign'ant.

Well, if you're a yank especially, you should go for the whole "freedom of speech" thing. Personal opinion is personal opinion....all the black people in the world aren't going to explode if someone uses the dreaded "N" word, but what WILL happen is that person will lose the respect of their peers. I have no idea where James R is from, though.

Let people say whatever they want.

i got banned for saying "retard"...for 3 days.

i absolutely deserved it, and it probably should have been a 7 day ban, given the tone with which i spewed the words.

i agree absolutely with skinwalker in saying that the moderators are WAAAY too lax regarding ridiculousness.
you aren't the only one either.

i was banned for 3 days and deserved it.

another poster i was PMing was banned and they said they deserved it

there is only one poster i know of that hasn't said they deserved it but after finding out why they were banned i determined they deserved it.

so there you have it, 4 people banned, 4 people that deserved it.

I have been calling people worse than retard.

I oppose Forced Tolerance as well. Why do we have to tolerate Christians or conservatives? Banning all of them would instantly upgrade the IQ of sciforums and remove the resident human fungus that feeds off hatred and divisiveness. We could use a far less tolerant board. Can we begin the purge now??

Well I think they should both be brought back now. There isn't enough hatred and divisiveness on this board for me. Yes I'm (semi-)serious.

I mean, come on - we all love a flaming good row, don't we?

Well I think they should both be brought back now. There isn't enough hatred and divisiveness on this board for me. Yes I'm (semi-)serious.

I mean, come on - we all love a flaming good row, don't we?
Flaming can be fun if it's infrequent and not personal. Letting trolls run rampant diminishes discussion and neuters debate or serious dialogue. It brings the atmosphere into the sewers, where trolls live and breed. I don't think open racists should be tolerated at all. There are plenty of sites for that element.

SkinWalker:

Obivously I have not accepted the behaviour, hence why I have raised a public objection to it.

A despotic action is a despotic action, regardless of whether the authority in place was a rightful authority or not.

What I present here is simply a case where what I consider to be a despotic and subjective judgement has been made on two posters by a moderator in part. If this forums wishes to institute a new policy which only permits one side in a discussion, then it ought to present this openly and clearly, so that we can be clear that objective, free, reasoned conversation is not here. If we wish to transform Sciforums into such, let it be done. I do not care, really, whether there are ten thousand such websites which switch from a far greater ideal to a sort of pig-discourse where only one side is allowed to be presented and hailed as fact. That is fine. But let it be noted publically so we do not exist under a sham of presumed freedom of speech. But if contrary to this, we wish to keep sciforums as a place where such objective, free discourse can be found, then we must stop even good moderators like James R ,from acting in such a way that is contrary to this.

Do you really believe the 2 banned (till tomorrow :rolleyes: ) parties are being railroaded for simply arguing unpopular views?! Two intelligent people having their freedoms of speech trampled on? Their vile, always personal, trollish provocations are not speech that should be in an adult forum, nor should it be protected speech. It's clearly designed to inflame, impede and derail discussion, not the other way around.


Just the new guy's opinion.

Genji:

The thread was asking for personal opinions on certain sexual acts and preferences. People can hold the opinion that homosexuality is despicable and repulsive. Their personal insults of particular members of the forum are a whoel different matter, but because they are "homophobic" - a meaningless buzz word I am loathe to repeat - they cannot be targetted for banning, when their viewpoints were asked for.

Genji:

The thread was asking for personal opinions on certain sexual acts and preferences. People can hold the opinion that homosexuality is despicable and repulsive. Their personal insults of particular members of the forum are a whoel different matter, but because they are "homophobic" - a meaningless buzz word I am loathe to repeat - they cannot be targetted for banning, when their viewpoints were asked for.
So it's acceptable to create vile gaybashing threads and bash posters that are gay with childish disgusting personal attacks because the targets are gay? "When did you get your butt-cherry popped" is an example of the level of intelligence in those two. They shouldn't be banned for hating gays, but they should be for targeting posters with vile grade school hatespeech.

Although I totally disagree with wooody I actually think him significantly intelligent (I dont know the other guy), I dont think he should have been banned for playing Devils advocate. Back in a blink of an eye it was argued and evidently uncontested that this was a science forum and thus any view was important to judgement being scientific(objectivity).
I find the lack of moral courage apparent from some here as the worst thing of all.
Far worse bigotry and base sexual view have passed through this forum with hardly a comment of protest. Now that James has initiated a clamp down and made an example of these two, everyone is poking sticks, sticking their noses in the air and getting on their superiority horses. Why now?

Genji:

Admittedly asking someone when "their butt-cherry" was popped is -crude-, but I must ask, would it make any difference if it was "when did you lose your anal virginity"? And in fact, what about either comment is "hate speech"?

And how is it gay-bashing to say one hates gays? If one does hate gays, can not one say this?

If I say I hate zucchini - which I do, by the way - am I being offensive? Or am I just stating a fact?

Prince_James:

You raise some valid points, but I'm sure I've responded and made my views clear on several occasions (though probably not to you, directly).

I don't mind people debating issues. For example, if people want to discuss who is right in the Israel/Palestine conflict, fine. However, there are a few limits to this.

The most important point is that true debate cannot happen when people descend to name calling and personal insults. Once that happens, any hope of an intelligent debate is gone. Therefore, threads in which the discussion degenerates into a flame-fest are closed, no matter how much the participants might enjoy flaming each other.

Secondly, there's no point in a discussion which is not a real discussion at all, but merely one person standing on a soap box shouting their views at everyone. This kind of thing is particularly distasteful when the views being shouted are uninformed and derogatory of other people. Thus, threads which have no useful content are often moved to the Cesspool and/or closed.

Thirdly, sciforums is not a free-for-all. This forum has a purpose, originally determined by Dave when he set it up. As you can see from the subforum titles, this is a place to debate science (hence the name), and for intelligent reasoned debate on other issues such as politics, world events and religion.

sciforums is not a sex forum. It is not a porn site. It is not a racist mouthpiece. It is not a political platform. People who want porn or sex discussions or racial hatred or one-sided politics should go elsewhere. Every internet forum has a theme, a tone, and certain goals set by the administrators. If you don't like the tone of one forum, my advice is find one which suits you better.

I see no reason why sciforums should become a place where publishing the prejudices of the uneducated and unintelligent is a protected goal. Let the great unwashed go somewhere else more appropriate to their intellectual level. There are plenty of alternatives.

As to specifics of your comments...


That homosexuality both sickens and offends people ought to be able to be expressed, no?

As you will notice, such expressions are not uncommon on sciforums. The good thing is, homophobic prejudice is often quickly countered here by more enlightened views. A line is drawn when homophobic comments become personal, or when reasoned debate is no longer sustainable by the participants.


What I present here is simply a case where what I consider to be a despotic and subjective judgement has been made on two posters by a moderator in part.

No. People are banned as the result of their behaviour here. By far the most common reason for bans is failing to respect other posters, and attacking the person rather than the argument they are presenting.

Note that the majority of bans are temporary, too. Witness all the people in this thread who have experienced temporary bans and are still here today. Only the truly objectionable get banned permanently.

If you like, compare sciforums to other similar forums. My personal impression is that we are more tolerant here than many other places.


But let it be noted publically so we do not exist under a sham of presumed freedom of speech. But if contrary to this, we wish to keep sciforums as a place where such objective, free discourse can be found, then we must stop even good moderators like James R ,from acting in such a way that is contrary to this.

Freedom of speech is never without limit. Complete freedom of speech would permit a person to shout "Fire!" in a crowded cinema without consequence. Complete freedom of speech ends up condoning all kinds of anti-social acts. And the assumption that "stick and stones can break my bones, but names will never hurt me" just isn't true in the real world. Words matter. And it is because they matter that there are limits on free speech.


Admittedly asking someone when "their butt-cherry" was popped is -crude-, but I must ask, would it make any difference if it was "when did you lose your anal virginity"? And in fact, what about either comment is "hate speech"?

Quite apart from the issue of hate speech, this is a personal attack on another poster. How else would you suggest interpreting a question phrased in this manner? This is not a neutral comment - any idiot can see that.


And how is it gay-bashing to say one hates gays? If one does hate gays, can not one say this?

Hate speech encourages and can lead to hateful behaviour. That is why limits are put on hate speech of various types in all liberal democracies.

Prince James

I reported one of Woody's comments, (may not have even been that thread now I can't recall) but it was pretty disgusting what he said and I am as you may have noted pretty liberal with my speech. I pointed out to Woody himself that he was crude and rude and this did not invite intelligent debate, and he was 'aghast' and surprised, he has no insight into his manner at all.

I knew someone many yrs ago who suffered from paranoid schitzophrenia and one of the manifestations of that disorder wasn the use of 'language and the complete inability to see reason topped with an obsession with certain sexual practices. Oh and I forgot religion played a big role. As I recall everyone was called a prostitute including their own daughter and grandaughter.

It is possible woody is similarly afflicted. Meaning there is no doubt that upon his return he will continue as before as he always has done until he offends sufficiently to warrant a premanent ban.

Meanwhile Prince James, I have a little online club and I ban whom I like, it is my power to weild and I weild it and as a non charging non profit site I am answerable to none. James R has been given that power whether he owns the site or not. Considering he is answerable to none he appears to operate a fair and reasonable policy.

James R,

I note what you say here re this not being a porn and sex site and apologise for my contribution in the breast, penis, vegetable threads. I shall keep myself in check hence forth.

Genji:

The thread was asking for personal opinions on certain sexual acts and preferences. People can hold the opinion that homosexuality is despicable and repulsive. Their personal insults of particular members of the forum are a whoel different matter, but because they are "homophobic" - a meaningless buzz word I am loathe to repeat - they cannot be targetted for banning, when their viewpoints were asked for.


It is possible to be homophobic PJ without being crude and rude and personally offensive, just as it is re every other thing we don't agree to.
You and I do not agree re innate knowledge but we aren't getting personally abusive and questioning each others lack knowledge, lack of education, lack of any other thing pertaining to knowledge that could be directed personally.
It would by your definition above be on 'topic' but none the less NOT on topic as the topic is not about you or me as individuals.

Woody takes his homophobnic theme and makes it personally abusive. This is what is unacceptable, not the fact he is homophobic.

i say!

mistress most magnificent
if i dare be so bold
is that you fucking a donkey in your avatar?

thank you
kindly

pardon

/impressed and shit

So it's acceptable to create vile gaybashing threads and bash posters that are gay with childish disgusting personal attacks because the targets are gay? "When did you get your butt-cherry popped" is an example of the level of intelligence in those two. They shouldn't be banned for hating gays, but they should be for targeting posters with vile grade school hatespeech.


What's the big deal?

So I asked "When did you get your butt-cherry popped" yea it's "childish" so, I think homos are funny. Alot of people laugh at homo's, why not? There are probably more jokes about homo's then any other group. A guy trying to mount another guy in hopes of somehow impregnating his fecal matter is as funny as hell.

I don't "hate" homo's, I think homo's are freaks butt I don't want to attack someone just because there homo. I feel sorry for homo's, what more damage could I do to a homo that compares to the damage there already dooing to themselves?

What's the big deal?

So I asked "When did you get your butt-cherry popped" yea it's "childish" so, I think homos are funny. Alot of people laugh at homo's, why not? There are probably more jokes about homo's then any other group. A guy trying to mount another guy in hopes of somehow impregnating his fecal matter is as funny as hell.

I don't "hate" homo's, I think homo's are freaks butt I don't want to attack someone just because there homo. I feel sorry for homo's, what more damage could I do to a homo that compares to the damage there already dooing to themselves?
You are my love muffin D and you always will be. ;)

So, when did you get your butt-cherry popped? :eek:

So, when did you get your butt-cherry popped? :eek:
It was a sultry June night in 1983. An empty bottle of cheap whiskey lie on the floorboard of my 1975 Ford LTD. Mark was a year my senior and was the hottest guy I had seen in a long time. His full brows, deep brown eyes, flawless skin and long chestnut hair complimented a 6foot frame, slight muscle and a deep voice to match his tight jeans. He wasn't effeminate at all but he was wanting something that night and I was willing to give it to him. We parked in the rear lot of a local church and began sucking eachother's faces. The murmur of crickets & cicadas in the background intensified my simmering lust. Then he put his greedy hands all over my dirty parts. He reeked & stunk of whiskey but I liked it! I Liked it! He found my ripe rectum with his eager fingers, plunging two and three in at a time. I had never inserted anything bigger than the handle of my sister's hairbrush so I knew this would be a new experience. That's when it happened. He thrust his member inside of me and thrusted again. It took my breath away with pleasure and with pain. I tightened and wriggled but he grabbed me by the hair and thrusted more and faster. I wanted to stop, but I didn't want it to stop. My hands gripped the vinyl seats and that's when I felt his burst of manjuice spraying inside me. My eyes were glazed. My throat dry. I was sweating and trembling. I slipped on my panties and zipped up my Jordasche jeans and drove him home.

So, does that answer your question?

Ya, that sure does.

Have you ever got the chance to be the pitcher instead of the catcher?

And, how do you guys know who is going to be the pitcher and the catcher?

Ya, that sure does.

Have you ever got the chance to be the pitcher instead of the catcher?

And, how do you guys know who is going to be the pitcher and the catcher?
Oh I've been the driver before. I prefer driving actually. Some keep their titles and never swap, others never even DO anal. :eek: Yeah, it's true!

I apologize to all members for my somewhat descriptive response to D'ster's provocations. I just had to rub it in his face. The original story was far more graphic. If I knew how to post a HiddenText button I would have. I regret not warning others the post was aimed at D'ster. His nasty question deserved a response that would turn his stomach. Incidentally, for what it's worth, the story was fiction. Again I'm sorry about that post and I'll refrain from biting hate bait from now on.

I apologize to all members for my somewhat descriptive response to D'ster's provocations. I just had to rub it in his face. The original story was far more graphic. If I knew how to post a HiddenText button I would have. I regret not warning others the post was aimed at D'ster. His nasty question deserved a response that would turn his stomach. Incidentally, for what it's worth, the story was fiction. Again I'm sorry about that post and I'll refrain from biting hate bait from now on.

I thought it was rather titilating myself, has anyone complained?

i am happy to see james laying it down.

:)

I thought it was rather titilating myself, has anyone complained?
It was a touch gritty for my tastes. Though I admit if the right candidate were to appear I'd be delighted to re-create the scene! No, didn't hear any complaints yet, but I feared that and worse.

I apologize to all members for my somewhat descriptive response to D'ster's provocations. I just had to rub it in his face. The original story was far more graphic. If I knew how to post a HiddenText button I would have. I regret not warning others the post was aimed at D'ster. His nasty question deserved a response that would turn his stomach. Incidentally, for what it's worth, the story was fiction. Again I'm sorry about that post and I'll refrain from biting hate bait from now on.

Hey no complaints; nice to know how the other side lives too. Not bad at all
I personally like the reek of whiskey too :p

I think he should write gay porn! (or stop reading it ;) )

I think he should write gay porn! (or stop reading it ;) )
:cool:

I apologize to all members for my somewhat descriptive response to D'ster's provocations. I just had to rub it in his face. The original story was far more graphic. If I knew how to post a HiddenText button I would have. I regret not warning others the post was aimed at D'ster. His nasty question deserved a response that would turn his stomach. Incidentally, for what it's worth, the story was fiction.
What is the big deal about just being honest?

I regret not warning others the post was aimed at D'ster. His nasty question deserved a response that would turn his stomach.
if d'ster is getting under your skin like that then you need to put him on ignore and not respond to any of his posts.

except like this:
This message is hidden because D'ster is on your ignore list.

And how is it gay-bashing to say one hates gays? If one does hate gays, can not one say this?

If I say I hate zucchini - which I do, by the way - am I being offensive? Or am I just stating a fact?
Zucchini is not a person.

I hope.

Zucchini is not a person.

I hope.

Isn't he the Italian left-back?

The wife kept saying zucchini to the son and I was wondering why? Why mentioned a vegetable constantly to a 4-year old?

turned out that she was actually saying 'suu kinni'. (shut your mouth/be quiet).

i cooked some zucchini about a week ago.

And did he complain?