New A2K is Anti-Free Speech

Free speech means you can say whatever you want. It doesn't mean you are entitled to have a third party publish whatever you're saying. When you write a book, and the publishing house of your choice elects not to print it, that isn't censorship. Indeed, requiring publishers do so would violate their freedom of the press.

Likewise, when you submit a post online, and the website of your choice elects not to publish it, this isn't censorship either. (Again, requiring webmasters to do so would be a violation of their rights.)

And A2K isn't even doing that. It does publish your posts, and merely makes it easy to ignore for people who don't want to read it.

I'm not a legal expert, but I think Craven would have to turn a lot more fascistic to touch your freedom of speech even tangentially.

No, it isn't. Free speech is the right to express yourself without the government punishing you. It has nothing to do with the being heard part and certainly nothing to do with everyone liking you for your speech.

Look, I'm a big fan of open exchange and have made this software this way to allow us to open it more. The TOS has been changed and moderation policy changed to allow more expression than we previously did. We are now censoring less because the tools are in the community's hands if they are individually bothered by something (as opposed to when they try to get the community on the whole to eject their source of irritation). It lets us keep unpopular folk like you around because when people get sick of hearing you they have to ignore you now instead of appeal for the site to censor you.

Make a argument that relies on data, and not your emotions and I'll be more than willing to have a look. If you are right the data will bear you out. But I work in a world of real number and real analytics, and not your personal feelings. So put up already. Show that you can do more than be an emotional basket case about your perceived popularity and come up with concrete examples of what you whine about incessantly.

So here it is yet again. Show evidence for your claims. Otherwise you are just being an attention whore and trying to blame the site for your own unpopularity.

Free speech has nothing to do with whether people will like you. And the site isn't responsible for people not liking you. Your problems with popularity are not the fault of the software.

I have put one poster on "ignore" and have used "thumbs down" on several dozen posts; not one of those was due to my dislike of their opinion but because I find the poster obnoxious or non-relevant to the topic. I am considering adding another poster to my "ignore" list.

Brandon9000,
I do not think you really meant to lead an accusation against 'free' speech here.
As 'I' often do, maybe you stated it wrong, but YOU know what you mean!
I BELIEVE you are stating that you think SOME posts will be much less visible, and you are right.
It is TRUE, we can go to ALL the forums and topics that we EVER could in A2K. They may be slower finding, but they are 'findable'.
What I have noted, however--- there are the SAME interested persons responding, two to four in some cases- less in others, most have abandoned them...
What I feel, and what I believe Brandon9000 feels, is that MAYBE these were MORE VISIBLE in the old A2k. because:
when a member clicked on POLITICS (for instance)- The last post made in a topic was at the top of the questions...
... and maybe, just MAYBE, the member took time to read what was current, even if he/she were not posting that topic. AND IT IS POSSIBLE the topic had been started the year before!
Now... we, the 'interested', can go back and pull up that topic and post in it. Yet, unless it is researched by someone ON PURPOSE- or in someones tag listing, it will NOT be read but by precious few, or none.
I believe he is complaining of 'air time', not free speech. Anyway.....
I just felt that...

I certainly never claimed that anyone is entitled to have A2K display what he posts. You miss the point entirely. I'm saying that a system in which the majority increases the ease with which their own opinions are viewed and makes minority opinions less visible is contrary to the philosophy of equal access for people of all views to have those views aired publicly.

It's all W's fault.

Finally! Ceej said something that I can agree with!

two-dimensional internet forum don't do it justice...

The key thing you are missing and just about everyone else isn't is that the people who want to follow most of the forum's posts should use the last post sort. If you use that, the "politics" topics are sorted that way, and stay that way till you change it.

The last software did the same thing. What the majority was interested in was the most visible stuff because their activity dictated the sorting. The only true equal opportunity system would be to be randomly directed to everything.

This system has the old system's sorting plus several others in addition to the voting. It's not an introduction of a popularity system it's a diversification of what was already a popularity system.

In all forum software, the truly unpopular topics and posts are not as visible as the ones that are popular. The only true equal access would be completely random.

NO, I am NOT MISSING it... I am just saying that NOW, it is a choice,
whereas, it used to be there, that is just the way it WAS.

You can argue all day about how NO ONE goes unread any more than they did on the old A2K... and I am NOT gonna argue back.
We all know what we know what we know what we know...

Ok then, keep knowing what you want to know. I won't argue with you.

But for others who aren't as attached to what they want to know: The default sort on the politics tag (or any tags) is not the voting.

Brandon,

From past exchanges with you I find you're dogmatic. You bring up the same points and arguments which are not logical nor informative. You have a Master's in Physics but lack everything else. You have a narrow base of knowledge and cannot win arguments nor win the hearts and minds of A2K members.

it is easy to see that you are right....on the old a2k posts with no replies almost always got at least near 50 views, and if you go back a few days on the new a2k you will see that very many now only get around 15. I saw one that was 6 views. Priority goes to threads that pick up replies and tags, that which is not popular drops rapidly out of the view, and gets more difficult to pick up by any method. In the old a2k threads that did not get replies dropped, but on many forum they would be on the front page for weeks. On the new a2k they are off of the front page with-in hours.

Ima call the waaaaaaaaambulance,

Where ya at...

pointing out problems= whine ......thanks for illustrating the gathering mindset of the new a2k. Those who point out problems are martyrs. Those who keep wanting to talk about things that many others don't are trolls.

we have a nice collection of Joseph Goebbels wanta be's around these parts.

You are no martyr, Jack...

Don't you own a dictionary???

(nods to the latino dude ~ )

If you think I am part of the establishment, you have reached new heights in yer paranoia...

(will destroy ya)

My thoughts exactly, Brandon. The voting system is corrupted and should be removed. It also poses serious issues in debate. It becomes a matter of which side has the most members, rather than the quality of each side's argument. It seems pathetic, if someone is in a debate, that that person should vote down all of his opposition's posts, but remarkably this is what happens. It seems a2k has been reduced to a popularity contest.

This is democracy gone mad.

for the record, my friend, I almost never vote, and then, only up...

The audience Will find you, if you speak clearly, and speak up...