Who is going to Block/Censor Hawkeye10? Others?

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

robert said no, that the ignore will go away to be replaced by the block/censor button. robert claims that this is all about other peoples right to not have to listen to you, but of course he does not bother to admit or defend the fact that what he is doing is allowing others to control YOUR experience here.

there is no defense for either his actions or his lack of honesty about his actions.
a2k is quickly becoming a repugnant place for free and democratic peoples.

If so, then as a matter of practical effect,
each member of the forum woud have the ability to (from HIS perspective)
throw out any other members. Thay 'd simply disappear from his known universe.
That might have a good effect upon people 's choices to be polite or not.

Does anyone know the name of that thread,
so that I can look for it?? Maybe it came out when I was away in Florida.

David

2 Replies

@Rockhead,

Quote:

you have no "rights" to see what I post.

i am not arguing that you dont have the right to choose who you share your thoughts and product with, I am arguing that a place which has instituted such a drastic culture of exclusion is unsuitable for use by those who claim to be free and democratic peoples, that this place would be such a violation of our values that it must be abandoned if this degrade goes into place and is used.

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Does anyone know the name of that thread,

it was mentioned in the wikileaks thread, but no where else that i know of other than the blog. it seems to have been a topic of conversation for some time in the A2K Kool Kids Klub but of course I am not a member, and apparently neither are you.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

This has nothing to do with what Robert claims. I am stating, categorically, that this is just another of your Chicken Little whines about interference with your free speech. It's tedious to have to repeat this, but . . .

. . . this is a privately owned site, and free speech rights apply to public fora, not to private venues; nevertheless, your free speech is not being interferred with, because free speech does not mean that anyone else is obliged to listen to you; finally, you always rant about free speech while ignoring that your rants get posted here, and no one is deleting them or otherwise preventing you from ranting. Craven is just offering people the option not to be bothered by people like you whom they despise. All your over-the-top rants about dicatorship and exclusion don't change that free speech doesn't mean that anyone is obliged to listen to you.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

DAVID wrote:

U shud be able to say anything u want politely with DIPLOMACY

hawkeye10 wrote:

how many of the words that I used should be illegal
and removed from the dictionary in your view?

1. Specificly it is "****"
not because I advocate celebacy,
but because it is perceived as being a brutal way of speaking,
or churlish. It can be compared to verbally hitting below the belt.
If u do it, u thereby DISGRACE yourself, regardless of the merit of your message.
Have u gotten this far in life, that your mother still has not explained that to u??
Did anyone explain that to your own children??
Everyone needs to be aware of that, in a civilized society.

If u came onto MY property and misconducted yourself
with the same rudeness, your presence woud not be tolerated.
In YOUR restaurant, how do u respond
when the customers tell u to go **** yourself???? Please inform.

Note that the penalty for the illegality that u mentioned
is OSTRACISM. In the real world, I have turned my back
on people who have been too crude for my willingness to put up with it.
That applies in cyberspace too.

DAVID wrote:

A guest never addresses his host with such insolence

hawkeye10 wrote:

yes, i am sure that you are correct that I should better mind my station.

In my opinion, all that is required of u
is that u BE DIPLOMATIC regarding whatever your point of vu is.
U oughta be able to handle that.
Stop trying to wreck the place.

Hawkeye, from years of your posts,
I 'm pretty sure that u r not stupid,
but u choose to FAKE it, acting as if u were stupid
by your pernicious choices of words.

As of October of 2012, I sense that the fires of resentment
against u have subsided (since your last misadventure
when u almost drove away some popular people who we LIKE,
by your personal insolence). I suspect that large numbers of A2Kers
will not expel u from their cognition, if u just be polite.

As I see it: the forthcoming new SUPER-Ignore function is like a weapon.
( I seem to remember Spock having something on his wall, in an alternate universe. . . )

There is an old saying:
"An ARMED society is a POLITE society."

or ELSE! . . . (that applies to all of us)

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Robert Gentel wrote:

Just want to mention that a2k is going to change so that "ignoring" is like "blocking" and just prevents people from seeing or replying to someone who has blocked them.

This is one of the reasons. If someone doesn't want to talk to you, insisting anyway is just boorish harassment. In the future when someone "blocks" someone else they both simply won't see each other's posts or be able to reply to them.

It will be a much-needed change on a2k. If someone doesn't want to talk to you they should be given better mechanisms to avoid it. The "ignore" feature needs a lot of improvement to make it actually remove more of what the user is wishing to ignore. Debate does not mean everyone should have the ability to force people to have to listen to you when they are trying to ignore you.

http://able2know.org/topic/164540-188#post-5135058

2 Replies

@Region Philbis,

Thank u, R.P.

That is very clear.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
you have no "rights" to see what I post.
i am not arguing that you dont have the right to choose who you share your thoughts and product with, I am arguing that a place which has instituted such a drastic culture of exclusion is unsuitable for use by those who claim to be free and democratic peoples, that this place would be such a violation of our values that it must be abandoned if this degrade goes into place and is used.

Do you use Facebook? Are you aware that people have the ability to choose who they share their thoughts and product with when using Facebook? We also have the ability to filter what others share with us.

Users of Twitter have the same filtering and blocking capabilities.

2 Replies

i used the ignore feature once for about half a day

i don't care what anyone posts, i can filter things manually, i refuse to use the boards filter

2 Replies

@Butrflynet,

Facebook and twitter never claimed to be after truth, conversation, or the greater good. Besides, we already have facebook, we don't need another one.

I use facebook very lightly....mostly to see pics of the extended family. Other than superficial goings on of those I know I would never expect to learn anything on facebook either.

Exclusion does not matter on such sites, because they don't aim to be anything important. It would ruin what was once this places gift, that it was a place for different kinds of people to meet and talk freely.

And ruined for what...because some weak and/or lazy people can't select what they want from the menu of ideas, they need to have it censored??

It is very sad that robert either never figured out or did not care what made this place special.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Facebook and twitter never claimed to be after truth, conversation, or the greater good. Besides, we already have facebook, we don't need another one. Neither has able2know.com.

I use facebook very lightly....mostly to see pics of the extended family. Other than superficial goings on of those I know I would never expect to learn anything on facebook either.

Exclusion does not matter on such sites, because they don't aim to be anything important. Neither has able2know.com. It would ruin what was once this places gift, that it was a place for different kinds of people to meet and talk freely.

And ruined for what...because some weak and/or lazy people can't select what they want from the menu of ideas, they need to have it censored??

It is very sad that robert either never figured out or did not care what made this place special.

1 Reply

@Butrflynet,

If robert wants to drive low in order to get traffic that would be disappointing but not surprising. He had a great place, but others may well have cared about it more than he does.

We have all seen great restaurants ruined by their owners. We survive. There is always the next great place.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

you have no "rights" to see what I post.

hawkeye10 wrote:

i am not arguing that you dont have the right to choose who you share your thoughts and product with, I am arguing that a place which has instituted such a drastic culture of exclusion is unsuitable for use by those who claim to be free and democratic peoples, that this place would be such a violation of our values that it must be abandoned if this degrade goes into place and is used.

Hawkeye, WHICH "values" woud be violated??
Can u be more specific??

It seems to me that if the change in Ignore goes into effect,
then it will be more like a lot of A2Kers opt to send their friends
in this forum many Private Messages. Do u allege that your rights r violated
by Private Messages that u don't know about??

David

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

As a restaurant owner, you also know that many restaurants have signs stating they reserve the right to refuse service, and they often have signs specifying their standards for service such as requiring shirts and shoes.

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/restaurants-right-to-refuse-service.html

Quote:

What Conditions Allow a Restaurant to Refuse Service?
There a number of legitimate reasons for a restaurant to refuse service, some of which include:

Patrons who are unreasonably rowdy or causing trouble
Patrons that may overfill capacity if let in
Patrons who come in just before closing time or when the kitchen is closed
Patrons accompanied by large groups of non-customers looking to sit in
Patrons lacking adequate hygiene (e.g. excess dirt, extreme body odor, etc.)
In most cases, refusal of service is warranted where a customer’s presence in the restaurant detracts from the safety, welfare, and well-being of other patrons and the restaurant itself.

In the case of A2K, the administrators leave it up to individual members to apply (or not apply) their own standards for service and gives them tools to "refuse to serve" those they deem don't meet their standards.

1 Reply

@djjd62,

Quote:

i used the ignore feature once for about half a day

i don't care what anyone posts, i can filter things manually, i refuse to use the boards filter

I mostly agree with that, dj.
But I make an exception when it comes to the incessant, relentless, incredibly dumb spam posters here.
I have recently decided to put every single one of the posters of this rubbish on "ignore".
And will continue to do so.
It has cut out a lot of crap, I can assure you.
Which is rather nice! Smile

0 Replies

@Butrflynet,

Butrflynet wrote:

As a restaurant owner, you also know that many restaurants have signs stating they reserve the right to refuse service,
and they often have signs specifying their standards for service such as requiring shirts and shoes.

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/restaurants-right-to-refuse-service.html

Quote:
What Conditions Allow a Restaurant to Refuse Service?
There a number of legitimate reasons for a restaurant to refuse service, some of which include:

Patrons who are unreasonably rowdy or causing trouble
Patrons that may overfill capacity if let in
Patrons who come in just before closing time or when the kitchen is closed
Patrons accompanied by large groups of non-customers looking to sit in
Patrons lacking adequate hygiene (e.g. excess dirt, extreme body odor, etc.)
In most cases, refusal of service is warranted where a customer’s presence
in the restaurant detracts from the safety, welfare, and well-being of other patrons and the restaurant itself.

In the case of A2K, the administrators leave it up to individual members to apply (or not apply)
their own standards for service and gives them tools to "refuse to serve" those they deem don't meet their standards.

I thawt that was most deftly, adroitly, skillfully and successfully articulated.

David

0 Replies

@djjd62,

djjd62 wrote:

i used the ignore feature once for about half a day

i don't care what anyone posts, i can filter things manually, i refuse to use the boards filter

U make it sound like an important PRINCIPLE of virtue.

I had U on Ignore many years ago, for maybe a few months.
I think someone quoted u and I took u off, based on what I saw.
U apologized and made amends.

I 'm glad I took u off Ignore. I made a mistake in Ignoring u.
I misjudged u. U r kind of a nice guy.

I LIKE the Ignore feature, but candor moves me to admit
that (upon reflection, in retrospect) I decided that
I was too trigger-happy with the Ignore Button
with maybe 3 or 5 members of A2K.

On the other hand, I have also re-instated ostracism
of some others who were not re-habilitated, e.g.,
the infamous JTT was thrown out, taken back in,
and thrown out AGAIN, by my use of the beloved Ignore Button.

David

1 Reply

@Butrflynet,

Quote:

Do you use Facebook? Are you aware that people have the ability to choose who they share their thoughts and product with when using Facebook? We also have the ability to filter what others share with us.

Users of Twitter have the same filtering and blocking capabilities.

My understanding, admittedly being a fairly new user of Facebook & Twitter, is that most of the "blocking capabilities " are based on abuse of some poster to those sites.

I don't know how Facebook defines abuse, but this his how Twitter defines it:
https://support.twitter.com/articles/15794-safety-abusive-users#

But, supporting just about any reasonable site's abuse of the terms of agreement with it's users ...
I can't help but question the use of the blocking option when it comes to discussion & debate here .

Where does all this fit in with the A2K TOS?
You could block an A2Ker simply because you don't like their perspectives.
Or because you don't like them.
It depends on how you define "debate", I guess.

But, mind you .... my concerns are probably a waste of time, since we have no say ever, anyway.
We ( the users) do not control, say nothing of have any influence on management, about what happens on this site..
The sooner we adjust to this reality the better.

3 Replies

@msolga,

msolga wrote:

Quote:
Do you use Facebook? Are you aware that people have the ability to choose who they share their thoughts and product with when using Facebook? We also have the ability to filter what others share with us.

Users of Twitter have the same filtering and blocking capabilities.

My understanding, admittedly being a fairly new user of Facebook & Twitter, is that most of the "blocking capabilities " are based on abuse of some poster to those sites.

I don't know how Facebook defines abuse, but this his how Twitter defines it:
https://support.twitter.com/articles/15794-safety-abusive-users#

But, supporting just about any reasonable site's abuse of the terms of agreement with it's users ...
I can't help but question the use of the blocking option when it comes to discussion & debate here .

Where does all this fit in with the A2K TOS?
You could block an A2Ker simply because you don't like their perspectives.
Or because you don't like them.
It depends on how you define "debate", I guess.

But, mind you .... my concerns are probably a waste of time, since we have no say ever, anyway.
We ( the users) do not control, say nothing of have any influence on management, about what happens on this site..
The sooner we adjust to this reality the better.

It coud be possible that Robert is interested in our opinions
about it. He never said different, so far as I know.
He has always been a gentleman and treated us, his guests, with courtesy.

I see both good and bad in the contemplated new arrangement regarding Ignore.

I 'm uncertain that it is OPTIMAL to lose the ability to make amends
among friends who have had a little spat (as distinct from situations
of YEARS' duration, that Robert described).

There is something to be said for the value of reconciliation
and the re-habilitation of social relationships. Sometimes it works.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

It coud be possible that Robert is interested in our opinions
about it. He never said different, so far as I know.

he has repeatedly shown a lack of interest in what the a2k masses think, he is only interested in what his chosen elite think and want. there is a constant lack of communication till the decisions are made, then it is take it or leave it. I dont think that there are more than 30 members whos opinions he gives a damn about, and not more than 15 who have any say in shaping what happens here.

1 Reply

Who is going to Block/Censor Hawkeye10? Others?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know