Freedom of speech on A2K

I pay no attention to anything that creep writes.

Libyan soldier blames Brits for sex attacks by Libyan cadets in UK: “They didn’t tell us…what’s the difference between right and wrong here.”

Then there is that business about Robert himself starting a thread about should A2K ban people for outrageous views, that is views that cause outrage, a couple of days after yet another major call for my banishment. I dont see why he would ask the question if he was not of the opinion that maybe I should be booted. Surely the Hamsters know the views of the Owners and are tempted to reflect them.

Quote:

Then there is that business about Robert himself starting a thread about should A2K ban people for outrageous views, that is views that cause outrage, a couple of days after yet another major call for my banishment. I dont see why he would ask the question if he was not of the opinion that maybe I should be booted. Surely the Hamsters know the views of the Owners and are tempted to reflect them.

I think you completely misread the intent of that thread. I took it (and Robert's discussion on it seems to confirm it) that he was trying to demonstrate to the vocal minority who were calling for your banishment that they didn't have the wide support of the community - which is exactly how it came down - no matter how much folks disagreed with your positions.

You are quite correct here, JPB.

Hawk...read the thing over...and you will see that Robert is very much against banning anyone for thought content.

Quote:

Hawk...read the thing over...and you will see that Robert is very much against banning anyone for thought content.

the way I remember it Robert was always for self policing, and did not want to get into heavy mod control for that reason. He also seems to not like censorship too much. But my take was that he was willing to do it if the community demanded it, so he was asking the question. We also know that Robert was at one time very much in favor of burying unpopular opinions, the new A2K is written around that purpose, only it did not work out as planned. I know that was the plan because at one point Robert himself said so.

Still, I am here, and unpopular opinions do register here, which I am thankful for.

But my take was that he was willing to do it if the community demanded it, so he was asking the question.

99% people prefer "Freedom of Leech".

Only 1% truly have a "Freedom of Speech".

Hence why every innovation that changes the course of our society as we know it was built on individuals that had the capacity of intelligence that surpassed the capacity of billions of people. Meaning throughout the 400,000 years of this embarrassing species, there has not been a single time stamped into a history book that shows that the ignorant mass banded together for a GOOD CAUSE, rather than a BAD CAUSE like war, riots, propaganda pooling and so on. NOT ONCE has the majority of the species PROVEN THEMSELVES IN HISTORY - NOT ONCE. It's always one person changing this god forsaken world every few hundred years underneath billions of fucklings.

So just to be abundantly clear, in most cases you are not entitled to unbridled free speech when you participate in online communities. You are a guest of the site owner — and possibly of the virtual renter as well. Behave as you would if you were a guest in someone else’s home, and you’re likely to be welcomed as a friend. Give the site owner a reason to dislike you, and you’re likely to be booted to the curb.

I'm with you...

Better respect those fucklings, wall-eyed mind. You are one of them.

You also.

Quote:

But my take was that he was willing to do it if the community demanded it, so he was asking the question.

Again, I think you mistook his intent. IMHO that thread was more about him and O'Bill than it was about you and BillRM. I don't think he had any doubt where the community would come down on the subject of banning someone for their position. I think he started that thread to confirm it to a few folks who were calling for your heads. There's no need to consider the "what if" aspect of what if he'd been surprised because that's not who we are or what this place is.