Crash course in Libertarian ideology

[Cyrus]

MMMMMM, a self-proclaimed Libertarian, has just locked up a thread started by DVaut1, in which an MMMMMM statement made on this board was challenged. So, one can no longer discuss matters with or concerning the resident cop without the danger of incurring the wrath of same. It's nice to know that the person you're holding a discussion with has a gun (ie the power to kill the discussion).

The thread was allowed to extent to one post -- the original post.

Wow. (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=3328124&page=100&view =expanded&sb=6&o=&fpart=)


This site is getting more educational by the day.

[DVaut1]

As I said in the 'Leadership' thread, I don't think the locking of that thread was fair, given that MMMMMM has (on numerous threads now) said that he never claimed "racism is dead", despite the fact that he obviously said:

"If racism were as prevalent in this country today as you claim it to be, don't you think you or I or any other respected poster would have piped up with just ONE personally observed, serious, incident? That you couldn't do so, helps support my thesis that racism is for all practical effects and purposes, more or less dead in today's America."

Apparently it wasn't his thesis, just some rogue thesis that some other scurrilous poster fooled MMMMMM into thinking was actually his. I guess it's just more malicious misrepresentation and misquoting on behalf of the 2+2 peanut gallery, who are clearly intent on misquoting and mischaracterizing MMMMMM's arguments whenever possible.

By his standards, it seems like he should lock every new thread on the Iraq war, as discussion of the Iraq war exists in other threads.

[newfant]

I won't comment on the locking of that thread because I'm not familiar with the details, but MMMMM seems to be a pretty fair moderator in general. He has his ideas on how the forum should operate, but, as near as I can tell, he doesn't ban people for violating his rules.

I would prefer an unmoderated forum, but, as far as moderators go, MMMMM seems alright.

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus, the original thread was itself quite convoluted and difficult. The second thread took everything out of context; therefore, to try to explain everything ALL OVER AGAIN, and without benefit of proper context, would have been ridiculous.

Worse yet still, the second thread ADDED NOTHING. NO new ideas; just rehash and requests for explanations ALREADY PROVIDED. There was no new discussion or points made in the new thread by DVaut1. He just itemized things out of context and requested explanation, but those explanations had been provided at length in the first thread. In short, the second thread added NOTHING AT ALL.

The place for the second thread was in the first thread, where it now resides. Go and wade through that entire thread if you feel like some masochism today. But it is not fair to ask someone to explain everything ALL OVER AGAIN and out of context, when full explanations are to be found in the original thread, in proper context. Those explanations and discussions were taxing enough so I don't see a need to repeat it all just for the hell of it.

It's not like DVaut1 added ANYTHING to the second thread: it's just a rehash, and moreover, it's a rehash out of context which is designed to be a bit misleading in my opinion.

Well, you know where to find that post and thread. Have at it if you care to, but please read the whole damn thing before commenting.

[[censored]]

can you [censored] retards please spare us your obsession with the moderator.

[MMMMMM]

DVaut1, I addressed this too in the other thread, earlier.

Do you think it is fair to repeatedly request the SAME explanations from me, over and over again?

I believe I answered the point you just raised, and every other point too, in that same thread.

Is your purpose just to try to make me look bad, or to harass me?

Isn't explaining something ONCE enough for you? If you don't agree or accept my explanation, fine. I tried my best. But you can't just go on requesting the same explanations as if I never provided them.

If you don't believe me on something, like that I didn't at first realize someone had subtly misquoted me, FINE. As I said I don't much care if you don't believe me; it's enough for me to know that I answered genuinely at every turn. You said you found that hard to believe. FINE. But must you bring it up elsewhere so as to harass me? I can't be explaining myself in every thread just because you launch another attack, which is in fact just the same attack again, beginning to be repeated as nauseam.

This is starting to look like harassment. Unless you have something NEW to add, please stop repeating the same points elsewhere, which were answered already in that thread.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
can you [censored] retards please spare us your obsession with the moderator.

[/ QUOTE ]

actually this doesnt apply to cyrus, who while completely wrong on most issues is intelligent and entertaining which makes his post even worse.

[newfant]

Are you ignoring so many people that you only see and reply to your own posts now?

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
this doesnt apply to cyrus, who while completely wrong on most issues is intelligent and entertaining which makes his post even worse.

[/ QUOTE ]


"Freedom means essentially freedom for those who think differently". -- Woman revolutionary, early 20th century.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
This is starting to look like harassment.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

Never not the victim, huh MMMMMM? Harassment? Can you say that with a straight face? My goodness. Harassment?!?!?

Whine, whine, whine, whine, whine...

You're just so persecuted.

I can only hope I get banned/officially reprimanded for merely quoting you, MMMMMM. I'd consider it an honor.

[FishHooks]

One thing I dissagree with is our moderator choosing sides in political debates, he should be neutral. If he wants to participate in political discussions, in my opinion he should have another account. If he does ban someone or stop a thread they will immediately think its because of your ideology, and it turns into unfair moderation. Just my 2 cents.

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
"Freedom means essentially freedom for those who think differently". -- Woman revolutionary, early 20th century.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. You guys are persecuted. Please. What freedom has been denied here? Your "dissent" is allowed be aired - in the existing threads where it belongs. A new thread about one's beef with moderation is not an appropriate topic for the "politics" forum. Get someone to create a "whining and bitching about moderators" forum.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is starting to look like harassment.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

Never not the victim, huh MMMMMM? Harassment? Can you say that with a straight face? My goodness. Harassment?!?!?

Whine, whine, whine, whine, whine...

You're just so persecuted.

I can only hope I get banned/officially reprimanded for merely quoting you, MMMMMM. I'd consider it an honor.

[/ QUOTE ]

No way will he make a MMMMMMartyr out of you.

Mack

[Exsubmariner]

Cyrus, a self proclaimed (i don't know for sure), has taken up some BS cause of the poor oppressed Dvaut1. Let this be a lesson to moderators everywhere. No matter how many times you explain yourself, no matter how fair you are in executing your duties, there will always be those who find something to whine about.

The vicious cycle follows the pattern of: 1) someone gets put in charge, 2) some liberal thinks they are smarter, 3) said liberal or liberal's buddies pick a fight with the person in charge to show how smart they are, 4) they proclaim after showing their smartness they should be put in charge, 5) Person in charge reprimands those involved in picking the fight and might go so far as to actually exert their authority, 6) the liberals proclaim that they are now a special class of an oppressed minority of super smart people and demand special treatment, 7) the liberals begin to use the incident they started to illustrate how badly they are oppressed, 8) if the liberals are really good at being liberals, the person in charge will step down out of sheer frustration, 9) a new person will be put in charge but not the liberals, 10) the cycle repeats.

Strange how all comedy has an element of truth.

X

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
[sarcastically:] Yeah. You guys are persecuted. Please. What freedom has been denied here? Your "dissent" is allowed [to] be aired. Get someone to create a "whining and bitching about moderators" forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

In case you are seriously interested in forming an informed opinion and not just to mouth off, please learn that most of my protests have been made when a poster with opposite political views was threatened with censorhip or banning!

Does this tell you anything about where I stand on the issue of freedom of speech on this forum ?

Let me give you the be-bop again. You did not get it the first time :

[ QUOTE ]
"Freedom means essentially freedom for those who think differently".

[/ QUOTE ]

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Cyrus, a self proclaimed (i don't know for sure), has taken up some BS cause of the poor oppressed Dvaut1. Let this be a lesson to moderators everywhere. No matter how many times you explain yourself, no matter how fair you are in executing your duties, there will always be those who find something to whine about.

The vicious cycle follows the pattern of: 1) someone gets put in charge, 2) some liberal thinks they are smarter, 3) said liberal or liberal's buddies pick a fight with the person in charge to show how smart they are, 4) they proclaim after showing their smartness they should be put in charge, 5) Person in charge reprimands those involved in picking the fight and might go so far as to actually exert their authority, 6) the liberals proclaim that they are now a special class of an oppressed minority of super smart people and demand special treatment, 7) the liberals begin to use the incident they started to illustrate how badly they are oppressed, 8) if the liberals are really good at being liberals, the person in charge will step down out of sheer frustration, 9) a new person will be put in charge but not the liberals, 10) the cycle repeats.

Strange how all comedy has an element of truth.



[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said...I didn't think the thread should be locked, but oh well; this actually has very little to do with moderation.

There's only one guy here who thinks he's being harassed...consider it next time you make a post like this, because I don't think you've been following this situation at all.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
...Cyrus, a self proclaimed Liberal...

[/ QUOTE ]
I never "proclaimed" any such thing. (In fact, I have denied it quite strongly!)

[ QUOTE ]
Let this be a lesson to moderators everywhere. No matter how many times you explain yourself, no matter how fair you are in executing your duties, there will always be those who find something to whine about.

[/ QUOTE ]
If the Mods were actually "fair in their duties", there would be no protest. That M is doing his job well is your own personal opinion. It differs with mine. (For starters, a mod should not be actively interfering in discussions in this page. FishHooks (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=3329814&page=101&view =expanded&sb=6&o=&vc=1) already made that point. Oh and note that MMMMMM locked up a thread when he disagreed with the OP!)

[ QUOTE ]
some liberal thinks they are smarter

[/ QUOTE ]
Not true. MMMMMM is as smart as you ! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
said liberals ... proclaim after showing their smartness they should be put in charge

[/ QUOTE ]
Seriously, you are breathing some polluted air down there. What are you saying? Do you see a lot of "liberals" queuing up for MMMMMM's job? (AndyFox already declined Matt Sklansky's invitation.)

Take the mask off.

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
There's only one guy here who thinks he's being harassed...consider it next time you make a post like this, because I don't think you've been following this situation at all

[/ QUOTE ]

Would that be MMMMMMMMM?

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Would that be MMMMMMMMM?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[lehighguy]

I have no clue what the posts were about. However, I've dealth with moderators before and came to the conclusion that as a private forum, they can do whatever they want.

However, let me say the way they conduct themselves in totally retarded. And I doubt 6M is a libraterian. Most libraterians are conservatives who don't understand what the idealogy means.

[Exsubmariner]

I edited that first part, Cyrus. I decided labels are counter to discussion. In any event, it was in the name of satire anyway, but it really doesn't matter. I will try to refrain from labeling in future. Except Dvaut, of course.

Please point to specific evidence MMMMMM is performing his moderator duties based of political preferences instead of terms and conditions set out by this website. I haven't seen any.

I have noted continued efforts to detract MMMMMM's moderator job. It's like a bunch of people on here are suffering from green name envy or something. I seem to recall recently that Dr Wogga was banned for using racial slurs, all the free speechers must have been jumping for joy at that one. Are all the issues really so tired we have to pick on the moderator all the time?

MMMMMMMM is a liberal now? I thought a minute ago he was a libertarian. This is really confusing.

X

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
In case you are seriously interested in forming an informed opinion and not just to mouth off, please learn that most of my protests have been made when a poster with opposite political views was threatened with censorhip or banning!

Does this tell you anything about where I stand on the issue of freedom of speech on this forum ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Last I checked, this forum is private property. You don't have any inalienable "right" to free speech here.

[LomU]

how can anyone be so ignorant as to saying that racism is completely dead?

if you want an example, you can find one here on this very board! take for example the issue of the terrible support provided by PartyPoker. many times threads are posted in the zoo bemoaning the horrible support at party. invariably the fact that the support is in India will come up. often the support staff will be characterized as monkeys. EVERYTIME, it is made clear that party cs is run by indians in india. and everyone points and laughs. this alone doesn't show racism.

however, the cryptological sites have just as bad/if not worse CS than party. yet in the countless threads bemoaning the crypto CS, no one ever makes note of the ethnicity or nationality of the CS staff. now i know that the CS staff are based in the UK for the crypto's, so why don't people make note of the ethnicity of the crypto CS? no cries of 'those useless monkeys!' or 'god i hate their stupid accents, speak PROPER ENGLISH U CHIMPS'

now perhaps you can tell me why so many people have to make it clear every time that party cs is run by indians. because i can only think of one reason, that they, conciously or not, think indians are inferior.

i'm assuming you must be a white male, who has experienced little or no racism.

i am a black male and have experienced racism. albeit minor, and very often only annoying and irrelevant, yet, it does still exist i believe. however, since moving to New Zealand, i have not run into much at all[small sample size?].

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Are all the issues really so tired we have to pick on the moderator all the time?

[/ QUOTE ]
Since the advent of Mods is relatively recent, it is only natural to talk somewhat excessively about it.

[ QUOTE ]
MMMMMMMM is a liberal now?

[/ QUOTE ]
What? Where did you read this?

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Last I checked, this forum is private property. You don't have any inalienable "right" to free speech here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am already on record as stating that the practice (mods, 86ing) is, first and foremost, bad for business.


I now see you do not know the background adequately.

Take care.

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Last I checked, this forum is private property. You don't have any inalienable "right" to free speech here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am already on record as stating that the practice (mods, 86ing) is, first and foremost, bad for business.


I now see you do not know the background adequately.

Take care.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a completely different issue than your "freedom of speech." You're either unable to differentiate the two or else your doing it on purpose because you can't argue your case legitimately.

Take care.

[coffeecrazy1]

Wow...that was a whole lot of words for an undeserving thread. Repost this in the other thread, if you are feeling such a grievance.

I would like to echo lehigh in that 6M's statements do not reflect any facet of Libertarian ideology, at least in terms of the thread in question. Actually, since Libertarianism is fairly meritocratic, I cannot see that racism would fit into Libertarian ideal...since we believe everybody should do the best they can do, and be free to do it.

I'm not sure how Cyrus interpreted 6M's comments to speak for the entire Libertarian Party, but I would like to refute that notion. As for LomU's statements about the PartyPoker issue...wow. I mean...WOW.

[ QUOTE ]
now perhaps you can tell me why so many people have to make it clear every time that party cs is run by indians. because i can only think of one reason, that they, conciously or not, think indians are inferior.

[/ QUOTE ] I realize that racism is an emotional issue for you...that much is clear from your post. And, I agree with you that racism is not dead, having grown up and lived in Texas my entire life. That said, I humbly submit that simply because you cannot think of another reason for those posters' comments does not prove the motivation of those comments. It is certainly a valid consideration, but is not proof of anything. I would actually posit that more people complain about the CS at Party because more people play on Party...far more people than the Cryptos...hence, more complaints.

Also...what if the complaints about the CS at Party are accurate? Isn't it possible that people speaking a nonnative tongue would be more difficult to understand than native speakers? Isn't it possible that many of these posters have difficulty understanding non-American English?

Again, I am not saying that racism does not exist, but racism toward people of India rather than more homegrown varieties is a bit obscure. Plus...bear in mind that these are customers of Party, and many people treat those that serve them poorly, regardless of color. Believe me...I can vouch for that, having been a waiter.

[LomU]

you misunderstood me/i wasn't very clear.

its not that there are MORE complaints about party, it's the fact that the ethnicity of the CS people is always brought up. why is this? bad support is bad support. who cares where they come from? obviously alot of people do. crypto support is horrible too, but does anyone call the brits chimps, or characterise them as monkeys? noone even brings it up. they just call the cryptos out on their terrible support.

the point being, if its bad support at party, its bad support BY indians in many peoples eyes.

when its bad support at cryptos, its just bad support by cryptos.

so tell me why people feel the need to bring up ethnicity?

i dont want to go overboard im just using this minor thing to show that there is still an innate, or even subconcious racism still among many people.

[coffeecrazy1]

Well...

I agree with you that ethnicity should not a focal point of the argument. However, there is, as you said, a natural tendency of people to dislike those who are unlike them. This is true in every race, not just the whites. There are plenty of non-Americans who hate Americans simply because there are Americans...and for no other reason than that. There are plenty of blacks that hate whites. There are plenty of this that hates that.

That doesn't make it right, of course.

But...I also stand by my statement that most cultures would look down on those who do not speak their native tongues expertly. When I was in college, I sang in choir. We traveled to Germany, Austria, and the Czech Republic, singing songs in the languages of those countries(German, German, and Czech). In at least one of the concerts, we drew laughter from the audience because our pronounciation was not the same as those who speak the language fluently.

Did that make them racists? Of course not...most likely, they were amused more than anything...but it reinforces the point that how you speak the language or write the language leads people to draw conclusions about you.

And, also...I would like to reiterate that the customer/company relationship is not necessarily one built on mutual respect. Many people treat those that they do business with as inferiors, regardless of race. The racial issue with the Indians is perhaps an easy way to grasp at this.

[Easy E]

You're exaggerating the effect of this a little bit, aren't you?

[Cyrus]

I have actually advanced both arguments :

1. Excessive moderation can be bad for 2+2 business; and,

2. Although no "inalienable rights" are present here, it remains my privilege, as long as I am permitted by the webmasters to post freely here, to argue in favor of unrestricted use of language in the Politics Forum.

I already understand that the most convincing argument is the first one, for the webmasters. But I have failed to convince them of that because their concern is mostly the uncontrollably expanding nature of their beast. Or so they see it.

In any case, you seem to be after some imaginary nit. Feel free to pick it if when you see it.

[ QUOTE ]
What freedom has been denied here? Your "dissent" is allowed be aired.

[/ QUOTE ]
You realize that this "argument" is rendered null and void the moment you snarl that "Last I checked, this forum is private property. You don't have any inalienable "right" to free speech here."

[warlockjd]

I tried to reply to the locked thread yesterday and found it locked.

Anyway, my response was going to be: The evidence before the court is incontrovertible, there's no need for the jury to retire.......

In all my years of judging.... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
I won't comment on the locking of that thread because I'm not familiar with the details, but MMMMM seems to be a pretty fair moderator in general. He has his ideas on how the forum should operate, but, as near as I can tell, he doesn't ban people for violating his rules.

I would prefer an unmoderated forum, but, as far as moderators go, MMMMM seems alright.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYI....The locked thread was mine. It consisted of a Cut-and-Paste of the 'Welcome' message that heads the Politics Forum and a Cut-and-Paste of the 'Welcome' that heads the Science, Math, Philosphy Forum.

The title of my post was....'Compare & Contrast'

I posted it this morning.

This evening I returned and found another string locked, so I bumped it, commenting only that I had found another string in this forum locked, and I responded by bumping my own thread.

Any of you can interpret that however you'd like......That's what happened.

THAT is Politics......

THIS is a Politics Forum.......

I guess we can't comment about politics in this Politics forum?

.......George Orwell must be spinning in his grave.

[MMMMMM]

Discussions of forum moderation have been too numerous, and too disruptive, consuming, and unproductive; and overall appear to have created more problems than they have solved.

The moderation of this forum has been more than adequately discussed on the forum already. There will always be some few who remain dissatisfied; that is unavoidable. I have neither the time nor the inclination to perpetually defend my moderating against the continually expressed dissatisfactions of a vocal few. Any further comments or questions please take to PM. This forum is about Politics; it is not about moderation and M.