GW's constituency

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Then you must agree that jokerswild misrepresented me, because in the title of his post he asserts that very thing. Hence his post is not just "another man's strongly worded accurate description".

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because you and I agree doesn't mean we own the patent on truth and objectivity.

[ QUOTE ]
In the meantime posters should not claim other posters have done, written or advocated things THAT THEY CLEARLY HAVE SHOWN NO EVIDENCE OF DOING.

[/ QUOTE ]

This happens all the time on this forum. If someone says something untrue about you/what you said, just refute it and move on. The community can judge for themselves what they choose to believe.

[ QUOTE ]
If I were to write that you had "clearly advocated violence against the government of the USA", but in actuality, nothing you had ever posted suggested that you did, do you not think that would have been far WORSE than insulting you or calling you a profane name?

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't really care about either; if someone made false claims about me, I would try to refute them. If someone called me a profane name, so be it.

Profanity isn't subjective though. I know profanity when I see it.

Lies are different. I think I can usually spot lies when I see them, but I can't always know when someone is lying - and when I do know someone is lying about me, then I call them out for it. I don't try to silence them.

[ QUOTE ]
If I were to write that you had "clearly advocated violence against the government of the USA", but in actuality, nothing you had ever posted suggested that you did, do you not think that would have been far WORSE than insulting you or calling you a profane name?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I don't think it would be far worse, or even worse at all. I don't think any of that would particularly bother me.

If I think someone has lied about me, then I'll do everything in my power to set the record straight. If it's that obvious someone is lying and defaming me, then the community will obviously recognize it as such. If the community fails to see the truth, shame on the community.

[ QUOTE ]
I suggest you ask yourself which is worse: someone calling you a profanity, or someone spreading defamatory lies about you.

[/ QUOTE ]

People are free to do either, and I'm free to refute them as strongly as possible. Sounds like legitimate discourse to me.

[cadillac1234]

Some 800 white wooden crosses, bearing the names of soldiers killed in Iraq like her son, have lined the road near the area where Sheehan has pitched a tent. Witnesses said they saw a truck dragging a pipe and chains drive over some of the crosses on Monday night.

Larry Northern, 46, of nearby Waco, Texas, was arrested and charged with criminal mischief in connection with the incident, Crawford Police Chief Donnie Tidmore said.

Link

[BCPVP]

You'll pardon me if I don't think lefties' new-found concern for the desecration of crosses is sincere.

[cadillac1234]

[ QUOTE ]
You'll pardon me if I don't think lefties' new-found concern for the desecration of crosses is sincere.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe not but don't you find a neocon's total disregard for dead soldiers and crosses a little disturbing?

[Roybert]

[ QUOTE ]
You'll pardon me if I don't think lefties' new-found concern for the desecration of crosses is sincere.

[/ QUOTE ]

Any other nominees for the "Most Self-Righteous, Ignorant and Offensive Post" Trophy?

[MMMMMM]

DVaut1, if I announced on this forum, in all seriousness, that you were, let's pretend, a pedophile (something which you have given absolutely no evidence of being), do you think that that is somehow "legitimate discourse"?

People get sued for things like that in real life. Here on the forum they may just get banned.

I'm not modifying my stance on this one iota. Forum members are not to invent and post deliberately harmful untruths about other posters. If you have a problem with that you can take it up with Mat.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe not but don't you find a neocon's total disregard for dead soldiers and crosses a little disturbing?

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course. What this guy did was wrong, and he should pay for the stupid decision he made.

But the left has a terrible track record with regards to desecration of the cross, so any "outrage" over this incident, imo, is over the fact that it happened to "their side".

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
DVaut1, if I announced on this forum, in all seriousness, that you were, let's pretend, a pedophile (something which you have given absolutely no evidence of being), do you think that that is somehow "legitimate discourse"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I do think it is legitimate discourse. If such a situation were to arise, I would come and let everyone know, as strongly as I could, that I wasn't a pedophile. Since there's no evidence I am a pedophile, anyone who makes baseless claims such as this ought to walk away from a situation with egg on their face. Problem solved.

[ QUOTE ]
People get sued for things like that in real life.

[/ QUOTE ]

People get sued for things like that because it has the power to ruin careers,lives, families, etc. What are the consequences of such accusations on this forum? It's not comparable. The fact that you admit that 'here' and 'real-life' are different places indicates that.


[ QUOTE ]
I'm not modifying my stance on this one iota. Forum members are not to invent and post deliberately harmful untruths about other posters. If you have a problem with that you can take it up with Mat.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I will.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
You are abusing your powers as a moderator. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think I am abusing the powers of moderator in the slightest, but I'm willing to listen;-)

[ QUOTE ]
JW is stating the logical (in JW's mind, not mine) implications of your political views. You should know that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jokerswild asserted that I ADVOCATE violence against Americans. He is not claiming that that is an implication of my views; rather he is claiming that I OUTRIGHT ADVOCATED IT. Which of course even Jokerswild knows is not the case (not to mention that my views do not even lead in that direction).

Boris, if I were to assert that the logical conclusion of your views would lead to, let's pretend, the extermination of all handicapped persons in America--that's a very far cry from stating that you ADVOCATE the extermination of all handicapped persons in America. See the difference? Jokerswild claimed I ADVOCATED violence against Americans which is simply an outright falsehood. Furthermore even he could not "think" that was truly what I had advocated; he claimed so to post a deliberately false and defamatory assertion as apparent fact.

Boris, if you think I am abusing my powers as moderator, well...I would hate to see what you would think if Andy Fox were Moderator. It's a certainty he would have banned Jokerswild over this, as he has so said, and I'll warrant its even money he would have banned someone else as well by now. This however is my first application of banning (and hopefully it will be my last).

Just to be perfectly clear: if a poster invents a defamatory falsehood about another poster and posts it as a fact, the initial poster risks banning. I'm not talking about mere opinions but rather somebody posting something like: "Boris advocates the neutering of all humans of the xyzzz race." That is, something that is stated as a potentially verifiable fact but which actually is invented, categorically false and defamatory. If someone were to seriously post that about you I would ban them. As a final note I'm afraid I fail to see why all of this should even be controversial.

[Boris]

[ QUOTE ]
Boris, if you think I am abusing my powers as moderator, well...I would hate to see what you would think if Andy Fox were Moderator.

[/ QUOTE ]

Andy Fox would be a terrible moderator.