The phantom censor

[aisha759]

I tried to go on that site, but got a blank page ;)

[slothy]

uummm suprised it didnt forward you to www.about(nothing).com

[epeeist]

shouldnt this be discussed

 

in the forum at www.whogivesash?taboutdanishlaw.co.dk ?

 

:)

 

PS And BadMonster Uday a HE :D

You know what? You're right. I shouldn't have let myself get drawn in again. I withdraw my question -- I suppose I already really know the answer... ;)

[Fluffy]

I cant believe that people are drawing tangible parallels between the democracy of a country, and the maintenance of it, and the administration of a bulletin board!!

You are just surprised that they could make it without your help :)

 

Either they have little faith in the notion of democracy or have a rather bloated consideration of the importance of a series of posts.

 

Who does have faith in democracy?, as far as I know all democracies are moved by capitalism, I dunno if you can call capitalism a kind of goverment, but I would say it is more apropiate. At least to all democracies I know about.

[inquiry]

Just so everyone knows.. .there was a political post attacking the intellegence of a population that elect certain leaders, then there was an attack on the poster who made that post. Both post have been removed.

 

I thought I would have to remove the first post, but left it for a while, but when the second came in, it was certain.

[csdenmark]

Just so everyone knows.. .there was a political post attacking the intellegence of a population that elect certain leaders, then there was an attack on the poster who made that post. Both post have been removed.

I remember the post from Ron - nothing for me but now I have been a bit wiser on this delicate topic.

 

For a few days I have really wondered what kind of subversive material which really qualifies for interference.

 

I now understand that false accusations based on deliberate lies are OK but when it comes to questioning the wisdom of a public person it will not be OK. - Very interesting Ben!

[luke warm]

i'd like to take all those who vote for candidate A and get an average iq and compare that average to those who vote for candidate B... i think some might be surprised (self-edited to mention no names or affliations B))

[inquiry]

For a few days I have really wondered what kind of subversive material which really qualifies for interference.

 

I now understand that false accusations based on deliberate lies are OK but when it comes to questioning the wisdom of a public person it will not be OK. - Very interesting Ben!

No claus.. What we do not allow is flame wars. The initial post, which in fact attacked american and president bush, was left UNTIL someone took great objection to the statements and attacked the original poster.

 

Now the one thing we are not going to have here is flame wars, especially ones completely and utterly devoid of any bridge material. So we had one, post that i left initially knowing that it would probably need to be deleted. Then we had a predictable (and actually quite clever) response to it.

 

We will delete them everytime, flame wars are not for here.

[the hog]

I cant believe that people are drawing tangible parallels between the democracy of a country, and the maintenance of it, and the administration of a bulletin board!!

You are just surprised that they could make it without your help B)

 

Either they have little faith in the notion of democracy or have a rather bloated consideration of the importance of a series of posts.

 

Who does have faith in democracy?, as far as I know all democracies are moved by capitalism, I dunno if you can call capitalism a kind of goverment, but I would say it is more apropiate. At least to all democracies I know about.

Ok lets try this instead -

 

Fluffy, I have lost faith in democracies when I look around and see the incredible intellectual and moral poverty of some of the elected leaders of the world's democracies. Give me an enlightened dictatorship anytime.

[mikestar]

Back to the original subject of the thread. Does anyone have any trouble in distiguishing between these two hypothetical quotes:

 

"A bid of 4♣ shows poor bridge judgement"

 

"Your suggestion to bid 4♣ is the stupidest thing I ever heard in my life--you must be a low-grade moron, probably becase your family is so inbred."

 

Isn't is obvious that the first is a harsh but fair critique, while the latter is an intense personal insult. (Indeed, f2f in certain cultures the second quote will get you killed.)

 

Why should the moderators do anything other than allow the first quote to stand while removing the second (and giving at least a severe warning)?

 

I am not suggesting that the original offensive quote was as extreme as the second one above, I'm just illustrating my point. I did not even read the offending material, it was deleted before I saw it.

[whereagles]

Give me an enlightened dictatorship anytime.

Hog, not wanting to argue with you, I'll venture to say this 'solution' does not work well in practice. We tried this in my country 60 years ago and it led to decades of retrograde, anti-industrial policies. Even if the 1st dictator is a good ruler (far from a certainty), 2nd and 3rd are likely to suck and, worse, you won't be able to kick them out.

 

The only way to mitigate the flaws of Democracy is through CENTURIES of investment in education, understanding and tolerance.

[the hog]

Give me an enlightened dictatorship anytime.

Hog, not wanting to argue with you, I'll venture to say this 'solution' does not work well in practice. We tried this in my country 60 years ago and it led to decades of retrograde, anti-industrial policies. Even if the 1st dictator is a good ruler (far from a certainty), 2nd and 3rd are likely to suck and, worse, you won't be able to kick them out.

 

The only way to mitigate the flaws of Democracy is through CENTURIES of investment in education, understanding and tolerance.

Yeah you may be right. However an enlightened dictatoship with me as dictator definitley does appeal.

[mike777]

Give me an enlightened dictatorship anytime.

Hog, not wanting to argue with you, I'll venture to say this 'solution' does not work well in practice. We tried this in my country 60 years ago and it led to decades of retrograde, anti-industrial policies. Even if the 1st dictator is a good ruler (far from a certainty), 2nd and 3rd are likely to suck and, worse, you won't be able to kick them out.

 

The only way to mitigate the flaws of Democracy is through CENTURIES of investment in education, understanding and tolerance.

Please note the ancient Greek philosopher greats thought Democracy was a cruel option but lost out.

 

They voted for a REPUBLIC I think but I am not that old, ask HOG.

 

I think one of those old gents aristot the something taught alex the son of Philip but not sure, late here.

[Erkson]

Back to the original subject of the thread. Does anyone have any trouble in distiguishing between these two hypothetical quotes:

 

"A bid of 4♣ shows poor bridge judgement"

 

"Your suggestion to bid 4♣ is the stupidest thing I ever heard in my life--you must be a low-grade moron, probably becase your family is so inbred."

 

Isn't is obvious that the first is a harsh but fair critique, while the latter is an intense personal insult. (Indeed, f2f in certain cultures the second quote will get you killed.)

I see no great difference between the two quotes. And in my culture the author would be treated the same way because he would not get enough time to finish the second one.

 

Erkson

[coyot]

Back to the original subject of the thread. Does anyone have any trouble in distiguishing between these two hypothetical quotes:

 

"A bid of 4♣ shows poor bridge judgement"

 

"Your suggestion to bid 4♣ is the stupidest thing I ever heard in my life--you must be a low-grade moron, probably becase your family is so inbred."

 

Isn't is obvious that the first is a harsh but fair critique, while the latter is an intense personal insult. (Indeed, f2f in certain cultures the second quote will get you killed.)

I see no great difference between the two quotes. And in my culture the author would be treated the same way because he would not get enough time to finish the second one.

 

Erkson

That shows how different the cultures are.

 

Must admit that I would not want to live in your culture, though, because it makes a big difference to me whether you criticise someones action or decision or criticise him as a person.

 

And I would certainly agree with the 2nd type of qoutes being taken out and shot. Even the original message that caused this whole issue was over my limit of good manners (though not by a big margin).

[inquiry]

Back to the original subject of the thread. Does anyone have any trouble in distiguishing between these two hypothetical quotes:

 

"A bid of 4♣ shows poor bridge judgement"

 

"Your suggestion to bid 4♣ is the stupidest thing I ever heard in my life--you must be a low-grade moron, probably becase your family is so inbred."

 

Isn't is obvious that the first is a harsh but fair critique, while the latter is an intense personal insult. (Indeed, f2f in certain cultures the second quote will get you killed.)

I see no great difference between the two quotes. And in my culture the author would be treated the same way because he would not get enough time to finish the second one.

 

Erkson

The difference is this. The first one can often lead to an enlightened discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of the bid at hand. With people expressing their views. The second one always (well nearly always) leads to a response in kind wtih "come out side" kind and settle this like men kind of response that has nothing to do with bridge. It is true that occassionally overly sensitive types take exception to the first type response too, and to stop the flames, the first has to be treated like the second.

 

The second kind will be censored by one of the board adminstrators immediately, the first kind will be left alone unless it starts something like what happened in the thread that was discussed initially in this thread.

[Fluffy]

Why is it always that the weirdest topics get the most answers?

[helene_t]

Why is it always that the weirdest topics get the most answers?

This has been explained in the book "Parkison's law". You should read it.

 

Basically, people are reluctant to make statement about important topics for fear of saying something that is wrong, or for fear of disagreeing with particular persons with whom they prefer to agree with for strategic reasons.

 

There are even some linguists who seriously suggest that the driving force in the evolution of the human ability to talk was gossib rather than exchange of real information.

[helene_t]

i'd like to take all those who vote for candidate A and get an average iq and compare that average to those who vote for candidate B... i think some might be surprised (self-edited to mention no names or affliations :rolleyes:)

Lol. A friend of mine noticed that when he asked people he knows, some 30% say they vote for [self-edited for the same reasons] allthough that party in fact never got more than 3% of the votes. His theory was that people are ashamed for admitting that they vote for a party with a non-intellectual imago.

 

Helene (who officially prefers French food, classical music and symmetric relay systems).

[uday]

I have removed a couple of posts from this thread.

[P_Marlowe]

I cant believe that people are drawing tangible parallels between the democracy of a country, and the maintenance of it, and the administration of a bulletin board!!

You are just surprised that they could make it without your help :)

 

Either they have little faith in the notion of democracy or have a rather bloated consideration of the importance of a series of posts.

 

Who does have faith in democracy?, as far as I know all democracies are moved by capitalism, I dunno if you can call capitalism a kind of goverment, but I would say it is more apropiate. At least to all democracies I know about.

Ok lets try this instead -

 

Fluffy, I have lost faith in democracies when I look around and see the incredible intellectual and moral poverty of some of the elected leaders of the world's democracies. Give me an enlightened dictatorship anytime.

Hi.

 

I am to lazy, to look, if the quatote was already brought in the thread here

 

"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." (from a House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947)

 

http://wais.stanford.edu/Democracy/democra...ll(090503).html

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[bearmum]

I have removed a couple of posts from this thread.

Good for u Uday - IMHO this thread has become something NOT related to bridge (or even related to Hog's original post) --- maybe needs to be LOCKED? :)

[Double !]

I have removed a couple of posts from this thread.

Good for u Uday - IMHO this thread has become something NOT related to bridge (or even related to Hog's original post) --- maybe needs to be LOCKED? :(

Unfortunately, then he will surely also be accused of censorship.

Sadly, the only way to close down this thread is for us to stop posting on it.

[luke warm]

why not stop reading it, double? then you'd have no temptation to post

[helene_t]

Does anyone have any trouble in distiguishing between these two hypothetical quotes:

 

"A bid of 4♣ shows poor bridge judgement"

 

"Your suggestion to bid 4♣ is the stupidest thing I ever heard in my life--you must be a low-grade moron, probably becase your family is so inbred."

I would feel far more offended by the first one.

 

First, while I know I say stupid things frequently, sometimes even on purpose, it's not so nice to hear someone saying that my bridge judgement is poor. Having other people believe you have a poor bridge judgement is just about the worst social handicap you can have in this specific online community. (Of course, if the same statement was made on a stamp collector's forum it would not count as a major offense). Also, accusing someone of having "poor bridge judgement" can hardly contribute to a discussion in constructive way (allthough it may depend on the context). A slightly more specific statement, say, "4♣ is a waste of time" or "4♣ shows a lack of partnership trust" would be ok.

 

Second, the second statement is so obviously exagerated that it is a harmless joke.

 

Third, why would I care about the reproductive behavior of my ancestors, let alone what other people say about that topic? It's my ancestors' own business. (if this had been a clinical genetics forum, statement two could have some negative impact unless supported with some evidence, in which case it could be very interesting).