Mudcat Café message #1466382 The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #77879   Message #1466382
Posted By: GUEST,The Shambles
20-Apr-05 - 11:55 AM
Thread Name: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
It was looking as if we may get there Ted - but sadly Joe has decided to use his 'special powers' to continue to post but not refresh the thread.

Yes, I did consider your proposal, Shambles - and I gave a thoughtful, well-reasoned response on more than one occasion. Now, can you find other people who will give thoughtful, well-reasoned responses in support of your proposal?

I suspect not publicly - for they may not wish to expose themselves to the following sort of public thoughtful, well-reasoned response from you.

Yes, I think you may well be first on the list, my friend. It's time for you either to shut up, or to use a name and take responsibility for what you have to say. If you continue to refuse to use a name, you will be come a non-person around here, and every single message you post will be deleted.
Free speech is fine, but you're just a pain in the ass.
-Joe Offer-


On the other hand, since we operate under a general atmosphere of trust and respect, why should we be required to document our every action as if we were under suspicion of committing a felony?

Joe it is clear that although you feel qualified to sit in often heavy judgement upon your fellow posters - you do not feel that you should be judged youself. It has become clear over time that you do not like to be judged - so why would you think that any of your fellow posters like to have your judgement - and the judgement of anonymous volunteers - imposed upon them any more than you would?

Yes I do think that you and your band of volunteers should be expected to be accountable to the rest of this community - just as the rest of the community are expected (by you) to be accountable.

For the main and simple reason that when public defence of all this judgement and secret measures are given by you on our forum - to a poster who may not have the best interests of our community at heart - I would like to be able to honestly and fully support this defence.........Sadly I find myself in agreement with the many logical arguments that these "trouble-makers" express and I find myself embarrassed at the bullying and strange reasoning that forms to corner stone of this defence.

Joe what is so very complicated about ensuring that an editing comment is always present - to indicate when and why editing action was imposed upon the invited contributions of a fellow contributor to our coumminity?

Posters do post defend the current system and state that the levels of censorship are 'about right'. However, I am not sure how this can be stated with much basis in reality - if these posters are not aware of what the true level of censorship is.

So I have tried here to demonstrate and evidence what the true level is. When ALL the community can see when ALL editing action has been imposed - they will be a better position to judge - whether this is acceptable or not.