The issue was that we were hearing about statists and Murray Rothbard in threads about the weather.
He recieved warnings for invented rules that only applied to him. Such rules should never have existed in the first place, and so the warnings and banning should be rescinded, the rules abolished, and the mods that made them removed from power.
This won’t happen, but it would be the right thing to do.
All rules are invented. And they only applied to him because he was the only one doing it. Not a unique situation on this board, I might add.
Are those facts, or opinions?
Some of each. First sentence fact, second sentence opinions, third sentence one fact then one opinion.
As is obvious to anyone who understands how the English language works.
I would have marked down that first sentence as unevidenced opinion.
If one doesn’t follow the directions given to them by the people in charge of enforcing the rules, one can hardly complain when those enforcers subsequently “pull the trigger”.
Or so I’ve been told.
Most rules are not invented, but evolve - and almost all are not invented by those who enforce them. “Don’t be a jerk”, for example, was almost certainly never invented by any individual.
And no, the rule only applied to him because it was specifically, by name, directed at him. Which is the problem - rules like that are inherently discriminatory, as they require different behaviour from different people.
We have rules aginst being a jerk, and against threadshitting - so use them, don’t add extra silly personal rules. The obvious reason they did that, of course, is because he was neither threadshitting nor being a jerk, but the Powers That Be wanted him silenced.
The sad thing about this is that you, with your dislike of rulers and powers and so on, should be firmly against that happening. But, like the vast majority of leftists, you can’t deal with having to hear things that you disgagree with, or that you choose to be offended by, and want them silenced. Which, to make a statement of fact not opinion, is a hypocritical position.
Then you would be factually wrong.
That’s your opinion.
Cool story, bro.
But nonetheless, WillFarnaby was a massive jerk and persistent threadshitter.
Do you have the same view of “protesters” being arrested? Or about people being arrested or worse for resisting the police? Most people here don’t, and are pretty anti-authoritarian - I don’t know your views specifically but at least Czarcasm and Mr Dibble fall into that category.
It seems silencing dissenters is fine, as long as they dissent from your party line.
Unsubstantiated opinion again.
No, he simply saw things from a different perspective to you. That you think disagreeing with you counts as being jerkish and irrelevant (to expand threadshitting to a more general sense) says more about you that anyone else.
To put it bluntly, your opinions are not always right. Neither are mine, neither are anyones. To shut down opposing opinions in a debate is to embrace ignorance and tribalism, things that most people here claim to be opposed to.
Cite? Every time I saw him discussed in ATMB, the warnings were not non sequiturs like that.
Sounds like the kind of justification Laura Ingraham would use for cruel treatment of migrants who cross the US border without documentation. :dubious:
I think you’re getting a bit carried away with this. I lean toward your view in a quantitative sense, in that I would have preferred Will had been given more latitude, because he was a bit crazy but seemed completely sincere. But it’s a judgment call, not some absolute principle. Free speech cannot ever be absolute. It’s always a judgment call if someone is abusing the privilege of free speech to infringe on the rights of others.
If you want to use that analogy - yes, I think there’s a point at which protesters should be arrested, depending on how they are protesting, not what they are protesting - if they are throwing Molotov cocktails at innocent passers by, for example.
You had to travel hundreds(or even thousands) of miles with just the clothes on your back, starving most of the way for weeks on end just to make that post?
:rolleyes:
And some people here are strongly authoritarian and are fine with those authorities shooting people, including children, to death with little justification. As long as they don’t ban them from a private messageboard, I guess it’s all fine.
But that has nothing to do with WillFarnaby, who wasn’t oppressed by the system or banned for speaking truth to power or silenced by The Man. Were that the case, I would certainly oppose his banning. But it isn’t. He was banned for being, as already noted, a massive jerk who shat all over a wide range of threads with his particular firebrand lunacy and refused to stop.
Consider the late unlamented Huey Freeman who was also a raging asshole. The particular bee in Huey’s bonnet was the unfair treatment of black people in society which, if this board really is as loony left as suggested, ought to have been warmly welcomed. And indeed we tried to engage. But Huey was a massive jerk, although he did eventually restrict his raillery to one thread, and he got banned for it, just like Will.
“Don’t be a jerk” applies to everyone.
nm
That’s custom, not rules.
I didn’t say they had to be.
I disagree. Whoever first codified it, invented it.
Because he was the only one doing it.
I’m pretty sure if a second poster started inserting their anti-statist bugbear everywhere, the rule would shortly be applied to them, too.
Do you think Evil Captor was being discriminated against for his custom rule, too?
I see this as the mods just highlighting what specific flavour of jerkishness and threadshitting they were seeing, and telling him to knock it off. The existence of the specific doesn’t mean the general doesn’t apply. See Evil Captor and Skald and others’ various personal rules…
They could ban him anytime they wanted, if that was their wish. Hell, they could do it, say absolutely nothing, and if anyone asked, say he was a sock.
Instead, they gave him every chance to change his behaviour. Your conspiracy theory is as leaky as a rusted colander, there.
Why? This board is a voluntary association, not a national government. I choose to put myself under the mods, and I can leave anytime I want to. The Mods aren’t rulers, they’re unpaid employees of an establishment I choose to frequent.
You can keep trying to shoehorn my anarchism into this, but it’s really not a good fit, mate.
I hear things I disagree with all the time I have no problem with existing here.
It’s jerks who threadshit that I’m glad are gone.
You’ve clearly shown you have no idea what my position on things is, so I’ll give all accusations from you that they’re hypocritical a shrug, it’s the only response they deserve.