Here is my take…
[list]
[li]A story about a man who looks up women’s dresses and takes pictures — open to all - contains sexual content, should be moved[/li]
[li]An article by a woman who says that liberals hate America, hate flag-wavers, and hate every religion except Islam — open to all - no sexual content[/li]
[li]An article about a man who says that the Muslim prophet is a terrorist and a child molestor — open to all - **contains no sexual content… have to look at the molestation angle… **[/li]
[li]An article that says former President Clinton keeps a death list and is an adulterous traitor — open to all - contains no sexual content[/li]
[li]An article about child murderers — open to all - contains no sexual content[/li]
[li]An article about doctors refusing to perfrom abortions — open to all - **Borderline… moderator preference… ** [/li]
[li]An article about a gay couple moving across the street from Jerry Falwell’s empire headquarters — restricted from children - probably borderline, depending on the content… could have been moved due to sexual content, or reference… might have been moved in error, or erring on the side of caution…[/li]
Note: Those guidelines are based on very vague instructions from some filtering services… from about 2-3 years ago… things may have changed, things perhaps should be re-evaluated to include other categories other than merely sexual content… I have no problem if that request was made…
OTOH to come to a different board and rant on the policy, and use an expletive towards people that are making decisions on such a policy…
I think that is sophmoric…
you might have a different take…
you tell me…
I think that parents should be active with what their children do online, what they read, what they watch on TV. I think that a considerable amount of learning can occur both by the child AND the parent if such topics are discussed openly, honestly and with the proper amount of discretion…
Until such a time that behavior is manifest by at least a majority of parents (and I’m not even sure that I fit in that utopia of an ideal) there are different ways to limit exposure to content that might be inappropriate to children.
Will any of those systems work… perfectly?
I doubt it highly…
walk a mile… and dance like nobody’s watching friend.
someone assumes to know what the decisions made by a separate party, yet doesn’t possess all the information for which that decision was made…
Is that a good argument, or a bad argument?
Let me posit… I think it is wrong for you to eat meat and you should only eat carbohydrates… I’ll ask you ‘what the _____ are you doing eating steak…???’
What is missing is that you are diabetic, and eating protien is a valid dietary choice…
was my argument a good argument or a fallacious one?
Another example…
I decide to use vulgar langage with my co-workers and use it to domineer the conversation and make my view become the dominant view, based solely on my outward presence, and not the substance of my supporting arguments.
is such a strategy good practice… or does it fall on the side of deception or fallacy?
I do like the ‘ferrous’ / 'iron’y angle… that was neat.
Okay. I went out of my way not to mention your board by name, and even refused to provide a link. I felt the need to rant. I can’t rant on your board, so I ranted here.
If you’re angry because of the rant, then don’t be. If you’re angry because gay people are treated like they have cooties, then do be.
If you’re angry because hate, treason, and murder escape filtering while consentual adult human sexuality is automatically banned, then stand here beside me. I welcome you.
reasonable discourse with reasonable people… (which are the people behind the policy) will bring about change… (sometimes… most times slower than we like…
but ranting…
that is just noise…
you, sir, should understand that…
a rant at your desk… makes your office noisy…
a rant here… well it stays here forever, along with the potential to hurt feelings long after the initial… rant… just like other threads… that would be better kept at the bottom of the stack…
Jesus ranted, sir, and you should understand that. I’m no Jesus, but I’m ranting for the same reason. The experts in the Law have closed heaven’s door to those who seek entry, and if I can’t fight it, then I surely won’t join it.
I’m glad people are watching. I only hope they can see. I won’t bother you or your board. You have what you want. Now, be at peace.
Can’t say I’m surprised to see this boiling over onto this board. There’s a fair bit of overlap in membership, and, at least as of a few months ago when I washed my hands of the whole thing, very little opportunity over there for venting. Which is why I preferred to have myself temporarily silenced over there rather than get myself banned permanently.
If the primary purpose of that board is not discussion, but evangelism help and advice, why do you allow controversial articles to be posted and discussed, and then ignore abusive, demeaning comments by those on the right of the issue and come down hard when those on the left defend themselves? I can’t count how many times certain people called into question the love of country and the loyalty to the USA of liberals after 9/11 last year. I can’t count how many times in the last year Islam as a religion was slammed, and not just on theological “Jesus-is-God” grounds. I can’t count how often the slightest support for the fair and equal treatment of homosexuals was called godless or humanistic or sinful.
Often, what’s worst about evangelical Christianity as a social institution is celebrated over there, with very little reprimand from the staff or the ‘patrons’. It used to be relatively fair, hearing both sides with some degree of impartiality. It’s steadily slid into a right-wing position, thanks to folks whose names I won’t mention.
Can’t say I’m surprised to see this boiling over onto this board. There’s a fair bit of overlap in membership, and, at least as of a few months ago when I washed my hands of the whole thing, very little opportunity over there for venting. Which is why I preferred to have myself temporarily silenced over there rather than get myself banned permanently.
If the primary purpose of that board is not discussion, but evangelism help and advice, why do you allow controversial articles to be posted and discussed, and then ignore abusive, demeaning comments by those on the right of the issue and come down hard when those on the left defend themselves? I can’t count how many times certain people called into question the love of country and the loyalty to the USA of liberals after 9/11 last year. I can’t count how many times in the last year Islam as a religion was slammed, and not just on theological “Jesus-is-God” grounds. I can’t count how often the slightest support for the fair and equal treatment of homosexuals was called godless or humanistic or sinful.
Often, what’s worst about evangelical Christianity as a social institution is celebrated over there, with very little reprimand from the staff or the ‘patrons’. It used to be relatively fair, hearing both sides with some degree of impartiality. It’s steadily slid into a right-wing position, thanks to folks whose names I won’t mention.
I won’t allow my behavior to degenerate to the point where I am in danger of banning, so I had to stop posting there. The last straw for me was the religious hysteria following 9-11, as described above. I had begun posting there as I was working through my questions and issues with Christianity and the thing that ultimately drove me away was the impatient, unkind behavior of some people, the kind that kept a record of wrongs, and was more interested in dogmatic pronouncements than understanding or grace. The last straw was when one of them accused me of trolling because he didn’t think I had ever been a real Christian. :rolleyes:
On the other hand, one poster who showed great lovingkindness while still holding very conservative views was Roblynn.
I think it is great that you have this place to vent…
I think it is admirable that you have the foresight to see a trouble spot and steer clear.
I wondered how y’all would react if ‘you’ were the subject of the title of this OP.
My perception was that it wasn’t very different than the way I reacted…
The well stated reasons of jayjay and Mars about why they have chosen to leave the other place is strangely inline with why I choose not to post at this web wateringhole. I regret not being consistent in my purpose.
