PDA

View Full Version : ODN sins against freedom of speech



arisce
January 13th, 2005, 08:54 AM
The ODN has hit a new low.In a move that would be applauded by the NAZIS struck a blow against freedom of speech.The inquisitors have removed my thread.They don't want you to see their pettiness and abuse of power.I am willing to put my membership on the line.I would ask the members that did not participate in the thread to judge for themselves if any of my posts were inapropriate.I am not ashamed but if any one of the non-participants finds my conduct objectionable then I will resign gladly.Demand to see the thread and judge.However,I will willing to bet that the anti-rationalists are cowards.But you have a right to know and I have a right to be judge by my peers.Thanks!

chadn737
January 13th, 2005, 08:57 AM
Its time that you get banned......come on Mods....

Dionysus
January 13th, 2005, 08:59 AM
Easy guys. Let's hear it out.

PallidaMors
January 13th, 2005, 09:08 AM
Its time that you get banned......come on Mods....
I second this motion and move to vote.



Easy guys. Let's hear it out.

I am all for hearing out even the most idiotic of claims, provided at least some attempt at proof/backup is provided, but just throwing a claim out and expecting every one to fight against airy nothingness is pointless.

arisce
January 13th, 2005, 09:10 AM
Its time that you get banned......come on Mods....
I think that you participated in the thread so your comment does not count.Rather than rant and rave read the thread first.

arisce
January 13th, 2005, 09:11 AM
I second this motion and move to vote.


I am all for hearing out even the most idiotic of claims, provided at least some attempt at proof/backup is provided, but just throwing a claim out and expecting every one to fight against airy nothingness is pointless.

See post#5

Dionysus
January 13th, 2005, 09:24 AM
The ODN has hit a new low.In a move that would be applauded by the NAZIS struck a blow against freedom of speech.The inquisitors have removed my thread.They don't want you to see their pettiness and abuse of power.I am willing to put my membership on the line.I would ask the members that did not participate in the thread to judge for themselves if any of my posts were inapropriate.I am not ashamed but if any one of the non-participants finds my conduct objectionable then I will resign gladly.Demand to see the thread and judge.However,I will willing to bet that the anti-rationalists are cowards.But you have a right to know and I have a right to be judge by my peers.Thanks!

Fair enough. If you didn't participate in the thread in question (The "Big Bang" never happened!), please respect Arisce's wishes and do not contribute to this thread. Ordinarily, we keep these sort of things private and let the staff handle it, but in this case Arisce insists on making it known to the public so I will share the posts that lead to the removal of the thread, as well as the rules supporting the move. I'll be back in a little while. "Real" life calls me. In the meantime Arisce, perhaps you could explain your case in more detail for the benefit of those just now learning about this.

Meng Bomin
January 13th, 2005, 09:28 AM
The ODN has hit a new low.In a move that would be applauded by the NAZIS struck a blow against freedom of speech.The inquisitors have removed my thread.They don't want you to see their pettiness and abuse of power.I am willing to put my membership on the line.I would ask the members that did not participate in the thread to judge for themselves if any of my posts were inapropriate.I am not ashamed but if any one of the non-participants finds my conduct objectionable then I will resign gladly.Demand to see the thread and judge.However,I will willing to bet that the anti-rationalists are cowards.But you have a right to know and I have a right to be judge by my peers.Thanks! Oh, nice, you edited your post after chad and GP posted and perhaps PM. Well, should I tell you why your conduct was objectionable? Yes, I participated in the thread, but I do not see how this nullifies my opinion.

Your conduct was objectionable because you refused to actually debate the topic. When asked for support, you would just paraphrase your original claim. That is considered spamming and your continuation despite requests for actual support, you continued, which is considered trolling. Both are not permitted. There has been a spamming problem in the past, which the moderaters were dealing with. However, your posts go beyond the range that past spamming has been.

Free speech is not a guarantee and a forum, especially when your "speech" is disruptive to the forum. This is privately owned property and is not subject to the First Amendment of the Constitution. You do not have the right to come in and spam and disrupt the forum. If you want to give input, fine, but be prepared to support your argument, otherwise, you are spamming.

Meng Bomin
January 13th, 2005, 09:29 AM
If you didn't participate in the thread in question (The "Big Bang" never happened!), please respect Arisce's wishes and do not contribute to this thread. I posted at the same time as you, so you may remove my post.

PallidaMors
January 13th, 2005, 09:35 AM
I think that you participated in the thread so your comment does not count.Rather than rant and rave read the thread first.
Why you tricky little human. Post a meaningless thread, then edit your initial post so it actually has a bit of substance, after people post. Try this instead: Write what you mean to say in your original post. Give it a shot, it's been known to work for other folks...

Regarding your other thread, I eagerly await the fine examples of your witty and engaging prose.

chadn737
January 13th, 2005, 09:36 AM
Oh, nice, you edited your post after chad and GP posted and perhaps PM. Well, should I tell you why your conduct was objectionable?

I noticed that. When I first posted his entire post consited of


The ODN has hit a new low.

arisce
January 13th, 2005, 09:39 AM
Oh, nice, you edited your post after chad and GP posted and perhaps PM. Well, should I tell you why your conduct was objectionable? Yes, I participated in the thread, but I do not see how this nullifies my opinion.

Your conduct was objectionable because you refused to actually debate the topic. When asked for support, you would just paraphrase your original claim. That is considered spamming and your continuation despite requests for actual support, you continued, which is considered trolling. Both are not permitted. There has been a spamming problem in the past, which the moderaters were dealing with. However, your posts go beyond the range that past spamming has been.

Free speech is not a guarantee and a forum, especially when your "speech" is disruptive to the forum. This is privately owned property and is not subject to the First Amendment of the Constitution. You do not have the right to come in and spam and disrupt the forum. If you want to give input, fine, but be prepared to support your argument, otherwise, you are spamming.

I guess your post proves that there is a lot of spamming and trolling.By posting you proven your point.BTW,I did not edit my post before or after.Accusation that are unsupported is not conducive to good debating.You should know that by now.Practice what you preach!

arisce
January 13th, 2005, 09:45 AM
I noticed that. When I first posted his entire post consited of
Unsupported accusation.You guys are walking contradictions.You are worst than the Spanish Inquisition beating up on a heretic.Congratulations!

Meng Bomin
January 13th, 2005, 09:54 AM
BTW,I did not edit my post before or after. You are a very bad liar.
When did you edit?

Last edited by arisce : Today at 12:07 PM.
Posted: Today, 11:57 AM
Posted: Today, 11:59 AM These were obviously posted before your edit

Posted: Today, 12:08 PM I think PM may have started his post before you had finished editing.
I think the accusation is well supported by ODN's vB Bulletin system.

arisce
January 13th, 2005, 09:55 AM
Why you tricky little human. Post a meaningless thread, then edit your initial post so it actually has a bit of substance, after people post. Try this instead: Write what you mean to say in your original post. Give it a shot, it's been known to work for other folks...

Regarding your other thread, I eagerly await the fine examples of your witty and engaging prose.

Is this an attempt at sarcasm.It is abusive and misused.
You accuse without foundation.Isn't this going against the principles of debating which you claim to follow.Think before you post.But brown nosing will get you points.

Fyshhed
January 13th, 2005, 09:55 AM
Unsupported accusation.You guys are walking contradictions.You are worst than the Spanish Inquisition beating up on a heretic.Congratulations!
I'm confused. You display a lot of bitterness and an equal or greater amount of hypocrisy. I can't measure either so you can call me unsubstantiated too :lol:

But instead of whining, it's best to acknowledge your mistakes and fix em. We like to improve ourselves here. I participated in your thread and found it lacking in anything to refute. This, as you know, hinders debate. Putting the evidence in while you make the initial post is worth the effort. Better luck next time. ;)

Dionysus
January 13th, 2005, 10:03 AM
Quote: Originally Posted by GP

If you didn't participate in the thread in question (The "Big Bang" never happened!), please respect Arisce's wishes and do not contribute to this thread.

Okay, I see that didn't work...

Again Arisce, would you like to add any thing to support your case before I offer up my evidence?

arisce
January 13th, 2005, 10:08 AM
You are a very bad liar.
When did you edit?
These were obviously posted before your edit
I think PM may have started his post before you had finished editing.
I think the accusation is well supported by ODN's vB Bulletin system.
Liar is a big accusation.Nice touch.Shows that you are a thug.I did not post before or after in relation to anybody.You are accusing me of changing my post because I saw the other posts.Not so.I did not see the other posts.Besides prove what my intent was.Back it up with something other than unfounded accusations.You are grasping at straws.

Fyshhed
January 13th, 2005, 10:12 AM
Liar is a big accusation.Nice touch.Shows that you are a thug.I did not post before or after in relation to anybody.You are accusing me of changing my post because I saw the other posts.Not so.I did not see the other posts.Besides prove what my intent was.Back it up with something other than unfounded accusations.You are grasping at straws.
The editing Vbulletin system shows you edited it, and the responses show the text is different than what they responded to. This is not sleuth-quality detective work, it's plain-sight giveaways. We grasp straws and get a firm hold on them all with one attempt. :)

arisce
January 13th, 2005, 10:17 AM
Okay, I see that didn't work...

Again Arisce, would you like to add any thing to support your case before I offer up my evidence?

I wish you would admonish the people that keep posting when they were told by you not to post.Whatsamatter afraid to apply your rules against these people who exhibit inapropriate conduct.You are and remain a coward.Please stop posting here because you are disqualified by your own edict.Thanks!

Meng Bomin
January 13th, 2005, 10:21 AM
Liar is a big accusation. Read again, "bad liar" is different than "liar". I was implying that you are lying, but not doing a very good job of it.

You are accusing me of changing my post because I saw the other posts. No, here is my accusation:

Oh, nice, you edited your post after chad and GP posted and perhaps PM. I did not state what your motives were or what I thought your motives were.

Besides prove what my intent was. I cannot, but I can say that it was rather strange of you to edit your orignial post instead of creating a new post. Afterward you told chad that what he said didn't count because he participated in the thread, whereas your original post had no part which said that those who participated in the thread could not participate in this thread. Your actions are very suspect, but no, I cannot prove that you had malicious intent; you might have just have been acting stupid.

Back it up with something other than unfounded accusations. My accusations are very well founded. Post 14 proves my accusation correct and your denial incorrect.

Dionysus
January 13th, 2005, 10:21 AM
Well, I was going to give you a chance to explain your case in more detail, but I fear it's gone far beyond all that, Arisce.

As for the rest of you, STOP POSTING IN THIS THREAD. You have been warned.

arisce
January 13th, 2005, 10:25 AM
The editing Vbulletin system shows you edited it, and the responses show the text is different than what they responded to. This is not sleuth-quality detective work, it's plain-sight giveaways. We grasp straws and get a firm hold on them all with one attempt. :)

Now the Inquisition can read minds.You are so wrong.BTW,you are not allowed to post.You are disobeying Adolf this could be nasty for you.Besides you are not helping His cause.So go peddle your papers in some other thread before Adolf has a fit.

ShadowKnight
January 13th, 2005, 10:29 AM
I wish you would admonish the people that keep posting when they were told by you not to post.Whatsamatter afraid to apply your rules against these people who exhibit inapropriate conduct.You are and remain a coward.Please stop posting here because you are disqualified by your own edict.Thanks!

Dude, enough of this. Let me sum up what you have done, I'm sick of your endless ignorance to listen.

First, you made a statement, saying that Big Bang is crap, that's great, but guess what else you did? YOU DID NOT OFFER ANY evidence. Your only evidence is "BIG BANG IS STUPID AND UNPROVEN!" How so? why do you think that it's unproven? WHY? WHY? WHY? WHY? WHY? please elaborate! this is a debate forum, not a place where you can scream your opinions and offer NOTHING to back them up. Am I directly attacking you here? NO. I'm just saying, like everyone else, that we are trying to make you understand that you must present an argument. because without an argument, what is there to debate?

I can make a thread and say, "The sky is green." well, if i'm going to make such a statement, i need to back it up.

You are the one that is telling everyone that they are the fools when YOU can't even back up what you say, so, for the last time, BACK IT UP. and you know what? I WILL BACK YOU UP.

ShadowKnight
January 13th, 2005, 10:29 AM
Well, I was going to give you a chance to explain your case in more detail, but I fear it's gone far beyond all that, Arisce.

As for the rest of you, STOP POSTING IN THIS THREAD. You have been warned.

my bad, i was in the middle of posting, i will stop here.

arisce
January 13th, 2005, 10:32 AM
Read again, "bad liar" is different than "liar". I was implying that you are lying, but not doing a very good job of it.
No, here is my accusation:
I did not state what your motives were or what I thought your motives were.
I cannot, but I can say that it was rather strange of you to edit your orignial post instead of creating a new post. Afterward you told chad that what he said didn't count because he participated in the thread, whereas your original post had no part which said that those who participated in the thread could not participate in this thread. Your actions are very suspect, but no, I cannot prove that you had malicious intent; you might have just have been acting stupid.
My accusations are very well founded. Post 14 proves my accusation correct and your denial incorrect.

There you go again with the stupid.BTW,Adolf is mad at you you are disobeying orders.Go peddle your trash in another thread before Adolf has you banned.Remember brown nosing gets you brownie points.Spamming doesn't.

arisce
January 13th, 2005, 10:42 AM
Dude, enough of this. Let me sum up what you have done, I'm sick of your endless ignorance to listen.

First, you made a statement, saying that Big Bang is crap, that's great, but guess what else you did? YOU DID NOT OFFER ANY evidence. Your only evidence is "BIG BANG IS STUPID AND UNPROVEN!" How so? why do you think that it's unproven? WHY? WHY? WHY? WHY? WHY? please elaborate! this is a debate forum, not a place where you can scream your opinions and offer NOTHING to back them up. Am I directly attacking you here? NO. I'm just saying, like everyone else, that we are trying to make you understand that you must present an argument. because without an argument, what is there to debate?

I can make a thread and say, "The sky is green." well, if i'm going to make such a statement, i need to back it up.

You are the one that is telling everyone that they are the fools when YOU can't even back up what you say, so, for the last time, BACK IT UP. and you know what? I WILL BACK YOU UP.
Talk about screaming your opinions.This post is perfect example.Adolf is not going to like it.You are breaking two of his rules.Not nice.Btw,never said big bang is stupid.That word is used by thugs.The sky is blue but that is just my opinion.But if you can prove that the sky is in fact green then I am all ears.
P.S.Advice do not post here anymore.I don't want Adolf to ban you.You seem like a nice chap.Perhaps hanging around with a bad gang.

Iluvatar
January 13th, 2005, 11:01 AM
Well, Arisce, I had just decided to ban you when I saw this thread. I intended to email you with reasons, but it seems you want this public.

Arisce, your membership is herby suspended for a length of 7 days. The reasons are as follows:

1)Posting statements, with absolutely NO support. This is at first simply bad debating. However, you have done this continually, after repeated requests and warnings from staff members.

2)A large number of Ad Homs, insults, and excessive, condescending sarcasm.

3)Directly insulting staff members and forumites. This thread specifically. If you had backed up your claims in the least, we would have allowed you to continue. However, there is a major difference between "You are stupid" and "You are stupid because...". You fall squarely into the first category. GP accepted your criticism and outright mockery, with more patience than you had any right to. He asked you to support your accusation, and instead, you simply changed your post. No matter how much you deny that, it's quite easy to tell that you are lying from your post's time.

-------

We strongly encourage You are still welcome here. We have had a number of new joiners reform, and go on to become excellent debaters. We hope that you can too.

I will PM you a copy of this.

FruitandNut
January 13th, 2005, 11:20 AM
The ODN has hit a new low.In a move that would be applauded by the NAZIS struck a blow against freedom of speech.The inquisitors have removed my thread.They don't want you to see their pettiness and abuse of power.I am willing to put my membership on the line.I would ask the members that did not participate in the thread to judge for themselves if any of my posts were inapropriate.I am not ashamed but if any one of the non-participants finds my conduct objectionable then I will resign gladly.Demand to see the thread and judge.However,I will willing to bet that the anti-rationalists are cowards.But you have a right to know and I have a right to be judge by my peers.Thanks!

I trust/hope that the moves to remove your thread were only based on the rules of the site and nothing else. I feel very strongly that debate and argument on such a site as ODN should be unfettered by 'politically' biased moderation. I trust/hope in the analysis that this is so. Free speech is not entirely deviod of certain rules, otherwise what we are left with is a sort of 'law of the jungle'. In a civilised society, freedom comes with certain responsibilies that include a modicum of consideration for others.

As I do not specifically remember the thread, I would appreciate you PMing me the title of the thread and the basis of the controversy.

ps. If I did participate, I feel that I can still give a reasonable appraisal - it is not so much content as personal uncalled for or justified offence that bothers me - from whatever source.

Apokalupsis
January 13th, 2005, 12:30 PM
*Thread Locked*

FYI: "Freedom of Speech" does not extend to privately owned and operated communities/web sites. ODN is owned and operated by myself and no one else. If I choose to allow ONLY ad hom's, I may. If I choose to edit EVERYONE'S post to have it say something they never said...I may. If I choose to turn it into a photo gallery of kitties...I may.

You (Arisce or anyone else who wishes to use the FoS card) are my guest. You agree to my terms when you register. You also agree that I may change my terms at any time I wish, with or without notice, for any reason.

The reason for the action taken by an ODN staff member, has been thoroughly explained. ODN focuses on intelligent discourse. When making a claim, it is expected that the claim is supportable. If not, it's not a claim worth taking seriously. The burden of proof lies with the claim maker. Furthermore, it has always been our belief, that the argument, not the person, is to be attacked.

It would seem that Arisce felt otherwise on many occasions. That is in direct opposition of the policies of this site, as determined by myself. If anyone objects to these rules and cannot reach an acceptable agreement or compromise with an ODN staff member, that objector is free to start their own community and run it as they see fit.

But when in "my home"...it's "my rules". No such thing as "freedom of speech" at my house. I allow you to express your views...you do not have the "right" to express them. There is quite a big difference.