Pepsi is a _________

[Pepsi]

This practice of putting other members names in the subject title perhaps is getting out of hand.    We had prohibited it at one point.    I would like you the Newsrake community to decide - should the practice be prohibited or continue to be allowed?     I will tally the votes by Friday and that will be the policy.

[johnhp]

I have a longstanding distaste for censorship of any kind in a venue where ideas are being exchanged. That’s a particularly difficult position to take for those of us who have to scroll through pages of posts where people (even PhD’s) are swapping insults like sixth graders, but if you want to have an honest discussion you have to put up with the crap in order to insure that everyone is able to speak his mind. It’s very annoying when someone gets “banned’ or has his words removed at the whim of a moderator because it looks like his opponent is getting an unfair advantage. If his opponent happens to be me, I don’t appreciate it. I’m perfectly capable of articulating my thoughts and bringing down anyone who doesn’t like it. Besides, when you let idiots talk like idiots the only consequence is that everyone figures out that they’re idiots. It happens here all the time. For my own part, the only thing I will not tolerate is my own words being removed or edited.

On the other hand, I always play by the rules of the administration. If the rules become too oppressive for my liking then I can always take my leave with no hard feelings.

Free speech does not include your various and continuous libels of public persons.

[Coit]

Try to stay on topic folks.. simple policy question here and I am asking for your opinion.   

I absolutely did not go off topic. I gave you my opinion, stated fact, and asked you for yours.

[Pepsi]

I absolutely did not go off topic. I gave you my opinion, stated fact, and asked you for yours.

thanks.. give me a vote!

[johnhp]

Pepsi,

No one went off topic.  All due respect, you were capricious in the move of the thread.  Every issue there was related.  Even Mornac's mewling.

[Coit]

Pepsi,

No one went off topic.  All due respect, you were capricious in the move of the thread.  Every issue there was related.  Even Mornac's mewling.

I appreciate Mornac's thoughts on this, especially because they weren't circular for a change.

[johnhp]

I appreciate Mornac's thoughts on this, especially because they weren't circular for a change.

They were, however, as usual, misleading and dishonest.

[Coit]

thanks.. give me a vote!

I think it's your responsibility to set the tone. You can take the easy way out and do that by default, which is what it seems to me you have done. That is your right. I have said to Ivan, in response to his hypocrisy, that if you don't care I don't see any reason why I ought to care either. That is why I asked for your opinion.

Without you setting the tone here I don't know what answer to give you.

[johnhp]

I think it's your responsibility to set the tone. You can take the easy way out and do that by default, which is what it seems to me you have done. That is your right. I have said to Ivan, in response to his hypocrisy, that if you don't care I don't see any reason why I ought to care either. That is why I asked for your opinion.

Without you setting the tone here I don't know what answer to give you.

Let's be fair, if he demanded decent behavior (refrain from threats of violence or libel, for instance) would some of those on the right have anything to post?

[Coit]

They were, however, as usual, misleading and dishonest.

I did not get that sense, but of course you are entitled to your opinion.

I subscribe to Occam's razor. The simplest explanation is usually correct, if I recall Occam's razor correctly. In Mornac's case he is circular because he wishes to be circular. From his perspective that not misleading at all. Nor is it dishonest.

If you want straightforward, direct answers then Mornac is not your guy.

[johnhp]

I did not get that sense, but of course you are entitled to your opinion.

I subscribe to Occam's razor. The simplest explanation is usually correct, if I recall Occam's razor correctly. In Mornac's case he is circular because he wishes to be circular. From his perspective that not misleading at all. Nor is it dishonest.

If you want straightforward, direct answers then Mornac is not your guy.

When he discussed his posts that were removed he failed to mention that they contained libel.

[Boffo]

I voted to prohibit, but frankly, Pepsi, it is your call as the forum owner.

a bigger improvement (imo) to keeping order would be to disallow changing the thread title as it appears in the new post menu via "subject", but don't know if that is possible with the software.

[makesenseplease]

My name in the ORIGINAL post wouldn't bother me.

Call me out if you want to.  Just call me out in a separate thread.

I notice that even your post asking for feedback has been changedto something else.

[Coit]

Let's be fair, if he demanded decent behavior (refrain from threats of violence or libel, for instance) would some of those on the right have anything to post?

That's a rhetorical question, right?

[johnhp]

My name in the ORIGINAL post wouldn't bother me.

Call me out if you want to.  Just call me out in a separate thread.

I notice that even your post asking for feedback has been changedto something else.

MSP

Pepsi opened a new thread with those.