Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Censorship

  1. #1

    Max Bench

    I want to thank you for your trust in this community and your forebearance of Ron. It takes a great deal of courage and self to post your message. I am proud of our community.

    I think that Ron must also have trust in this community to show his own hurt and anger so openly.

    At least one person has written to me about deleting Ron's post. As you know, I asked at the initiation and description of this forum for people to be gentle and respectful of each other.

    This situation provides an opportunity for the community to decide for itself what constitutes acceptable behavior and posting on these forums. What do people think?

    Wise.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Rick1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Carlsbad, CA
    Posts
    724

    No To Censorship

    Censorship at whose discrection? And what about the people who can't help but engage the "guilty" poster? ("I shouldn't do this, BUT...") Will they be censored also? Talk about a slippery slope.

  3. #3

    CENSORSHIP

    I think that Ron should be allowed to post, as long as he is using his name and has a valid e-mail address. However, if other unknown quantities emerge using pseudonyms such as Joe Breslin, no author, anonymous, etc. and we cannot verify whom they are because they use e-mail addresses which lead nowhere and make no valuable contribution. Then they should be censured and have their "wings clipped." I believe that his writings are nothing more than "dark" or "gallows" humor. It is also similar to the emerging radio stations that use "shock-jock" language.
    PN

  4. #4

    Censorship

    These are postings relating to the topic of censorship from the Life Forum topic Throwing in the Towel.......

    At the present, users have the power to edit their postings up to 2 days after they have posted. Topic originators also have the power to close a topic to further posting.

    Moderators of forums have the power to delete, edit, and close any topic or any posting.

    In a recent topic, there was a posting that some people felt was inappropriate. The question arose whether or not this posting should be deleted (i.e. censured). What do you think? Based on the discussion on this subject, I would like to set up a poll for the members of the forum to vote, to determine criteria for censorship, if any.

    Wise.

    [This message was edited by Wise Young on August 31, 2001 at 01:00 AM.]

  5. #5

    Flaming posts

    Wise,
    I felt pain for Max Bench in response to some of the cruel and nasty responses to his very honest post. I see this two ways, this forum should be an opportunity to hold honest and to hold straight forward dailogue with each other. The community should police itself. As in any community there is always a bully. Probably the most effective way to ignore a bully is to walk away, make no comment and shut them down. This provides a "nonviolent, non-flaming" approach. Max could simply lock the thread down to additional comments and others could begin a new thread or respond to him via direct email. On the old SpineWire, Sam used censorship judiciously and it worked. I believe one of the few individuals he censored was Ron. Used capriciously and with the ability to monitor ourselves, I believe this works. While I believe that the comments to Max Bench were over the "edge", I also believe that the more "feedback" we give the offender(s) the more encouragement we give them. As every parent recognizes, "NEGATIVE ATTENTION IS BETTER THAN NO ATTENTION". Lets try the ignore approach here, as difficult as it may be.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Rick1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Carlsbad, CA
    Posts
    724

    Good Sense

    We are a vastly diverse community, loosely bound by a single common interest. As such, I think it is essential that we allow all of our members sufficient, broad latitude for expression.

    While I don't approve of the callous language found in some posts, I am equally averse to posts that are patronizing, self-righteous, and factually inaccurate. But, that's just me.

    In Ron's case, I think his message, while poorly articulated, was entirely relevant and appropriate for an "open" forum. His post was as much a reaction to the patronizing tone of some of the other responses in the thread, as it was a direct response to Max Bench. Bottom line, his message was very similar to many others: "quit making excuses and assert some independence; chicks like that!"

    I would hope we can avoid the need for cumbersome rules, by simply agreeing to maintain a respective tone (i.e. no name calling or profanity) in our posts.

  7. #7
    I think as a community that if we do not want a person posting nasty posts like that, and enough people agree to have them removed from the board that it should happen. If I wanted to read what some ass hole has to say about how super wonderful his life may be compared to the rest of ours and that he is supposed to be the "King shit "of the spinal cord community, I would go back to reading posts at the newmobility web site or maybe he should start his own. Personally, people with such a bad attitude like that should just be removed from the board. You would think to ignore him would make him go away, but he knows that we are all reading his posts so he will keep writing them . Also, I seriously doubt that this man has any type of injury related to the spinal cord, and that may be in his life he has eaten to many paint chips, or maybe that horse that he was sucking on kicked him in the head. If I had ever written a post that came from as deep in my heart as the one that Max wrote, and then had some prick commenting on me like that, I would find him and beat his little quad ass. In my life I have not always been the nicest person, but since my injury I have learned a lot of patience. But that really tops the notch. But then again, maybe he's just mad because he has to choose one of 30 fathers. What an ass hole, D*** SUCKING, C!*K licking, PIECE OF SHIT. the site was not intended for bastards like this to be able to use it in that manner. I look at this site as a good source of information on the latest for cures, help, and information. Not slander. I will say it again, if someone wants to put slander like that towards a person in actual need of help, they SHOULD NOT be able to post here . They should go elsewhere. But these are all just my opinions and how I feel. sorry if I offended anyone, but I seem to have blown my top while reading his posts .

  8. #8
    Member sextonjt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Fort Myers, FL USA
    Posts
    59

    Free Speech

    The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that freedom of speech shall not be abridged. Freedom of speech is considered one of the pillars of the Bill of Rights.

    Having thus said, the First Amendment protects speech, it does not protect all forms of speech and there are clear limitations on speech. The First Amendment does not protect against speech which is false. Libel and slander for example. It also does not protect speech which would incite riot. It does not protect speech which will produce harm. The classic example of this is yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theater.

    Max posted a note indicating he was contemplating suicide. Ron's post essentially told him to go ahead and kill himself. There is no First Amendment right to such speech and no humanly decent excuse for such behavior. Everyone is in an uproar over the woman in Seattle who was taunted by motorists to jump off the bridge. How is what Ron did here any different?

    This is not a free speech matter, like it or not. This message board is a private place owned and operated by Dr. Young and his group. Everyone who is here is here because Dr. Young allows them, and he can delete any post or remove anyone at any time.

    The purpose of this place was, I thought, to be a meeting place where people with common interest could get together and share information and support with each other. In the midst of this someone in the group has a crisis and states he is contemplating suicide. In response, a member of the group shouts, "Go ahead and jump you worthless piece of shit."

    And in response to this you want to hide behind the First Amendment and put the question to a vote? The post hasn't been removed yet, by the way. This post needs to be deleted and this Ron needs to be out of here. Now. Forthwith. Before he really does hurt someone.

    If Max really does kill himself and leaves behind a suicide note that states that Ron was right about him so he's killing himself, would you still put the matter up to a vote?

    Ranting mode off. - Joe

  9. #9
    Senior Member Rick1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Carlsbad, CA
    Posts
    724

    Keep it in the proper context please

    I just re-read Ron's post and nowhere in it does he encourage anybody to kill themself. In fact, his post is not even directed at Max, but specifically at the respondents to Max's post.

    Another important point: When Max posted his circumstances on the internet, he (like it or not) opened the the door to whatever responses they would provoke, positive or negative.

  10. #10

    no censorship, please

    Talk about a slippery slope, once you start saying "this is bad", you have no mechanism to decide what is and isn't "bad".

    Language cannot hurt you- it is your perception of the language that is at question. Leave it open- just because you stop someone from saying something coarse does not mesan that the thoughts are there.

    People should show restraint, yes, but you also ought to be mature enough to brush useless pap off, in my opinion.

    Hensley-Martin Management

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •