Proposed Censorship Annual Double Jeopardy Clause

[Recidiva]

I suggest that anybody who truly wishes the Author's Hangout to be altered give this their last best shot and then if their proposed changes don't go in...to not bring up the subject, send a PM to the site owners or take on this mantle of responsibility more than once a year.

As someone who is endlessly tired (at least as tired of this subject as others are of politics, only I can't ignore those people without fearing missing some coup) at being brought to trial and asked to vote because the board owners have gotten involved by being convinced that the majority wants a change because some individuals want a change...

I'd like to ask that those who bring this subject up are aware that they're probably going on ignore because of it, I don't want to hear about and I'd appreciate it if in the future, they waited for someone I can't ignore to bring the subject up and ask the board as a whole.

I only respect a few situations:

1. Board owners to decide something's wrong and reverse their stance on free speech.
2. Put a timer on your decision that "everyone" wants something. Stand behind your faith in the board's numbers and give it at least a year between trying to get your way.

This is constituting harassment.

I'm signing a pledge here that I'm not going to send a PM to the board owners and attempt to change anything. If you decide you have the authority to change things, please let someone I respect post the poll. I'll check in around every Halloween just to hand in my vote or send my lawyers.

Thank you, have a nice day.

Signed: Recidiva

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

We'll be doing this again next month.

 

[SixtyMinuteMan]

But wait, I thought you didn't want limits on people's right to express themselves?

Ooooh, I get it. You only meant YOU. Sorry, my bad, should have caught that right away.

 

[Recidiva]

But wait, I thought you didn't want limits on people's right to express themselves?

Ooooh, I get it. You only meant YOU. Sorry, my bad, should have caught that right away.

Do I think this actually matters? No.

Am I making a point? Yes.

I didn't PM Laurel about it anyway

This is satire.

 

[SixtyMinuteMan]

Right, of course. Satire. Not hypocrisy. Nope, not that at all.

Shine on, Recidiva.

 

[Recidiva]

Right, of course. Satire. Not hypocrisy. Nope, not that at all.

Shine on, Recidiva.

Hey, this may be my last chance to rabble rouse, right?

Might as well make the most of it.

I'm a bad element, I have no taste, I have no class, I just want the world to degenerate into chaos. I don't care, I make no effort to make the world a better place.

People make these accusations and I defend myself. I don't call the cops and try to pass a law.

That's not hypocrisy, that's frustration. I've had this conversation before. Many times. I think I've earned the right to a thread of my own mocking the proceedings.

 

[SixtyMinuteMan]

And, in an effort to remind us why we come here: I really like your writing. Given your opinion of me you may of course take that as you will, but FWIW I like your talent.

 

[Recidiva]

And, in an effort to remind us why we come here: I really like your writing. Given your opinion of me you may of course take that as you will, but FWIW I like your talent.

Thank you, I'm enjoying talking to you. I haven't had this conversation with you yet, so lots of people I'm sorta ignoring because I've been around and around and around...

Doo lang a lang.

But it's a pleasure to meet you and argue with you and such.

I don't think I necessarily have a dog in this fight other than in principle. The GB will never fall to this sort of stuff and I hang out and do my rabble rousing there mostly.

But generally the only thing really interesting me in the AH are conversations like this. I don't come here to socialize as much as I come here to challenge my mind and sharpen my wits, and conversations like this do that for me.

 

[SixtyMinuteMan]

Hey, this may be my last chance to rabble rouse, right?

Might as well make the most of it.

I'm a bad element, I have no taste, I have no class, I just want the world to degenerate into chaos. I don't care, I make no effort to make the world a better place.

People make these accusations and I defend myself. I don't call the cops and try to pass a law.

That's not hypocrisy, that's frustration. I've had this conversation before. Many times. I think I've earned the right to a thread of my own mocking the proceedings.

Fair enough, but do you see my point?

I think our difference of opinion- and I'm speaking of yours and mine in particular, the broader context is, well, broader- is simply that you see a separate forum as some kind of ban or exile or whatever term I should use. I just see it as another topic thread like any other. If you'd like to enlighten me as to your reasoning, I'd be more than happy to listen and discuss.

But for the record, I haven't ever hit a report button either. This is not "Please, won't some nice mod come protect us from the political monsters, they're beating us up!"... It's "Hey, man, we don't need a grillion threads constantly on the front page about how much you hate Obama/Bush/Health Care/the Iraq War/what the fuck ever."

I'm perfectly capable of ignoring people without using a button for it. It is, in fact, what I do most of the time with JBJ and amicus. But neither I nor anyone else should have to sift through a mass of threads just to find the few that are aimed at something other than politics. That's the rub, that's my point, and I think that's the prevailing point of the exercise.

 

[Recidiva]

Fair enough, but do you see my point?

I think our difference of opinion- and I'm speaking of yours and mine in particular, the broader context is, well, broader- is simply that you see a separate forum as some kind of ban or exile or whatever term I should use. I just see it as another topic thread like any other. If you'd like to enlighten me as to your reasoning, I'd be more than happy to listen and discuss.

But for the record, I haven't ever hit a report button either. This is not "Please, won't some nice mod come protect us from the political monsters, they're beating us up!"... It's "Hey, man, we don't need a grillion threads constantly on the front page about how much you hate Obama/Bush/Health Care/the Iraq War/what the fuck ever."

I'm perfectly capable of ignoring people without using a button for it. It is, in fact, what I do most of the time with JBJ and amicus. But neither I nor anyone else should have to sift through a mass of threads just to find the few that are aimed at something other than politics. That's the rub, that's my point, and I think that's the prevailing point of the exercise.

I definitely see your point. I do. But I don't think it's up to anybody to decide what are approved topics in a library or on a forum. This is "restricted section" stuff. This is an overzealous librarian deciding that Harry Potter is too inflammatory for some so for their protection it should be removed from the card catalog and kept under the front desk, where you sign a list to get it.

I see a few people who take it upon themselves to speak for the group. I don't like lobbying in Washington, I don't like it here. It's influence and it's insidious and it doesn't represent my interests in the slightest.

You don't like politics? This IS politics. Irony.

You don't get to decide what "everyone" wants or should get. You're deciding what you want and think you should get and excluding everyone else. Partisanship.

I don't want a grillion topics about "Everyone's mean to me, make it stop!"

I'm not on the fence about this and nothing new about "Someone's being mean to me!" is of interest.

I MIGHT however find some nuance or insight regarding politics and the world at large if one of those grillion topics you tire of, has something in it that sparks for me.

 

[SixtyMinuteMan]

But we're not talking about hiding Harry under the front desk. We're talking about putting him in his very own section, with a big sign over it saying "Harry Potter Section". It would still be right there, free to everyone. I still fail to see how this is different from having a GLBT section or Feedback sections or any of the others.

 

[Recidiva]

But we're not talking about hiding Harry under the front desk. We're talking about putting him in his very own section, with a big sign over it saying "Harry Potter Section". It would still be right there, free to everyone. I still fail to see how this is different from having a GLBT section or Feedback sections or any of the others.

I would agree with you if the mandate for the site wasn't "Free Speech."

There's no way to enforce "no politics" with such a thin and wavering definition of "politics" and still have free speech.

If you want a site that is tightly modded and has less free speech and more structure, why are you here?

I am here BECAUSE of the lack of structure. The site advertised itself that way. "Free Speech" and "No Spam" both appealed to me.

The author's hangout is a place for authors to socialize. Some people socialize by discussing current events. Some current events are political.

What makes "Hey, do I want a ham sandwich?" of more or less valued content?

This is specifically singling out politics and religion based on the opinions of a few, it's not an argument that's being defended logically, because it's not a logical issue. It's an emotional issue. It has nothing to do with free speech or socializing or even authors.

It has to do with hurt feelings and people wanting to strike back and make a few individuals pay, and this is the costume it's donning to accomplish that.

 

[trysail]

... You don't like politics? This IS politics. Irony...

Exactement, mademoiselle !!!

I've been stifling myself from posting precisely that for the past thirty-six hours.

In fact, in the interest of civility and politeness, I do a whole lot of stifling myself around this joint. Fortunately, there are one or two free spirits around who aren't nearly as polite as I am.

 

[Recidiva]

Exactement, mademoiselle !!!

I've been stifling myself from posting precisely that for the past thirty-six hours.

In fact, in the interest of civility and politeness, I do a whole lot of stifling myself around this joint. Fortunately, there are one or two free spirits around who aren't nearly as polite as I am.

I believe you, I've been doing the same.

My husband, however, has heard some fun rants.

I did let some of them go through, but only after thinking them for about the seventeenth time or so.

I do think "Control Freakery" is my favorite of what I didn't say yesterday.

 

[SixtyMinuteMan]

I might define "Irony" as complaining about how many times you've had this discussion while in the same breath defending your right to have any discussion you like. N'est pas?

 

[SixtyMinuteMan]

I would agree with you if the mandate for the site wasn't "Free Speech."

There's no way to enforce "no politics" with such a thin and wavering definition of "politics" and still have free speech.

If you want a site that is tightly modded and has less free speech and more structure, why are you here?

I am here BECAUSE of the lack of structure. The site advertised itself that way. "Free Speech" and "No Spam" both appealed to me.

The author's hangout is a place for authors to socialize. Some people socialize by discussing current events. Some current events are political.

What makes "Hey, do I want a ham sandwich?" of more or less valued content?

This is specifically singling out politics and religion based on the opinions of a few, it's not an argument that's being defended logically, because it's not a logical issue. It's an emotional issue. It has nothing to do with free speech or socializing or even authors.

It has to do with hurt feelings and people wanting to strike back and make a few individuals pay, and this is the costume it's donning to accomplish that.

It's not about the value of the content. It's about the location of the content. Isn't the logical conclusion of your line of thinking a forum with no categories at all? What makes story feedback more or less valued? Or "How-to" questions? If putting something in a sub-forum dedicated to it diminishes its value, shouldn't the entire site be one big general board?

 

[Recidiva]

I might define "Irony" as complaining about how many times you've had this discussion while in the same breath defending your right to have any discussion you like. N'est pas?

But if I ignore this conversation, I might not be able to have any discussion I like. Again, this is about principle.

You really don't see that?

You can check though. In my opinion the AH jumped the shark years ago. I haven't started a thread here in a very, very long time because it's been crowded with "that's off topic!" for long enough to make me feel my very presence offends. Enough to not consider this a safe place to start anything. Someone's always bothered by me just talking.

I used to participate in the "Hey, do I want a ham sandwich?" threads. I don't any more, to avoid being harangued by the off topic police.

I even used to host my own threads, some even related to writing.

It's not worth the trouble any more. I can no longer ignore the content police because they will not tolerate being ignored.

In the meantime if someone else starts a thread and I hit "new posts" and I want to post, I will.

Fact is though, this will happen. It's already happened. The people who want this to happen can't stand it not happening and have already changed the entire tone of the place.

I've already lost, again, this is satire and mockery, but not without some sorrow.

 

[Recidiva]

It's not about the value of the content. It's about the location of the content. Isn't the logical conclusion of your line of thinking a forum with no categories at all? What makes story feedback more or less valued? Or "How-to" questions? If putting something in a sub-forum dedicated to it diminishes its value, shouldn't the entire site be one big general board?

I'm sorry, that sounds like double speak to me. There are value judgments being made about location.

If it's about just writing, only writing topics should be on the main board, there should be a sub-forum for anything not writerly.

However, there's no real definition for "not writerly" either and this board used to be really diverse and people behaved like grown ups.

Story feedback is specific and really easy to moderate. Politics and "non writerly" aren't. What is political and inflammatory and what isn't, is now becoming divorced from "socializing." It's either a board to "socialize" or it's only and all about writing, in which case, there goes my opportunity to freely socialize without being ushered into the back room.

There's already a general board and I love it there. The AH I no longer love. I used to. The AH, with all its pretensions of being better, is infinitely worse in terms of tolerance and variety. It is not smarter, it is not better, it is becoming increasingly close minded and intolerant.

The GB might be a free for all, but nobody tries to take your weapons away while saying they're the only people allowed to have weapons.

I go to the GB, someone snipes at me, I snipe back.

I come here, people are sniping while saying they don't have a gun and crying that someone shot them. It's bullshit.

It is not a place to socialize, it's a place to lock-step in the approved topic in the approved manner with the approved set of principles.

And hell to pay if you don't.

 

[SixtyMinuteMan]

But if I ignore this conversation, I might not be able to have any discussion I like. Again, this is about principle.

You really don't see that?

You can check though. In my opinion the AH jumped the shark years ago. I haven't started a thread here in a very, very long time because it's been crowded with "that's off topic!" for long enough to make me feel my very presence offends. Enough to not consider this a safe place to start anything. Someone's always bothered by me just talking.

I used to participate in the "Hey, do I want a ham sandwich?" threads. I don't any more, to avoid being harangued by the off topic police.

I even used to host my own threads, some even related to writing.

It's not worth the trouble any more. I can no longer ignore the content police because they will not tolerate being ignored.

In the meantime if someone else starts a thread and I hit "new posts" and I want to post, I will.

Fact is though, this will happen. It's already happened. The people who want this to happen can't stand it not happening and have already changed the entire tone of the place.

I've already lost, again, this is satire and mockery, but not without some sorrow.

I would see it as being about principle if people were advocating banning discussion of politics. They aren't. Separate sub-forum =/= banning. Not in any way, shape, or form. We could all talk politics until the cows come home, and you know how late those fuckers stay out.

That said, Mabeuse made a very valid point in the other thread. It may be that by the time I get home tonight I'm closer to your side on this, because right now I don't see an easy way around the danger he presented.

At the very least, I'd support a new forum with a ban on politics, because frankly the trolling is ridiculous. There's a reason that sooner or later every forum adopts anti-troll legislation: Let them stick around and in short order the place is about them. It's unavoidable. Put 'em on ignore and they'll still wreck conversation, because it only takes one person not ignoring them to ruin conversation in any thread they visit. And they will keep visiting threads until they've wrecked them all.

 

[Recidiva]

I would see it as being about principle if people were advocating banning discussion of politics. They aren't. Separate sub-forum =/= banning. Not in any way, shape, or form. We could all talk politics until the cows come home, and you know how late those fuckers stay out.

That said, Mabeuse made a very valid point in the other thread. It may be that by the time I get home tonight I'm closer to your side on this, because right now I don't see an easy way around the danger he presented.

At the very least, I'd support a new forum with a ban on politics, because frankly the trolling is ridiculous. There's a reason that sooner or later every forum adopts anti-troll legislation: Let them stick around and in short order the place is about them. It's unavoidable. Put 'em on ignore and they'll still wreck conversation, because it only takes one person not ignoring them to ruin conversation in any thread they visit. And they will keep visiting threads until they've wrecked them all.

Okay. I agree with Mabeuse and his argument is also mine. Sometimes I may have made a point a year ago or two years ago and I don't restate if it doesn't come up.

I think you're on the money when the conversation turns to this being about trolls themselves. Politics is getting singled out because it might be one of the most highly trolled issues.

I think the issue is trolls and their ability to disrupt, and I think ignore handles that already. It's a lesson I learned at Lit on the GB and I find that the AH does not wish to adapt to reality, it wants reality to adapt to it, and I find that to be naive and for people who believe in Evolution theoretically, ironic again.

Essentially "I shouldn't have to adapt!"

Beyond that, one man's troll is another man's treasure. There's no easy definition of "troll" either. There's only an individual's discretion in dealing with them.

It's easy. When you see someone quote someone you have on ignore, don't read it and don't respond.

I've watched you quote LOTS of people you complain are trolls, and respond with venom. I've noted but ignored that although you complain about JBJ, you talk to him and about him a lot, and it's not with love.

If you agree more with nuance of a subject revealing itself over time, then good. I wouldn't take any credit for it, I'd just have more respect for your ability to adapt to new information.

 

[Edward Teach]

Again.

Political threads aren't the problem and moving them won't solve it.

 

[trysail]

"Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded."
-Yogi Berra

 

[SixtyMinuteMan]

I'm sorry, that sounds like double speak to me. There are value judgments being made about location.

If it's about just writing, only writing topics should be on the main board, there should be a sub-forum for anything not writerly.

However, there's no real definition for "not writerly" either and this board used to be really diverse and people behaved like grown ups.

Story feedback is specific and really easy to moderate. Politics and "non writerly" aren't. What is political and inflammatory and what isn't, is now becoming divorced from "socializing." It's either a board to "socialize" or it's only and all about writing, in which case, there goes my opportunity to freely socialize without being ushered into the back room.

There's already a general board and I love it there. The AH I no longer love. I used to. The AH, with all its pretensions of being better, is infinitely worse in terms of tolerance and variety. It is not smarter, it is not better, it is becoming increasingly close minded and intolerant.

The GB might be a free for all, but nobody tries to take your weapons away while saying they're the only people allowed to have weapons.

I go to the GB, someone snipes at me, I snipe back.

I come here, people are sniping while saying they don't have a gun and crying that someone shot them. It's bullshit.

It is not a place to socialize, it's a place to lock-step in the approved topic in the approved manner with the approved set of principles.

And hell to pay if you don't.

It's not tough to determine what's politics in the sense of the politics that dominates this forum. Establish clear guidelines on a handful of topics and we'll eliminate 85% of the crap. Want to talk global warming? Do it in the Politics forum. US health care reform? Whether Obama is Hitler? The next/previous US election season? Gay marriage? Any and all potential or pending legislation in the US, any political candidate or representative of any kind? That's political. Screw off to the appropriate forum.

We're not children. We're capable of identifying a clear set of topics that will get a thread moved to a separate forum. The hazard, to draw from Mabeuse, is in the troll brigade injecting those topics into any old thread.

Personally, my inclination right now is to say it's an obstacle that could be overcome without too-intense moderation. "Nope, JBJ, this thread is about ham sandwiches, not how much you hate that Obama eats ham sandwiches. Bugger off, post deleted." Or "Okay, this thread has now legitimately taken on a political cast, because that damned Obama taxed us right out of being able to afford ham sandwiches, so I'm moving the whole thing to 'Politics'".

But my opinion may change. It is at the least problematic. I'll mull it over today.

 

[Recidiva]

Again.

Political threads aren't the problem and moving them won't solve it.

Here I agree with you.

The problem is trolls and wanting to "win" over trolls by striking some real blow that somehow puts the authority of the site in the hands of those who want to win.

Compromise and ignore are not good enough.

This is not about being equal, this is about being better.

No, I don't want to be on the side of defending reprehensible assholes. I'm defending the principles of free speech that simultaneously allow reprehensible assholes to do what they do, and me to use my discretion to ignore them or engage them as I so choose.

 

[SixtyMinuteMan]

Again.

Political threads aren't the problem and moving them won't solve it.

Okay, as an aside and a general commentary on internet discussion: Recidiva and I are actually exchanging information in a useful dialogue free of pointless dogmatic repetition. As you may or may not have noticed, my previously strong conviction that a separate forum was the way to go has wavered significantly. Recidiva's points have gotten through, in other words. As did Mabeuse's.

That's the kind of thing that happens when you discuss instead of just repeating. Just bark your position again and again and all you do is entrench the other side. I don't mean this as a personal attack at all, certainly you're not the only one doing it, but do you see my point? If we talk about things, we might actually get somewhere. If you have the time and patience to explain why you think moving political threads won't help, by all means go ahead. Otherwise, the only thing you're doing is undermining Recidiva's time and effort in debating me.

And of course this will just be spitting into the wind, but I thought I'd make the point.