stickdog99 » Mon Jun 22, 2020 7:24 pm wrote:Personally, I don't get it. I hadn't even read this yet. I guess that shows how much I hate board (or office) politics.
SLAD got weirdly obsessive with her flooding, so I could see limiting her to posting one new thread per day and only making personal rather than pasta comments on every other thread. The exact same limitation could have been enforced on AD, as far as I am concerned. Jerky was not a misnomer, but what's a political board today without a reliable neoliberal spokesperson?
As for all of the other bans, just put me on record of being largely a libertarian when it comes allowing the free expression of ideas. Personally, I don't even draw my line at Holocaust denial, or no planers, or crisis actors, or Obama birthers, or even flat Earthers. Why should I? Why can't we discuss this stuff? Why can't we just make fools of those who embrace unhelpful stupidity? I mean, none of you have had any problem stomping on my occassional bs, and I have evolved significantly as a result of getting destroyed for posting some utter nonsense here without first fully thinking it through.
Sure, Sounder said some stuff and posted some links I personally considered racist, brekin got the crazy idea folks' protesting police brutality was worse than supporting Hitler, and Mac (one of the sharpest minds here, in my worthless opinion) got strangely personal with anyone who disagreed with him on the topics he felt most strongly about. And while I did not see FB's supposed meltdown, I often enjoyed reading his unique input. But why should anyone care what I think about any of this? The intense personalization of all of my preceding commentary in this paragraph slightly sickens me. It reminds me of my biggest problem with hippies, which is that one of their favorite pastimes is to gossip about the lack of righteousness of other hippies they know.
Personally, I generally do my best to divorce content from the personalities providing it. Why worry about the messenger when you can attack the message? For example, the idea that a link to a wholly unobjectional article cannot be shared because it comes from a racist aggregator site has always puzzled me. Why not just point out that fact if it legitimately bothers you?
And why do we need to be protected against "bad ideas" in the first place? Why can't we argue against views we disagree with? And why can't I read those arguments? Sometimes I admit that I need to. In fact, the main reason I come back here consistently whenever something crazy happens is to get a sense of informed consensus, not enforced consensus.
Just my two cents.
"First they came for ... "
^^^Worth repeating in full. And, along with Willow’s persuasive and moving posts in this thread, pretty much say it all. Jack’s responses (to Willow and other posts in this thread) speak volumes to me in how he doesn’t seem to ‘get’ it. Maybe he can’t. But that, along with, over the years, the persistent ad hominems leveled against some members, lecturing and labeling, make him a “bad fit” (to use his term about Sounder) as a fair moderator, imho.
JackRiddler » Sat Jun 20, 2020 8:25 pm wrote:
... If you've ever shared a thought with brekin (I definitely did a few) or Sounder, that's okay. We don't want uniformity of thought.
We don't have a list of further targets. We don't want to act out an online reign of terror with user accounts...
.
Wow. Originally I thought there might be a master plan that came w/the (successful) ultimatum you issued Jeff about the conditions of continuing your membership (posted in another thread somewhere). Sounder and Brekin were ousted in almost one wave of the wand. It was really a shame to see you also check off Brekin so quickly
. He’d recently come back to the board after a long absence and I, for one, was very glad to see him. Since you don’t have “a list of further targets, does that mean you’ll lay off Heaven Swan and 0_0 and let them share their thoughts, links, etc.? As not done with Sounder, AD, Brekin, et al., maybe you could now take a leap and trust that members can be discerning about the content they’re presented. We're not students in a classroom.Not really. I think the last several months have shown how small it is. And strange.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNr1GChCVQM
It's a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack
You taught me all I know and I'll never look back
It's a very strange world and I thank you, Master Jack
You took a colored ribbon from out of the sky
And taught me how to use it as the years went by
To tie up all your problems and make them look neat
And then to sell them to the people in the street
It's a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack
You taught me all I know and I'll never look back
It's a very strange world and I thank you, Master Jack
I saw right through the way you started teachin' me now
So some day soon you could get to use me somehow
I thank you very much and though you've been very kind
But I'd better move along before you change my mind
It's a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack
You know how I feel as if I'll never come back
It's a very strange world and I thank you, Master Jack
You taught me all the things the way you'd like them to be
But I'd like to see if other people agree
It's all very interesting the way you disguise
But I'd like to see the world through my own eyes
It's a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack
No hard feelin's if I never come back
You're a very strange man and I thank you, Master Jack
You're a very strange man and I thank you, Master Jack
You're a very strange man and I thank you, Master Jack
I was going to post this in jest, but it’s too beautiful (and, the 2nd verse, poetic) a song for poking fun. (I vaguely remember the original release and probably switching the station-wasn’t my style of music. Hope I won’t be labeled misogynistic for choosing this group's (name) instead of the original, but I prefer the quality of this version.) Like w/all art, poetry, lyrics, etc.. listeners can interpret the ‘meaning’. I, personally, can see myself and many I’ve known in the lyrics.
Edit to add...Just saw this on WaPo front page--wow, serendipity?
Dixie Chicks drop Dixie, change name to The Chicks: ‘We want to meet this moment.'
https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-ent ... me-chicks/
Chump being banned would be unforgivable. Hopefully Chump or mods will let us know. 
. 
'
