Put that in your pipe(s) and smoke it


I'll say it again: let's seek out the gem's and leave the rest, folks. Ignore the trolls, or be selective of the actual content they bring up - should you choose to reply; it may even hold an unexpected, worthwhile observation or two on a subject that could put into perspective our endeavors here.

More importantly, if we want this forum to allow for free speech and a degree of resilience, some around here should reconsider their liberal urge to hit the 'report' button, because that's the thing that truly annoys me and what I'd call the real trolls around here: the one's feeling offended on grounds I imagine to be so relative to their own agenda, indeed petty in nature, that their reporting a post or thread is likely to see no further inquiry by the admins and is therefore, simply by virtue of being a report alone, put into effect as an actual deletion.

We should be able to hold a conversation without someone feeling taken aback over what is, in the bigger scheme of things, insignificant issues. If not it's an ongoing, sad tendency to shut the mouths of those we don't agree with, or for some other flimsy reason don't like. 
128x128phusis

Showing 16 responses by unsound

There’s nothing wrong with expecting people to be decent to each other. But it’s another thing to invite the thought police.
^...and who decides based upon what?
The line is constantly moving, making for a slippery slope for the past going forward.
 The issue at hand is that, despite conforming to the rules as prescribed by the hosts, that posts are being deleted just because a complaint has been made. When such decisions  are arbitrarily made it potentially negates the purpose and value of the forum.
@djones51, the constitution was written over 200 years ago. The concept and words were and aren’t exclusive to the constitution. It might be presumptuous to assume that the actual scope of the rights afforded by the constitution is misunderstood.
The seemingly instantaneous manner in which posts are deleted after complaints suggests to my sensibilities that little consideration is made before such knee jerk reactions.
I find it curious that one might have access to the data that might suggest I’m the only with such a claim.
^ I firmly disagree with this assertion. I have experienced it first hand. When it was easier to respond in the past, I’ve had deletions reversed.  It now seems more difficult to respond to notices of deletions, and even if one is successful in making contact, such petitions are often ignored.
As has been stated previously, sometimes the judgments have been reversed, and sometimes the judgements have not been justified. It may be their house, but I don’t think it’s too much to ask that they play by their own house rules.
Please understand that there is not an accusation of implicit bias ( though one might construe it) being made, but rather one of a lack of due diligence. It seems as though the initial accusations are rewarded, before confirmation of the veracity of the allegations being made.
^Throwing the baby out with bath water?
There are legitimate concerns included within.
Well, another thread just seemed to disappear, after a poster made an appeal to other posters to complain. No rule was cited as being broken, or reason why was  given, despite being specifically asked for. It would appear to be an objection to the original poster rather then the subject inquiry at hand. Deny the who rather than the what cancel culture strikes again?