http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif So much for "liberals" having cornered the market on victimhood. As for flamin' and baitin', this is pretty rich coming from someone who has called other posters (i.e. SMizer) "tool." So while OMNI is said to be the fiefdom of gay loving liberals, Randy's forum is turning into a 'conservative' whining fest.

7.1.

Conservatives are not the victims of the unbalanced moderating. OMNI is.

I have enjoyed going to OMNI, but I can live without it. In fact, I have not been banned or even suspended. I left of my own choice because of the direction the forum is taking: The Left is free to flame ad nauseum, the Right can not disagree without being censured and censored.

OMNI can not live without open debate with all sides being treated equally. It will turn into a Left wing mutual admiration society. At first, the Lefters will be pleased but soon the more intelligent of them will find that they have no opposition, become bored, and not bother posting.

The very few who will remain will be those satisified with intellectual masturbation.

This is the reason that I don't post on conservative forums. There is no reason for me to do so. I don't need to have everyone tell me how intelligent I am simply because I agree with them.




[This message has been edited by Dovster (edited Jan 21, 2004).]

No idea who he/she is. From what little we could gather they posted from a Kinko's.

I guess you could start by banning Ryan Stiles then. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

More accusations.

How do your accusations balance with the fact that I'm a straight, white male, Republican, US Army vet, home owner, who's voted for Reagan (twice), Bush I (Twice), and Bush II? (I Didn't vote for Dole because I thought he was too old.)

How does it balance with the fact that you, Dovster, have posted 145 times (in the last 3 months) in OMNI and have decided to make a big issue out of 1 of those 145 posts?

Or could it be that the OMNI moderators are only interested in seeing that people don't fight and that flame wars don't erupt? Or could it be that the OMNI moderators are largely apolitical and don't waste their time trying to advance any agenda on a internet bulletin board?

I've said this before, if the moderators are pushing/supporting any left wing/gay/Bush hating agenda in OMNI, IMHO we're doing a piss poor job if it.

The only agenda we're trying to push is keeping FTers to follow the TOS. And on that count, we're doing the best we can.

I'd like to ask the question: "How have any of you helped 'the community' in this regard?"

------------------
Sean
aka: skofarrell
Moderator, OMNI & American Express

[This message has been edited by skofarrell (edited Jan 21, 2004).]

Don't know about "SMizer" - actually I'm fairly certain that I was referring to ScottC. It was about one year ago, IIRC, long before he was anointed as supreme OMNI moderator. Since you have such a great memory of that horrific transgression, surely you also recall the baiting and other OMNI posts that led up to it (all of which were the most serious of TOS violations and were, sadly, roundly ignored by the then OMNI moderators, due largely to the offenders being members of the OMNI "clique")? Would you like to discuss that here or in a separate thread?

OK, let's bring stuff up from a year ago. Have you sent in your moderator application yet 'Pete?

[This message has been edited by skofarrell (edited Jan 21, 2004).]

Some strange things happened when the site was down. My answer to Sean's post disappeared.

His reply, to me, saying that he removes posts when there is an attack on a fellow FT poster also disappeared.

The last post that disappeared was the following one. It included a number of attacks on Thumper, Yevlesh2, and myself which appeared in the now-infamous "Ambassador" thread. These posts appeared ABOVE my post which was censored out, meaning that he could not have missed them. They were not removed and, in fact, are still there. I have to wonder why.

Debo_nair to Thumper : Now with your opinion you should also be supporting the Palestinian kids who throw stones at Israeli tanks when they roll them in their backyard ???

anrkitec to me : Please leave behind your opinions supporting one individuals 'right' to violently and unilaterally limit another persons right to free speech the next time you come over. I am afraid that if your beliefs cannot tolerate the free expression of other divergent beliefs then you really don't have much to believe in nor do your beliefs really stand for very much.

Of course, as this is America, neither you nor anyone else are under any obligation to do so. And I am very glad for that fact. See how that works? I have an opinion and express it but I also allow you and others to express your opinions and, wait for it...my opinions and beliefs do not require that I prevent you or others from expressing yours...Neat huh? Despite the often resultant small-mindedness of the approach quoted above it is just another one of the many costs of real freedom. Even in the face of death, even when we "just think of the children..."

anrkitec about me : you cannot have an honest conversation about any issue when one side is intentionally and dishonestly misrepresenting the other side’s position with their own hatred.

anrkitec about me : this is nothing more than a personal opinion dishonestly represented as the official intent of the artists in question.

Well, I suppose that this is just my opinion, but at least it is an honest one.

anriktec about yevlesh2 : Can you not see the significance of what you advocate?

By holding these views you are saying that if one person disagrees with another person then they have some right to physically prevent the other person, even violently so, from expressing their views. This is the antithesis of the ideals of a free society.

Yes, I was also surprised when your buddy SMessier jumped on me for a year-old transgression. I was simply responding to his post. How ironic that you missed that http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/redface.gif in your effort to defend the double standard that the OMNI moderators have created.

I will not respond to the actions or reasons of the moderators or other FTers but since this line is about one of my posts I will respond.

Never once did I make a personal attack against Dovester nor did I call him/her dishonest. This was Dovester's first post in the thread in question,

What I said was in response to another poster, letiole, asking where she could find information about the poem "glorifying this woman". I responded to letiole by saying,

In the post to which I was responding, Dovester began to give what appeared to be straight factual description of the artwork in question and then added, "along with a poem singing her praises" and "It was a tribute to a mass murderer" which seemed to be suggesting that this was the intent of the artists in question and the museum. Dovester, or anyone for that matter, certainly has the right to hold and express these opinions but I took issue with what I saw as those 'opinions' being represented as fact. I was simply calling Dovester on this [again, IMHO] intellectually weak method of debate. What I called dishonest was the idea that "along with a poem singing her praises" and "It was a tribute to a mass murderer" were now being represented as something other than Dovester's personal spin on the work.

Yes, I criticized Dovester's idea of this work and his [IMHO] subterfuge to present it as "fact" thus I was critiquing and idea or an issue. I never once, neither technically nor by outright means made a personal attack. Arguments, ideas, and reasoning can and often are dishonest, disingenuous, specious, etc. You cannot debate any serious issue or idea without being able to call into question a persons line of reasoning, but doing so does not necessarily constitute a personal attack. I do not know Dovester personally. I do not know [nor really care, personally] if he is an honest person or a dishonest one but I will, as always, give someone I do not know the benefit of the doubt, AND I still stand by my original argument that to suggest that the official or even the only real intent of either the museum or artist in question is to "honor" or to "sing the praises" [in direct contradiction to the statements by the artists and the museum] of the subject is to make a dishonest argument, regardless of whether or not one agrees with or finds any value in the specific work itself.

Edited to add:

As for the other post quoted by Dovester I think that it should be apparent that I was setting up an extreme example, my suggestion to leave behind what I thought were small-minded beliefs in regard to artistic freedom, to show how one can vehemently disagree with the expression of another's freedom not only without limiting said contrary opinion but in fact celebrating that personas right to have them.

That is that I whole heartedly disagree with what I perceive to be Dovester's willingness to violently limit another persons free speech [support for the ambassadors actions] but I also wholeheartedly support his right to have and express those opinions. If this example was too subtle then I offer my apologies to those offended. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif




[This message has been edited by anrkitec (edited Jan 21, 2004).]

Anrkitec, you are 100% right. For that reason, I did not call "foul" when you posted these remarks.

However, under the rules as stated by Sean in removing my post what you did is a personal attack.

I did not call any poster any name. I did not say that any poster was being idiotic. I did not say that he has no right to post.

I merely pointed out that he called the Israeli ambassador a "harsh word" (rat) but did not use that term about the murderer, the artist who honored her, or the Swedish officials.

In other words, just like you, I was calling into question his line of reasoning.

Unlike you, I had my post banned. That is the problem -- the double standard that was applied.

I understand what you are saying. I think that it is fair to say that many of us at times do not know where precisely the line is drawn. I do know that it Is going to be impossible to have absolutely consistent moderation in this area as all participants are human and by definition fallible. I personally believe that the mods have blown a couple [one big, on small http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif] but as a percentage of what all goes on in Omni I would honestly have to say that they are doing a very good and, yes, even-handed job.

I believe that it is pretty common knowledge now that my post was deleted because it quoted your post which was deleted for a TOS violation, thus since my post quoted a post that was no longer there, my post became unnecessary. Personally I would have only edited that part that referred to your post under these circumstances but so be it, I will defer to the mods.

That is about the extent to which I can empathize with your situation or address a "double standard" because truly, for the life of me I cannot remember your post nor can I remember what I said in response. I would really be in a pretty tough position trying to argue a point, either way, the text of which I cannot remember.




[This message has been edited by anrkitec (edited Jan 21, 2004).]

My original post read as follows:

Originally posted by debo_nair:

Israel has the right to withdraw her ambassador from Sweden in protest but the rat doesn't have the right to destroy the art in Sweden.

debo_nair used a harsh word: "Rat".

He used no such word to describe the mass murderess.

He used no such word to describe the artist who honored her.

He used no such word to describe the Swedes who allowed the exhibition.

Only one person warranted such a denunciation from debo_nair: the Israeli diplomat.

A few months ago Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh was murdered while shopping. Ms. Lindh was not particularly loved in Israel as she was one of its harshest European critics. If an Israeli museum were to put up an exhibit honoring her assassin, I wonder if debo_nair might use his harsh words a bit differently.



[This message has been edited by Dovster (edited Jan 21, 2004).]

I am not sure about which ones you are talking about, but we never said we were perfect http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

We are just volunteers trying to do a job. The holy spirit did not descend upon us making us wise beyond the average human.

Although, I am smarter than the average bear http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif