Could we place certain members in the corner for a couple of weeks? Give them time out for their incessant babble of left-wing ranting (this is a frequent flyer board right?) and non-stop negativity? Perhaps give them a taste of FT Siberia?

I gave up my subscription to Pravda years ago. FT is becoming Pravda-Lite...

I thought this was an international board? Most countries are genrally a lot more left wing than the United States, mine included and I resent your assertions that this implies communism and left wing ranting. We elect social democratic governments in democratic elections - I don't see how you take issue with that.

It is possible that I may have misinterpreted your points. If so, I agree completely that this is not really a place for politics except where directly related to an airline/frequent travel issue. I think matters like the US-UK open skies debate and the 'passenger bill of rights' laws are fair game. Perosnal attacks on presidents, politiicans, former speakers are not.

Your idea about suspending those who are causing trouble is an interesting one. Who decides and on what grounds? What annoys most people may inspire others. Do you the threads a couple of months ago where there was that big arguement and then everything was deleted. In among the bitterness and acrimony, some people still made useful points about travel and in one case about (technically) how to use the board better. The good stuff was indiscriminately thrown out with the bad stuff. That was censorship by the thread initiator; in my opinion, as soon as another individual posts to the thread, they initiator no longer owns it and shouldn't be able to delete it. Onefreeman can censor my post here with three mose clicks.

All these things are very shaky ground and we must be very careful. Make every effort to avoid these people; warn others like we do with emmet/roberto/nancy/lucy et al. As someone eloquently put it, don't feed the trolls. But when you start deleting usernames and suspending access, you cross he line; one day, I might object to one of your posts and ask to have you suspended. Bad language, personal insults and attacks are a separate matter but we may just have to tolerate content of posts.

[This message has been edited by james (edited 08-12-1999).]

The right to free speech is the right to not have the government infringe on your free speech. I will earnestly defend the right of you (and me) to be free from government repression.

However, FT is a private operation. It is free to silence or ostracize those interfering with its goals. We'd be insular and foolish to do this wantonly, but the civility and high information content of FT is one of its sparkling charms.

OK QuantumLeap, I unreservedly take you point about the high signal/noise here being a great strength. But in terms of silencing people, I ask again who's to judge and by what criteria?

anyone may (please) judge for himself - and than act (or silence) accordingly.

james: methinks onefreeman (with a moniker like that) was jesting. But if not, of course I would be the one to make all judgments, since mine are the only ones which are infoulable

As Bishop Bossuet once said to someone who dared to inquire: "I have the right to persecute you for your beliefs because I am right, and you are wrong."

Or something like that. The problems only come when someone powerful really believes it.

The one and only person I would nominate for "Official Janitor of FlyerTalk", who would be free to sweep any person into the FlyerTalk dust bin is.....Arturo!

Thank you Brian - I think you are right. But I do think my points still stand as commentary on the issue of censorship. One or two things along those lines still trouble me.

First, my favorite:
One great thing about America, even you have the right to be wrong.

Second, the golden rule:
Those who have the gold make the rules...in this case Randy and his delegates. We always have the right to vote with our feet if we do not agree.

Sigh, these discussions keep recurring. I've been trying not to say anything, and I've been trying to be on my best behavior but pardon me if I am not. We can't have it both ways - asking Randy not to censor anyone (it was NJDavid and others if my memory serves me right who wanted some kind of guarantee from Randy not to censor anyone), and asking Randy to censor someone we feel is worthy of it (BTW who is "we" here?). I agree with james. Also its trivial to get a new username.

Everyone's right. Free speech, freedom to express one's views, pure and undiluted freedom. But freedom carries with it a responsibility to play by the rules, meaning those standards, or rules, which serve, or, to use Mr. Jefferson's word, bless the public. So, let us do all we can to keep the standard(s) high, especially civil and polite, by obeying rules which clearly are good for the majority of people (also known as citizens). Most of us know them by heart

or by instruction and they are easy to honor.



I am guilty of a slap or two at times and I really should stop it because it's not civil and I know better. But even tho I am a saint I am weak and in those weak moments I say things like my earlier entry on this thread. I hope to do better now that I have thought about it again.



As to the person who has stirred up this bit of nonsense and early unpleasantness, we should just ignore him, her, or it. As Rudi said, pay him no heed. From here on, I pay him, her, or it no heed.

If I may offer a suggestion...

Back in the early 80's, I used to run a computer BBS (single-user on a dedicated phone line).

We had some terrific users, and some not-so-terrific ones (I nicknamed them "weenies", and it stuck among SysOps I knew at the time).

I didn't want to restrict access, but I didn't want the BBS turning into Romper Room either.

So I came upon a terrific technical solution. SQUELCH. Is a weenie annoying you? Then you, as a USER can squelch the weenie. The messages stayed in the system, they just didn't come down the line to your screen. The operator of the board doesn't have to intervene. No censorship issue.

Now at this time UBB may not support this, but it is certainly something to pass along. It would just expand the profile a bit.

I must confess, I did have SUPER SQUELCH. It was a nifty way to guarantee the weenies got ignored. If a weenie posted a message, it got saved, but it was suppressed from appearing on anyone else's screen EXCEPT the weenie. In other words, the weenie would leave his message and could read it. He'd think it was posted there, but noticed that no matter what he said (and some got real colorful), it was ignored. Eventually they would just go away.

Now if super squelched weenie had 2 ID's, he'd notice. But most of them weren't so ambitious in the mischief.


------------------
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own."


[This message has been edited by Jon Toner (edited 08-12-1999).]

OK premex, arturo now postie two thes mess and git awl basura and moogre out of hear. wat emportent es thet we awl luv each othr and know evrywon has an onionpin.

arturo now ask thet wonfreman deleet thes thred.

There are two things you can't debate unemotionally: politics and religion. And maybe your alma mater.

It's true about the alma mater; I bet DJLawman and I can find somehting we disagree about ours (Cornell!!).


[This message has been edited by kyklin (edited 08-12-1999).]