I am a little sensitive about freedom of speech issues right now. I don’t think freedom of speech means saying anything a person wants to say, but when it comes to subjects such as how our tax money is spent and if the US engages in war or not, I think, freedom of speech, as freedom to reason, is vitally important. I want to know up front, if a person can be banned without notice because someone who has the power so, can do so on a whim? If so, want are the taboo subjects?
There are no tabboo subjects. It isn’t what, but how you address others in discussion that can bring a ban. The folks here are pretty lenient, but stay away from ad homs or you might attract attention.
In other words, don’t be an asshole and you’ll be fine.
I googled ad hom and plenty of people are using this term, but I have no idea what it means. It is not in my dictionary either.
I leave forums where freedom of speech is not a strong value, or where freedom of speech is misunderstood abused.
and
The people who have broken them sufficiently to ban, since September 19th, 2006
If you want some negative examples, check out those posters – JennyHeart is a particularly egregious example of negative forum behavior.
It is pretty hard to get banned, but don’t take that up as a challenge.
“Ad hom” is short for “argumentum ad hominem”. In your case that would be “ad feminam”.
I don’t speak Latin and still do not understand what it is that I was told to avoid.
Well, it’s not my fault you don’t “speak” Latin. But I’m sure you can figure out what an “argumentum” is. All that’s left for you to do is look up “ad hominem” on Google. Forget the “ad feminam” - that was an aside - a joke.
Now go do your homework.
I have always considered Shakespeare’s words as outlining the ideal conduct for verbal exchanges:
“Conversation should be pleasant without scurrility, witty without affectation, free without indecency, learned without conceitedness, novel without falsehood.”
So a few positive virtues are required and a few more via negationis.
An Ad Hom is, technically, attacking the validity of another’s arguments based on their character. As in, person A argues for Y, but Y is invalid because person A is having sex with a 7 year old. But more generally, it is just philo-board shorthand for personal insults.
Thank you. Now that explanation I can understand.
And thank you, Mucius Scevola. I will try to keep that advice in mind.
However, I am female and I read one post that explains females should not be held up to the same standards as males, because they just can not handle abstract thinking. Does being pretty help? I can cook a good chicken soup, and am trained in other domestic arts as well.
Take it up in the thread.
But I’ve always been an advocate for pretty.
Good manners are more important than good laws. Laws invariably take individual power away. However, good manners empower people. This applies to the question about banning people.
I have experienced forums where moderators can ban anyone on a matter of whim. Before the Greeks concluded reason is the controlling force of the universe, and even the Gods are subject to reason, they thought the Gods ruled by whim. But democracy comes out of the idea that the universe is controlled by reason. Their concept of laws where tied to their knowledge of how things work, and then they wrote the laws, and agreed on how to enforce them. IN A DEMOCRACY PEOPLE DO NOT ACT ON WHIM, BANNING SOMEONE FOR EMOTIONALLY MOTIVATED REASONS BECAUSE S/HE TOOK OFFENSE TO WHAT WAS SAID. It is so important to me that people understand this principle, because we stand to loose our democracy if we do not understand the principles and live by them.
This means having a procedure that means communicating and reasoning with people, before action is taken. Does such a policy exist here? When I have made an issue of this in other forums, I have been told because the forums are owned, the owner can do whatever s/he pleases.
I tried to point out that if we accept owners can do whatever they please and act on whims, this eventually distroys democracy. It saddens me greatly when people defend autocratic values at the expense of democratic ones, and then I have to make a decision about if I what to support those who favor autocratic values over democratic ones or not. I can tolerate those who hold autocratic values, until the problem becomes intolerable. Meaning these autocratic people are also mercenary enough to use some judgement in banning people. But when their judgement is bad, welllll- that is why we have democracy instead of autocracy. Supposedly any way.
PS what I read in an explanation to new people was not encouraging, so I am kind of holding my breath, hoping reason has more of a chance here, than my first impression lead me to believe.
reason is worthless (and that’s a different argument), but you will not be banned unless you commit many offences…
(and you will be warned via pm at each violation)
-Imp
I agree with you that good manners are more important than good laws. The problem with that notion, from the perspective of your argument, is that it is ultimately anti-democratic. Democracy takes, as one of its most basic assumptions, that all the participating members are of equal value. That idea goes hand-in-hand with the notion of “rule of law” where an arbitrary system of justice can be meted out impartially onto equal members by mutual agreement.
Respect and manners, however, rely on recognizing the differences between people. People have roles and acting properly within those roles is the essence of respect and good manners but the whole idea is founded on ritual and hierarchy. That is, from this perspective, a good thing. After all, guest-friendship cannot occur unless there is both a host and a guest. These two individuals play very different roles and the power-dynamic between them, when properly expressed, is the essence of good manners. A good host does all they can to provide for the guest while the guest seeks not to impose upon the host. When properly done, both parties benefit from this interaction.
If it’s a truck, call it a truck, and not a Big Wheel because the person across the intarwebs is disagreeable.
If it’s an Imp, jack it a shot with a sledgehammer, bury it lime, and pray that all the metaphysical suppositions about “rebirth” are false, else it is likely to come back for you with Hume in one hand, and an elephant in the other.
If it’s Confucian and a microbiologist, it will say things that repeatedly befuddle you, annoy and agitate you, and cause you debilitating carpal tunnel as you search endlessly on Google to find something that makes it error at least once.
If it appears pensive and apprehensive, as well as being one of the oldest living, (loosely), mammals in all of creation, pet it softly, give it some drool to drink, and it will just wander off on its own, dreaming of red heads.
If its a red head … don’t answer, there is no end of pain caused by red headed posters. There is also no known cure for “red head psychosis”, well, you know, except for the unthinkable and unspeakable, (i.e. agreeing with it ::gasp:: ).
Oh Massypoo you just said you must agree with me. Stubborness and and perserverence does give one agreeablity. Pain builds character, I have made some people very strong, that is a good thing. Athena, I don’t cause that much pain, he tends to stretch certain things a wee bit. He knows he can’t live without my feminine wisdom. And Be specific Mas, he needs Moosey drool not just any drool. He gets down right fussy if he has any other kind.
Mas, left out a few very strong personalities that show up from time to time, they are the ones that catch you off guard and may make you want to break the rules. The shalom man, her Bessiness, the sage, the empty slate, and a few others that though their names change they remain the same, Don’t they?
And what Physchosis, I brushed my teeth 
Athena,
If you haven’t figured it out by now, just relax. Most of us are fairly tolerant and we don’t mind good natured pokes in the ribs (or elsewhere). You’ll run into a few jerks now and then, and quite a number of jerk-offs, 
but in the main, the community is pretty laid back. This is especially true of the staff. The prime requirement for staff membership is skin at least 1 inch thick. Most of them fill that requirement several times over… 
See what I mean. She is so deranged that even her halitosis is psychotic …
