Teacher said:

are you trying to control how people express themselves? is that your agenda?

sosgemini said:

I think dishonesty is offensive so if I could control that the answer is yes. But, as Captain Jack Sparrow said, the good thing about a dishonest man is that you can always count on him to be dishonest so by all means keep it up. Unfortunately dishonesty isn't against site rules but that doesn't mean it's right. It IS however revealing. Now I'm done with this discussion cos it's off topic. If you've got more to say please take it to orgnote.

Teacher said:

its rather rude to accuse people of dishonesty...just to try to win points in an argument.

now, im not sure how my blunt and honest comments could be misconstrued as anything other then what i typed...after all, isn't that what i am being attacked for here..being brutally honest to the point of being rude?

and no, i will not take this conversation to private...when you question someone's character publicaly you best get ready to publicaly get your ass called out on it.

it's down right silly when grown folks can't agree to disagree and instead resort to silly personal attacks.
[Edited 9/4/07 11:29am]

uPtoWnNY said:

It's not within the realm of civil behavior.....someone needs to educate the youth of today. How else are they going to learn? "Civility" by Stephen Carter is a good start.
"Fucking idiot" should never be tolerated in any manner.

sosgemini said:

Whelp! I read through the whole thing, and where do I begin????

The TOPIC IS: What is considered an offense thread?
In the site rules, the mod has final say.
If other mods support the decision, then that's the way it should be.
[Edited 9/10/07 15:49pm]

sosgemini said:

sake.....
[Edited 9/8/07 6:33am]

I find threads about the ill-treatment of animals posted in a humourous manner to be highly offensive.

I'm also offended when dissenting viewpoints are snipped or completely erased. I am still angry that my criticisms of Steve Irwin's expolitative television programmes were completely erased.

There was a thread the other month about bull-running in Spain which I really found offensive. It wasn't presented as a reportage, but was actually portrayed in a favourable light by many of the Spanish Orgers. I found it sickening.

I also don't want to see photographs of hunting trips.

Justin1972UK said:

If your talking about this thread, which I believe you are http://prince.org/msg/100/243410?&pg=1, I snipped what was obviously in bad taste.

With the comments that were made such as: fucking his atrium (heart area), the wound area (chest),fucking his ass, and mouth.

This is an insult to our Aussie orgers who admire the man, as well as to the memory of a man that did a lot of good in his life. Non-Aussies orgers and Aussie orgers were quite offended and hurt on the last thread announcing his death in regards to the sting ray picture/comments which was disgusting.

Since you're from the UK, as an example: if someone made the same comments about the Queen or the royal family, would you feel offended?? Do you think the UK orgers would be in an uproar?

luv4u said:

No. I'm talking about this thread from over a year ago. The majority of my posts were completely erased. Reply #108 makes reference to one of earlier erased posts, as does Reply #151, Reply #160, Reply #188.

I never wrote anything about sexually desecrating the man's corpse. I simply added a few dissenting viewpoints from various individuals and organisations - one of these being Germaine Greer. My post containing Ms. Greer's essay on Steve Irwin's life and work was completely erased. Try searching for her name. And for the record, Germaine Greer's essay also didn't advocate penetrative sex with Mr. Irwin's corpse...

A degree of hysterical conformity was encouraged by the moderation on the threads created in the aftermath of Steve Irwin's demise.

None of what I posted was libellous or intended to be for humourous "shock value". I have a deeply serious opinion of Steve Irwin's wildlife shows, which may not correlate with the majority of forum members, but was just as valid.

I still find it amazing that this site allowed a link to a video of a man being decapitated, on the grounds of "free speech" - when my valid opinions of a deceased television personality were silenced.

xplnyrslf said:

Then why do you tolerate me? I use that phrase a lot.

Justin1972UK said:

For what it is worth Justin i saw that thread when it was recent and i have just re-read your comments now and i have to say i still find your and Bens comments distasteful and disprespectful. Of course you are entitled to an opinion but to voice them at that time and that place is childish and immature. If you felt that way why not do it before or decide to raise those points at a later more respectful time?
I am sure that those that love and respect you woluld find it distasteful if you died tragically and someone posted here the facts of your demise and people steamed in with negative and hurtful stuff about you. Why does your right to vent come before their right to human treatment? That is simply selfish.
Your opinion was valid but mistimed and misplaced and therefore disrespectful and offensive to many.

mdiver said:

My comments weren't distasteful in the slightest. I wasn't mocking his death or joking about the manner in which he died as others did. Yes, my comments were disrespectful - they were intended to be. Why would I voice respect for somebody I had no respect for?

mdiver said:

I disagree entirely. Whilst he was headline news was absolutely the best time to discuss and reappraise the man's work.

mdiver said:

I had voiced my opinion on Steve Irwin prior to his death. The difference here being that my comments had slipped underneath the radar without the tidal wave of hysteria amongst many on this site.

mdiver said:

You mean like family of the hostage whom had his head chopped-off and had footage of his execution linked to from the General Discussion forum at Prince.org?

mdiver said:

Because I am a forum member here - and to the best of my knowledge, the Irwins are not.

In any case, I wasn't "venting" about Steve Irwin's life and death, so much as decrying his methodology. It wasn't exactly, "Steve Irwin was a poo-poo head and we should skull-fuck his cadaver"... After my original comments were stamped-on, I later voiced dismay that those offering dissenting opinions were being publically ridiculed with the approval of the Moderators here. You could define these later comments as "venting" but not my earlier (now deleted) posts.

mdiver said:

A Moderator allowing one person's opinion to take precedence over another's because it correlates with their own viewpoint is "simply selfish".

mdiver said:

The fact that I was silenced was offensive.

Justin1972UK said:

How old are you again?

mdiver said:

The clue's in my screen-name.

I thought that you were a friend.

Justin1972UK said:

I am mate, friends do that, they disagree and still work through. I just disagree with you and as your friend i think you are being a mug making an issue of it. Trust me mate i absolutely support your right to your opinion and to voice that opinion in a PUBLIC forum. However if you were pissed up in a bar making a fool of yourself i would drag your ass home.....same thing mate

mdiver said:

Hey, I just went through that thread. I don't get why everyone is so damned bleeding heart sensitive here. So someone makes a joke about Mr. Irwin. So fuckin' what?! Is it going to permanently scar anyone here? I personally never liked Steve Irwin, so pardon me for not caring whether he's dead or not. His voice grated on my nerves. That's just me, and I certainly wish that people would respect my opinion, as hard as it may be. It is a little stifling on this site because people can't just let others' comments stand as they are. They have to be some kind of champion for the politically correct. It's really stupid. If you don't like someone's comments, take it to orgnote or just ignore it. It's THAT simple.

And secondly, why are you guys hashing over a thread from a year ago?

No offense to anyone, really, but I get so annoyed by the fact that we have to be so respectful all the time, particularly when someone we DON'T EVEN KNOW passes away. I suppose that if you don't have anything nice to say, you shouldn't post on it. But it's almost as if most people try to say something cliche as if they care only to seem good to others. It's nauseating.

gemini13 said:

Ooooookaaaaayyyyy.

Please dont judge other peoples reasons for their posts and the sentiments behind them. If you feel that way then fine, others feel differently. It is not about being PC it was more about a modicum of sensitivity.OK you didnt see a need for it but others did. If you want your feelings taken in to account then the same is true ofothers

gemini13 said:

and right there is the crutch for us mods...if we do edit comments like justin's then we are censoring....if we don't we end up upsetting those who are offended by the comments....*that* is why i think communication from the mods is paramount.

when folks at start to understand why mods are taking certain actions it thaws some of the animosity. that's why i always appreciate efforts like this thread....

mdiver said:

So, if everyone respected others' differing opinions, there would be no problem, correct? It is the FORCED sensitivity and compassion that bothers me. The sheep mentality of "if you don't feel the same way that we do, there's something wrong with YOU" is unfair also.

gemini13 said:

is he saying that though? isnt mdiver simply stating dont judge other's?

sosgemini said:

He is saying that I don't have the right to judge others. And I'm saying that I do. ANDDDD if my particular judgment doesn't fit in with the majority, I am judged very quickly, and in some cases, reported.

What I am saying is that people should have the right to say what they want, as long as it's not a violent threat or something similar. There are a lot of emotional and dramatic people on this site, and it bores me. Sure, there are things I see that I could report, but I'm just not that nosy or controlling (I see some people here who are not happy unless they are controlling the issues). Most here are so damned worried about being liked by others that they come off a little bit insincere in my eyes.

gemini13 said:

Oh i agree with you but on the flip side compassion and sensitivity are human rights

gemini13 said:

That is just it you dont have the right to judge others but as SOON as you do you deserve the same treatment, what is good for the goose is good for the gander just if you wanna judge then dont bitch when you get judged

gemini13 said:

judging folks opinions tend to lead to off-topic thread jacking....

here's the first rule listed for this site:

Be civilized
Don't create offensive, vulgar, obscene, threatening, abusive or excessively profane posts. Do not instigate, engage in, or encourage 'flame wars'. If you insult someone "jokingly", be prepared to have it not interpreted that way by the Moderators. A good general rule: "criticize ideas, not people."

judging peoples motives or opinions cheapens the arguement...one that if done with a lack of civility is against site rules....

sosgemini said:

I just want to say that anything I said (and which was later deleted) wasn't said in jest, nor was it said to be inflammatory... It was said to counteract what gemini13 has correctly identified as being a "sheep mentality". I don't know exactly what Ben was saying either then or now, so I can't speak for him (nor should I).

mdiver has replied to me in an alternate thread stating that it wasn't what I said, but the timing of it. Well, how long would be long enough? If this site existed in 1943 and I started a thread called "Hitler Is A Cunt", would I be "offending" Germans?

I found the sycophancy afforded to Steve Irwin, in the days after his death, to be misplaced... I wasn't offended per se - but neither should anybody else have been offended by my countering viewpoint. I shouldn't have had my posts deleted and the moderator shouldn't have allowed others to hurl personal insults towards me.

I don't believe in censorship of thought or art - although I do believe in certification to some degree.

However, I do think that censorship should be implemented in instances when neither thought nor art is the underlying reason for expression. Racism, homophobia or sexism aren't "thoughts", but are conditioned impulses indoctrinated into an individual via their enviroment. You can't argue against a prejudice in the same way you can't argue against cancer. Arguing against a prejudice simply gives the the aggressor a platform on which to broadcast their ignorance... Just cut it out - like a tumour.

Everybody should have the right to free speech so long as their words do not condone or promote the silencing, inhibition or active prohibition of another's right to free speech. It's as simple as that.

The threads which I truly find offensive here, are those which are censored just for offering a dissenting opinion, or those in which members are ridiculed and insulted into silence - with the complicit approval of a moderator.

In addition to this (and to get back to my original post), humourous posts and threads concerning the ill-treatment of animals concern me greatly.

Justin1972UK said:

So now you are likening Steve Irwin to Hitler?

If you are you just lost your credibility,if you are not then the point is moot

Justin1972UK said:

thanks for sharing your opinion.

mdiver said:

Yes, I am likening Steve Irwin to Hitler, in that both were figures beloved of a nation blinkered by hysteria at a specific point in history.

Your positive/negative supposition is basically 'trial by dunking'... If I answer in the affirmative I've "lost my credibility" and if I answer in the negative, it's "moot". So, I obviously can't win... You've already reasoned that my opinions aren't valid - however I answer.

If you want to bait me into crying, then carry on, because I'm halfway there already. You're no longer conversing with me but attempting to trip me up.

Justin1972UK said:

I am not Justin i am saying that your position is untenable with comparisons like that. So you didnt like Steve Irwin.....fine, he didnt spark off a war that killed 55 million people, he didnt exterminate 6 million Jews, he didnt set about conducting genocide and systematically eradicating undesirables. Instead you didnt like his TV persona andthe way he did things.
C'mon mate i have already told you that your opinion is fine. You were not censored you were offensive. Just accept it and move on.It is about empathy. How often have YOU been shown that here.
How about if you posted a thread like you did a while ago about being depressed and i had posted all over that "depressed people are just lazy and need to suck it up and get a life"...would that be kind or well timed or sensitive?????
By your method i am entitled to my opinion and should express it in a public forum wherever and whenever i see fit.....

mdiver said:

I have explained my reasons for using using one facet of Hitler's iconography as a metaphor - that being his idolisation by a hysterical nation at a specific point in history... Not his "sparking off a war"; Not his mass-murder of jews and "undesirables"...

mdiver said:

I don't respect anybody whom exploits animals for entertainment.

mdiver said:

"Fine" so long as I don't express it?

mdiver said:

I was censored and I was not offensive. Disrepectful - yes... But whether or not you find disrespect for an individual, organisation or ideology offensive, is relative based on your own opinions.

mdiver said:

Not very often over the last five or six years.

mdiver said:

It would have been well-timed and insensitive. What is your point? I suffer from depression but am also a forum member at this site. As far as I am aware, a basic tenet of this site's membership is to respect other forum members. If I wasn't a member of Prince.org and posted whilst feeling low on AnyOtherRandomSite.com you would be well within your rights to comment about my behaviour here. In the same fashion, I was well within my rights to post about Steve Irwin (and the media circus following his death) as he was evidently not a member of Prince.org.

mdiver said:

No. Because posting something like "depressed people are just lazy and need to suck it up and get a life" would be expressing a thoughtless prejudice towards those with mental illness, rather than a valid, informed opinion.