Free Speech

[Lydiot]

And my personal commentary on the situation:
Just because someone else throws around stupid terms does not excuse one's own stupidity to engage in the same. There appear to be more people than Lydiot who needs to bone up on Godwin's law, Reductio ad Hitlerum and just how insulting it is to all victims of the Holocaust to have any sort of hyperbolic comparison drawn to the National Socialist party - any such comparison accuses the linked subject to some of the most absolutely horrid acts EVER committed in history and needs to be handled VERY carefully lest your audience immediately start disregarding everything else you say. (Which is true even if the comparison is valid.)

'Nuff Said from me, I'm reasonably sure.

I respect your opinion, and I don't disagree with it.

Let me just point out however that there are different ways of making a point, different ways of expressing a point. When I wrote that sig I expressed myself in a way I've expressed myself before. The point of phrasing it the way I did is that it is line of reasoning used by those it is addressed to. In other words, I don't literally think someone is the Fuhrer (which is obvious since he's dead), but it's also true that I don't think the person is like the Fuhrer.

The point refers to free speech and hypocrisy, nothing else. So while it may seem that I'm being hypocritical by having the sig and saying I agree with you, you need to look at what I said on this issue and you'll see that the point is actually not a literal comparison of some random Nazi, but instead about free speech and hypocrisy.

I just wanted to make that clear, because there is a huge difference.

[Lydiot]

Do you really have so much time to loose with this mess ?
@Lydiot: I think you're wrong for 2 reasons:
- 1st, any forum cannot be completely 'free-spoken', it's a matter of law. So, when a forum open a "freespeech" thread, it's a fake, it cannot really be, any publication on the internet must respect the law and must be moderated. It's a fact. Perhaps you disagree with this, so open your own forum and say what you want, you will be the only one responsible of what you say.

I don't disagree with this, but my point is that when the owner of the forum not only acts a certain way, but also starts attacks on others, surely this is a sign of what the forum is allowed to be?

Or, in other words; are you ok with a forum in which the owner is allowed to attack others and they aren't allowed to respond in kind?

I'm ok with firmer rules, and I will stick to them, but if someone attacks me first I would expect to be allowed to respond - OR - they should be taken care of. Neither has happened here. Hence the signature.

- 2cd: I don't know the whole story, perhaps it was some abuse from the forum's moderation like it seems to be, but you cannot threat someone like you do: sic "Der Fuhrer" (and please, fix it; we write der Führer in German). A führer is litteraly a leader, no more. But "Der Führer" is commonly associated with the leader of the "National Socialism" aka the Nazi Adolph H. during WW2. Naming somebody like this is really bad. It's not anecdotal. I'm always very sad to see this name coming back from time to time, as if it doesn't count for anything. It counts, as if you threat somebody a pedophile or something like. I'm really sad to see this fucking name here. You're a true asshole for this, you don't know what you're talking about. You don't know who is reading this forum, you ignore the story of many European peoples as I am, you don't know what this name really means.

Is it as bad as calling someone "Eichmann"?

See the point I'm making now?

[Lydiot]

I didn't read JWocky's entire post, but I will simply leave you with this:

1. Owner attacks a member.
2. Member responds in kind.
3. Owner calls member a troll because he had the audacity of responding in kind.
4. Owner calls for member to be excluded from the community.

All without review and investigation, well, except for being behind the scenes.

That's what you want?

[Lydiot]

Hear Hear! JWocky.

Deja Vu again....

[bomber]

You know I don't care who attacked who first... it's irrelevant, clearly there is an issue here and as the attacks are public so must be the response.... If it'd been done using PM's I could understand the response in PM's... but this has not been the case here has it, or has it ?

Now

4. Owner calls for member to be excluded from the community.

wow, that's a new one..... but also something earlier bothers me.... 'threats of physical violence'... now why would anyone say that ?

So we got these half truths and rumours.... I gota ask... Is this how you envisaged this thread going Vincent when you started it ?

But back to my first sentence.... what the feck is going on ?

Simon

[KL-666]

Hello Bomber,

No i did not envisage this. The topic is free speech and the role of name calling. I opened with saying that i see no role for name calling in free speech. Unfortunately i did not hear many opinions on that, because Lydiot immediately went off-topic about some grudge of his. Thereby he tried to make something that was done with the most integrity, look like he had been molested in the worst possible way. So i had to explain about what had really happened on Lydiots off-topic topic. And the original topic was fucked.

If you want to know what the feck is going on (on Lydiots off-topic topic), read my posts here. You can learn how the moderators really function. You may disagree with our choices, but you can not say that we do not do our utmost for integrity. If you have questions, do ask.

In short, Lydiot and Jwocky each got a letter from Israel, David and me with some advice how each of them can help themselves to avoid the big clashes between them. That is all to it. No lengthy behind the scenes debating or molesting of Lydiot, as he likes to make you believe.

Kind regards, Vincent

[IAHM-COL]

Hear Hear! JWocky.

Deja Vu again....

Exact my point. Do not think we did not mention this iterations on your past on this board (including the way you treated Simbambin) when we were discussing how to deal with J+Lydiot's roster-fight.

Somehow, I keep thinking that the best I can do is to establish a betting ring and make myself some wealth at the expense of your blood.

[IAHM-COL]

Now... onto some clarifications:

1. No one has ever been banned in this forum. Members that have left had done on their own intention

2. No one's words have ever been "edited" or "deleted". Anything, anyone has needed to say on this board have been left untouched by all the admin and moderators. We can criticize/question/counterargument with or without power-hat on. But we had respected your right to express yourselves both in your defense and others'.

3. The Free "Flight" Free Speech Forum stands for "Free Flight" but allows "Free Fight" when parties are willing to engage.

4. We do not have any mechanism/protocol of member banning. I am philosophically opposed to such, since banning and other forms of repression are counterproducing to freedom of thought and speech. (Exception: I had previously removed accounts that are deemed spam-bots and their click-baits)

5. We do not "actively" moderate any topic on this forum. The admin and moderation team only steps in to "Moderate" when we are called into a conflict. I preffer you think of us as "conflict mediators" if able. In this sense of ideas, anytime a Moderator or admin enters any discussion in any situation other than being called in for conflict mediation, he does so without any moderator hat on.

6. I do not support democratically-functioning judicial systems -- let aside democratically-functioning lynching systems (such as voting to ban or impose a signature change for anyone here). [C'Mon, let's give ourselves a break. 2016 was already golden year of democracy choices. Let's take a break of that! ]

7. I found Lydiot's signature Ludicrous. I can understand why Vincent felt it personal and began this thread of :Let's talk about Lydiot's Signature:.
Objectively speaking maybe the signature itself is not ludicrous. I just don't know where he is at with it. At all levels: literally, etymologically - historically, or asthetically (why does the chars shrink sort to speak).

8. I can understand Lydiot feeling overzealous that JWocky requested us to moderate him on a certain thread, but it is my opinion that a) the moderator team found the need to recommend a Bilateral conflict resolution recipe, b) JWocky clearly did not go all "Fuhrer" on Lydiot, cause he actually step out of the power-sphere and granted others the opportunity of calling the shots, and c) JWocky accepted our recommendations more humbly than Lydiot and his signature move. Back to 1 to 4 above, in any case, Lydiot being banned can't be even be considered under the fundamentals of our Free Speech forum. (note: besides, this is not the first time someone requests Moderation actions from our team to Lydiot. In fact Lydiot is record holder in this category here)

9. Who throws the first stone between JWocky and Lydiot becomes blurried with "alternative facts" (TM). And who's the worst offender becomes a topic of utter uninterest to the moderators' team in this case. The moderation recommendations that were send purposedfully ignored who was first and who was worst. It just emphasized in the fight-team graphically depicted by dogs above, and our recommendations to both of them is to step-away of engagement.

10. Personally, I think forbidding any mention of Historic characters, including certain Germans, is out-of-boundaries. If Lydiot wants to add a certain german "Leader" in his signature and he finds a twisted logic to do so, I think that "granted-it-is-ludicrous-to-me" is not a direct violation of any rule on this forum per-se.

11. Must Lydiot comply with our recommendations? Clearly not. Must JWocky comply with those of his? Clearly not. The moderator's team find the recommendations senseful and wish them the best of future interactions, but else, I can enjoy the blood-shed too (I guess). But with the best interest of any forum member in sight, I do hope they keep some distance of each other's neck.

12. From now on, to make sure Lydiot's signature is valid, he must send JWocky a private message of anything he plans to post, and only after JWocky approves his message he can post it (IH-COL giggles :rolleyes: :not-entertained: :irony: )

IH-COL

[KL-666]

I did not call you Der Fuhrer. Learn how to read.

Why that's funny, earlier you told me that your signature attributes to me.

The signature absolutely expresses principles opposite to free speech, and by inference attributes it to JWocky and you people!

I was already wondering when you would come up with this twist.

For some mad reason you set out to cause maximal damage to the moderators. Thus you paint a picture as if you had been molested by them, by twisting and lying about a very kind letter you know they will not disclose. Admittedly your story is going down quite well. Bomber even believes that i am Stuart now. But lying is a difficult business. You need to remember every single word you said.

You are not going to get away with your little scheme. Not on my watch.

Kind regards, Vincent

[KB7]

@IAHM-COL and @Vincent, comments understood and thank you for the explanations. Moderation is always a difficult job (the only exception being when you let genuine and unrestricted free-for-alls happen with nothing ever done at all, which is not moderation.)