Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Disable your ad blocker to continue using our website.
AMod wrote: ↑Sun Oct 21, 2018 4:58 pm
if they keep turning into sectarian bun-fights with no philosophical point then they will be gone.
But I thought philosophy encompasses EVERYTHING related to human affairs and enquiry? Now sectarianism is off the list? This looks like special pleading to me...
AMod wrote: ↑Sun Oct 21, 2018 4:58 pm
I'll leave threads alone if the thread starter takes some responsibility for moderating them by reporting off-topic posts,
And I imagine I am only contributing to this thread because one of my threads got deleted. Despite it being related to philosophical discourse. Or exposing the dishonest lack thereof. So when I do take it in my own hands to 'moderate content' or ensure that some modicum of reasonable discourse is maintained I am censored. Not even the courtesy to explain why.
I guess you don't really know what you want either. Might makes right
This is private enterprise. If you don't like a service, you try another. Isn't that why you voted Republican? Because you are a tough, independent American who can look after himself without gummint looking after you?
Well, there's no one to look after you now but all you do is whine and moan rather than just get with it.
TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Sun Oct 21, 2018 8:03 pm
And I imagine I am only contributing to this thread because one of my threads got deleted. Despite it being related to philosophical discourse. Or exposing the dishonest lack thereof. So when I do take it in my own hands to 'moderate content' or ensure that some modicum of reasonable discourse is maintained I am censored. Not even the courtesy to explain why.
I guess you don't really know what you want either. Might makes right
How is your crusade against people who call out your dishonesties, coming along? No more "courts of public opinion"?
Atla wrote: ↑Sun Oct 21, 2018 9:54 pm
How is your crusade against people who call out your dishonesties, coming along? No more "courts of public opinion"?
You mean people who call out my scientifically, empirically and evidence-backed claims and falsely accuse me of "dishonesty" without repercussion or justification of any sort?
It's going just fine. The rules have changed a little. Stand by
Greta wrote: ↑Sun Oct 21, 2018 9:44 pm
Where is the problem, Henry?
This is private enterprise. If you don't like a service, you try another. Isn't that why you voted Republican? Because you are a tough, independent American who can look after himself without gummint looking after you?
Well, there's no one to look after you now but all you do is whine and moan rather than just get with it.
Soft.
Ownership trumps events that have worldwide impact upon whether or not people can afford the luxury of philosophy? Not in the real world, only in bubbles.
Greta wrote: ↑Sun Oct 21, 2018 9:44 pm
Where is the problem, Henry?
This is private enterprise. If you don't like a service, you try another. Isn't that why you voted Republican? Because you are a tough, independent American who can look after himself without gummint looking after you?
Well, there's no one to look after you now but all you do is whine and moan rather than just get with it.
Soft.
Ownership trumps events that have worldwide impact upon whether or not people can afford the luxury of philosophy? Not in the real world, only in bubbles.
How about if we just drop all foreign aid to the world and use those resources for domestic benefit?
This site is a private affair: the owner and his proxies can do as they like, for any reason they like.
No explanations should be expected, no considerations offered.
Understand: I think Amod is wrong (and I'll damn well say it, over and over and over in this thread), but my (your) assessment doesn't mean diddly.
Lobbying the powers that be is like fartin' against thunder.
So: stay and live with the capricious uncertainties or go and satisfy principle.
...and...
This site is privately owned and administered with strict boundaries. Within, the owner and proxies act with impunity; without, they ain't jack shit. There's nuthin' the owner or proxies can do to stop you or him or her from buildin' a site where you or him or her call the shots and compete overtly with the PN site.
That is: the owner and proxies can only deny you their site, but not any other. This may be wrong-headed but it ain't censoring.
Walker wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 12:48 am
A mod is like a wall that protects the borders of a sovereign country.
Not just anything (posting) is allowed into the country, and the country sets the rules for getting in.
Each posting is a port of entry.
We’re the migrants.
This is the same argument used by those favoring censorship while professing freedom of thought in matters of philosophy. The contradiction is interesting and a meaningful effort to discuss but is practically impossible to do so. Why reveals a lot about us.
A better analogy is that the site owners and mods have held an open dinner party and hope that the guests will show some respect, as opposed to pushiness and self entitlement.
Greta wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 5:01 am
A better analogy is that the site owners and mods have held an open dinner party and hope that the guests will show some respect, as opposed to pushiness and self entitlement.
But if the open dinner party is for the purpose of discussing philosophy then to deny it is false advertising and only contributes to the degeneration of the value of philosophical ideas. That is what you don't understand as a mod.
