SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
SI - Site Forums : Silicon Investor - Legacy Interface Discussion (2004-2011)
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: mph who wrote (4860)9/26/2006 9:55:32 AM
From: Solon  Read Replies (1) of 6035
 
Excellent post! You've covered the issues clearly and intelligibly.

The contract (as most of us came into SI) was about censorship being confined to TOU and segregation corresponding likewise. Now we have experienced a small but vocal minority of people whose primary problem is (as you say) a need for control--and an overweening intolerance of diverse opinion. Now, most of us are so constituted and socialized that we can dialogue with others of diverse views--and this generally leads to a greater maturity and a more accurate and nuanced perspective on life. Thus a Democrat may discuss with a Republican; A christian may dialogue with a Jew...and so forth. But others seem incapable of moving beyond a sense of Absolute Right. It seems to me that this is basically a phenomenon of self absorption and an inability to see people as--well...people.

Such people seem incapable of looking beyond their own narrow selfishness. One advocate of censorship opined on this thread that he favored "gated communities" on SI. Well, that is just fine. Let SI offer membership upgrades to purchase gated communities for an appropriate fee. Using the resources of SI to play in a private sandbox and to censure and segregate ought to come at an appropriate dollar value as it does in the real world. None of us bought into a censorship ideology. Those needing to have special restaurant booths and fountains ought to pay for such a dubious privilege. We could have a category of threads termed "CENSORSHIP COMMUNITIES" for these people. Those wishing to pay the appropriate fee could then associate themselves with such thinking.

In the meantime, many moderators exercise abuse to an extreme level and diminish the value of the SI membership and experience. There is one moderator (and probably many) who routinely tears people out of dialogue without informing them. I recall in my case that I had spent 20 minutes composing a post to someone only to find that I had been banned without cause, without admonition, and without divulgence. These moderators ought to be held accountable for such abusive treatment of SI members. Such an expectation is a simple regard for being fair, decent, and above board.

Let us face it, mph: All of this "controversy" is contrived to coddle a kindergarten mentality. Mature adults segregate people on the basis of unlawful behavior within their community--NOT on their race, color, politics, religion, or opinion on any issue. A small but vocal minority on SI are kindergarten pupils. I mean, can you believe an adult would beat his/her breast screaming they want banning privileges against other members of the community whom are lawfully engaged in dialogue?? YUCK. Hardly the behavior of adults.

I looked at your link and skimmed it. Very interesting. Obviously not something that can be assimilated over a quick read but I have experienced workshops that touched on such dynamics. Thanks! Now please allow me to add a rec to your post. I think that is a kindergarten game as well but my rec is a sincere one.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News