Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Pastimes : Religion on SI -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (5)	8/16/1998 6:03:00 PM
From: Little Engine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1542

To clarify, and not to get into a knock-downer: I agree with you completely on your point that GNET can run this place however they want. This is a private "club", if you will, and they can exclude whomever they want, and enforce whatever TOS they want, as long as everyone knows the rules. I'll agree that "Evil Emile" is a world-class moron. And if I thought his idiocy should go unchallenged, I would have never answered any of his posts. TOS rules here, you must admit, are pretty damn vague. They ban "improper or otherwise objectionable" posts which means... what, exactly? I've been suspended for something not written in the rules. The rules need more definition. So, no, the purpose of SI may not be to promote free speech and totally open discussions, and they surely do not have to adopt that standard. But should they strive for free speech to the greatest extent possible, whether that means allowing "bashers" on a board or giving bigots some (not total) ranting room? It's a close call, but I tend to think so.

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (5)	8/17/1998 7:47:00 PM
From: marcos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1542

This is a hard one, Tastes. That is indeed an evil little piece of scum that wouldn't hesitate to silence anybody not obeying the rules it sets up, given the power to do so. And you're right, it's not about First Amendment rights - they belong here to SI. We're on private property and they can run it as they choose. It's a personal decision to vote yes or no, that's all. Having by some incompletely thought-out sort of principle never called for anybody's termination before, I find it hard to do so now. But I'll think about it. The one thing I've reported to SI Bob has been threats - physical threats or the posting of a poster's identity and location, which amounts to the same thing. This little crossburner would be a threat if it had any power, but it's hard to see how it would gain any power here. Also it never quite spells out the threat, it is skilled in the use of codewords and tends to employ some weird concept of Christ as a 'freedom of religion' shield. Very cunning. But a clear and present threat? - I dunno. Extremely offensive, no question. I tend to lean to vote yes on your petition, but would like to think about it. Not lightly done. Also - I think you have to consider the effects of booting it - it can then start up somewhere else screaming 'censorship' and gain a wider platform by that. Although - Who cares and what can ya do anyway?? .... I'll think about it ........ salud