Thread: Hey DU...so much for the "big tent"

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32
  1. #11  
    Resident Grump
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    7,767
    Could someone explain to me the point of this thread?
    DU.

    Hypocrisy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,578
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonnabend View Post
    DU.

    Hypocrisy.
    Well thats a givin :)

    Ok but why was hamp getting all snarky?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member KCornett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kal ee forn ya
    Posts
    123
    Yeah... what was the original message. I missed it!!!
    "If you're going through Hell... Keep on going"-Rodney Atkins
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    NeunElfer SuperMod hampshirebrit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    TehYuk
    Posts
    3,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Lars1701a View Post
    Ok but why was hamp getting all snarky?
    Why was hamp getting all snarky?

    Well, that's a good question; one well asked, and one well deserving of an equally good answer.

    Can you say "double standard"?

    Well, I can, because double standards are exactly what were shown by the OP.

    For in this thread, the OP has, very deceitfully and unwisely, shown a double standard, one that has no place on CU, nor on any other board that would like to call itself conservative.

    And in itself, although I doubt many will agree, that answer is good enough for me, for no other reason other than the fact that it has an impact on my beloved CU.

    I do care about CU, more than you might think. I have been a member here (despite what my tag-line might say), for quite a long time, longer than most people here, not that that makes any difference, but that's how it is. I left, I came back, and when I did, I only knew Ed, SR, SLW and one or two others. That's how goddamn long I've been around.

    What I always admired about CU was that unpopular views could be expressed and debated, without risk of banning...in other words, you would have to work at earning a ban. You would need to be a troll, and a semi literate troll at that, before, after quite a long time, you would get the ban hammer landing on your head.

    There was none of that "you will apologize for not calling him President Bush" crap back then. There was no eagerness, no blood lust, no (or very little) pressure placed on admins to ban members.

    Only the stupidest, dumbest, most troll-like posters got banned. And only after being given enough rope to hang themselves. And never, as far as I recall, after having had a >25 post birthday w00t thread started by the admin of the board.

    I came to CU to do what we Brits call "taking the piss". But you know what happened? CU changed my views on a lot of things. One thing, I learned to debate, because CU gave me that space.

    You know what it took? Seeing and partaking in debate with intelligent people from both sides. And having some of them showing me, not telling me, that it was not the best thing to do to insult others, if you want to win a point. OK, get a jab in here or there for comic effect, but that's not really the point.

    You know what would have killed it for me? Having some auslander telling me that this is the last warning and I will apologize NOW for calling the President "Bush" instead of "President Bush".

    Fuck that shit (and while you do that, you can pardon my fuckin' French, too) :D

    I might or might not (well, I do) despise my own Prime Minister, but I would not expect any foreigner, or even any Brit, to tell me how I should or should not refer to him on a political discussion site.

    We need dissent, otherwise the site will become an echo-chamber, and it will die.

    Now, let's not beat around the bush here ... freedom of speech is a good thing, but some things are unacceptable, and attacks on family members fall within that category, and that should be made clear and sanctioned immediately by moderators. We should nip such things in the bud, and put an early end to them, in such a way that it does not lead to a banning.

    CW may or may not have been banned for good reasons. I have my own view, which I have made clear. I have also made it clear that I will support SR on this matter.

    But to see Sonnabend crowing about how ban-happy DU is, to see him saying "hypocrite" about others, when he is clearly one himself, is a hypocrisy that I cannot let stand unchallenged.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,578
    Quote Originally Posted by hampshirebrit View Post
    Why was hamp getting all snarky?

    Well, that's a good question; one well asked, and one well deserving of an equally good answer.

    Can you say "double standard"?

    Well, I can, because double standards are exactly what were shown by the OP.

    For in this thread, the OP has, very deceitfully and unwisely, shown a double standard, one that has no place on CU, nor on any other board that would like to call itself conservative.

    And in itself, although I doubt many will agree, that answer is good enough for me, for no other reason other than the fact that it has an impact on my beloved CU.

    I do care about CU, more than you might think. I have been a member here (despite what my tag-line might say), for quite a long time, longer than most people here, not that that makes any difference, but that's how it is. I left, I came back, and when I did, I only knew Ed, SR, SLW and one or two others. That's how goddamn long I've been around.

    What I always admired about CU was that unpopular views could be expressed and debated, without risk of banning...in other words, you would have to work at earning a ban. You would need to be a troll, and a semi literate troll at that, before, after quite a long time, you would get the ban hammer landing on your head.

    There was none of that "you will apologize for not calling him President Bush" crap back then. There was no eagerness, no blood lust, no (or very little) pressure placed on admins to ban members.

    Only the stupidest, dumbest, most troll-like posters got banned. And only after being given enough rope to hang themselves. And never, as far as I recall, after having had a >25 post birthday w00t thread started by the admin of the board.

    I came to CU to do what we Brits call "taking the piss". But you know what happened? CU changed my views on a lot of things. One thing, I learned to debate, because CU gave me that space.

    You know what it took? Seeing and partaking in debate with intelligent people from both sides. And having some of them showing me, not telling me, that it was not the best thing to do to insult others, if you want to win a point. OK, get a jab in here or there for comic effect, but that's not really the point.

    You know what would have killed it for me? Having some auslander telling me that this is the last warning and I will apologize NOW for calling the President "Bush" instead of "President Bush".

    Fuck that shit (and while you do that, you can pardon my fuckin' French, too) :D

    I might or might not (well, I do) despise my own Prime Minister, but I would not expect any foreigner, or even any Brit, to tell me how I should or should not refer to him on a political discussion site.

    We need dissent, otherwise the site will become an echo-chamber, and it will die.

    Now, let's not beat around the bush here ... freedom of speech is a good thing, but some things are unacceptable, and attacks on family members fall within that category, and that should be made clear and sanctioned immediately by moderators. We should nip such things in the bud, and put an early end to them, in such a way that it does not lead to a banning.

    CW may or may not have been banned for good reasons. I have my own view, which I have made clear. I have also made it clear that I will support SR on this matter.

    But to see Sonnabend crowing about how ban-happy DU is, to see him saying "hypocrite" about others, when he is clearly one himself, is a hypocrisy that I cannot let stand unchallenged.

    Well thank you for the in depth answer :D


    I just saw sonna post that blirb from DU and no pretext on why and then you posted a reply. I was like wow whats going on? Thats what I like about CU and other sites is that you have to be really bad to get banned.
    I did'nt like CW for many reason but should he have been banned? who's to say. On the other hand eyelids lasted WAY longer then anyone had the right to last :D
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    NeunElfer SuperMod hampshirebrit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    TehYuk
    Posts
    3,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Lars1701a View Post
    Well thank you for the in depth answer :D


    I just saw sonna post that blirb from DU and no pretext on why and then you posted a reply. I was like wow whats going on? Thats what I like about CU and other sites is that you have to be really bad to get banned.
    I did'nt like CW for many reason but should he have been banned? who's to say. On the other hand eyelids lasted WAY longer then anyone had the right to last :D
    Fair enough...you had the right to ask.

    Anyway, you nailed it ... you do have to be bad to be banned here. And that's fine by me, that's how it should be. That's what puts us above DU.

    That, and that and our mods are generally not hypocrites about the whole thing. We don't seek to censor while simultaneously bitching about censorship.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Betwixt Member Bubba Dawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In my own private Alamo on The Mountain in Georgia
    Posts
    13,581
    Quote Originally Posted by hampshirebrit View Post
    Why was hamp getting all snarky?

    Well, that's a good question; one well asked, and one well deserving of an equally good answer.

    Can you say "double standard"?

    Well, I can, because double standards are exactly what were shown by the OP.

    For in this thread, the OP has, very deceitfully and unwisely, shown a double standard, one that has no place on CU, nor on any other board that would like to call itself conservative.

    And in itself, although I doubt many will agree, that answer is good enough for me, for no other reason other than the fact that it has an impact on my beloved CU.

    I do care about CU, more than you might think. I have been a member here (despite what my tag-line might say), for quite a long time, longer than most people here, not that that makes any difference, but that's how it is. I left, I came back, and when I did, I only knew Ed, SR, SLW and one or two others. That's how goddamn long I've been around.

    What I always admired about CU was that unpopular views could be expressed and debated, without risk of banning...in other words, you would have to work at earning a ban. You would need to be a troll, and a semi literate troll at that, before, after quite a long time, you would get the ban hammer landing on your head.

    There was none of that "you will apologize for not calling him President Bush" crap back then. There was no eagerness, no blood lust, no (or very little) pressure placed on admins to ban members.

    Only the stupidest, dumbest, most troll-like posters got banned. And only after being given enough rope to hang themselves. And never, as far as I recall, after having had a >25 post birthday w00t thread started by the admin of the board.

    I came to CU to do what we Brits call "taking the piss". But you know what happened? CU changed my views on a lot of things. One thing, I learned to debate, because CU gave me that space.

    You know what it took? Seeing and partaking in debate with intelligent people from both sides. And having some of them showing me, not telling me, that it was not the best thing to do to insult others, if you want to win a point. OK, get a jab in here or there for comic effect, but that's not really the point.

    You know what would have killed it for me? Having some auslander telling me that this is the last warning and I will apologize NOW for calling the President "Bush" instead of "President Bush".

    Fuck that shit (and while you do that, you can pardon my fuckin' French, too) :D

    I might or might not (well, I do) despise my own Prime Minister, but I would not expect any foreigner, or even any Brit, to tell me how I should or should not refer to him on a political discussion site.

    We need dissent, otherwise the site will become an echo-chamber, and it will die.

    Now, let's not beat around the bush here ... freedom of speech is a good thing, but some things are unacceptable, and attacks on family members fall within that category, and that should be made clear and sanctioned immediately by moderators. We should nip such things in the bud, and put an early end to them, in such a way that it does not lead to a banning.

    CW may or may not have been banned for good reasons. I have my own view, which I have made clear. I have also made it clear that I will support SR on this matter.

    But to see Sonnabend crowing about how ban-happy DU is, to see him saying "hypocrite" about others, when he is clearly one himself, is a hypocrisy that I cannot let stand unchallenged.

    Nicely stated Hamps. I agree.

    I don't mind a good argument, in fact I relish it. CW added much to the quality of debate here by the depth of his knowledge and his wit and style.

    I don't know the details of why he was banned. I will support SR in his right to do as he sees fit. I am also grateful that we here are free to discuss even as constroversial a subject as this one, without intimidation.
    I do feel the freedom to say that I think and feel differently on this matter. Such freedom of expression is something special that makes CU what it is.

    I wasn't sure if Sonna's original post was intended as a dig at CW or a backhanded insult for those of us here who liked CW, or if it was what he said it was. The fact that I was unsure of the intent of his post could mean that it was in poor taste, or that I am being overly sensitive. Either way, rightly or wrongly, it raised my hackles.

    I respect Sonna. He is one of only a few members whose every post I read. I learn from him, and find him interesting as well as provocative. Sometimes I agree with him, and at other times I couldn't disagree with him more. But I am always glad that he is posting here. As I was with CW.
    Hey careful man! There's a beverage here!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    BSR
    Guest
    To the dome we go... :D
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    BSR
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by hampshirebrit View Post
    I do care about CU, more than you might think. I have been a member here (despite what my tag-line might say), for quite a long time, longer than most people here, not that that makes any difference, but that's how it is. I left, I came back, and when I did, I only knew Ed, SR, SLW and one or two others. That's how goddamn long I've been around.
    Was that the second CU crash?


    Noob...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Senior Member Ree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Nashnille
    Posts
    977
    Quote Originally Posted by BSR View Post
    Was that the second CU crash?


    Noob...
    Third I think...:p
    Say what ya mean and get to the point quick....I don't have the attention span to listen to bullshit...

    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •