Forum Post: Is censorship alive and kicking on this forum?
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 27, 2011, 8:06 a.m. EST by theCheat
(85)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
just curious.
Public Forum
0 comments 2 days ago by agkaiser
1 comments 1 week ago by agkaiser
0 comments 3 weeks ago by agkaiser
1 comments 1 month ago by agkaiser
0 comments 2 months ago by factsrfun
7 comments 2 months ago by factsrfun
4 comments 2 months ago by factsrfun
4 comments 2 months ago by factsrfun
4 comments 3 months ago by gsw
7 comments 3 months ago by factsrfun
3 comments 3 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 3 months ago by agkaiser
1 comments 4 months ago by grapes
2 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
4 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
2 comments 5 months ago by rachelodell
2 comments 7 months ago by gsw
2 comments 11 months ago by factsrfun
5 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
6 comments 2 years ago by grapes
15 comments 2 years ago by gsw
12 comments 2 years ago by BrentWeirick81
30 comments 2 years ago by ChicagoCitizen
Actually it is censored. And they come up with excuses as to why they do things like selectivly change the names of poiliticians. They will claim that is not censorship but the definition of the word is.
Censorship -- the control of the information and ideas circulated within a society
(Straight from DICTIONARY.COM) MODERATE - kept or keeping within reasonable or proper limits; not extreme, excessive, or intense (Straight from the FORUM RULES) We do not support an election campaign for 2012. At all. We have removed election material for Obama, Paul, Warren, Paul, Cain, Paul, Perry, Paul, the green party, Paul, Nader, Paul, and did I mention Paul? The spamming by the Ron Lawl 2012 fan club was getting out of hand. We will continue to remove such material and any call for the Paul 2012 campaign will, at this point, be considered spamming. End of. We're tired of hearing about it. Main street debates are also largely off topic. (Straight from the URBAN DICTIONARY) SPAMMING - someone being a dumbass on a forum and posting useless crap of no relevance or amusement
I will make a statement.
During the presidential debate Ron Lawl said that Herman Cain was "blaiming the victims" when Cain criticized OWS for standing up against corporate greed and government bail outs.
That is not spam and it has been censored plain and simple.
One has nothing to do with the other. The problem, as stated in the forum rules, is an excessive amount of campaigning on behalf of Ron Lawl. I agree with you, it is censorship plain and simple. I'm only trying to present the other half of the equation, which is moderation. Are you protesting just this site's moderators, or do you object to moderation anywhere on the net? I'm pretty sure if I went on to a Christian forum and started a pro Satan post they would censor me in a heartbeat. That may be an extreme example, but I hope you see where I'm coming from.
Telling me about other forums policies of censorship does not change that censorship exists here. I am personally against censorship in any form. I am not saying this site does not have a right to censor, I just think they people should admit that it is censorship. Let’s not pretend.
As I said before, it is unwanted speech that needs protection. There is no need to protect acceptable speech.
That sounds reasonable to me.
These is but one example of how I became jaded and gave up on both the tea party movement and OWS.
Both started as worthy protests in my opinion. Both of these movements took on the traits of those they are protesting. While they went in different directions they both are outwardly hypocritical.
Me and you should start a jaded party. But if I can be more serious. I take a different view on hypocrisy. I start from the standpoint that there is a hypocrite in each and everyone of us. So I look to see how unchecked an individual or group's hypocrisy runs. For my bang, Occupy passes on the following criteria: One of their major claims to fame is that they are not and will not elect a leader. So far, they have stayed true to that. If they become hypocrites to that oath, I will bail. Otherwise, I won't sweat the little stuff. But to each his own view.
I have come to believe that OWS is for the most part a bunch of self important, self righteous, self affected losers.
I'm truly sorry to hear that. I know so little about you and you know so little about me. I hope you don't attribute (my) comments to an entire movement and are using that for the basis of forming your belief. I am just trying to share my views. I do understand your frustrations with censorship and hypocrisy. I only hope that despite those frustrations you can come here in the future, not for Ron Lawl, but for yourself, and share your personal views on what you see going on in the country. Because it might help somebody see a different perspective lacking here. Peace.
No it is a feeling I have in general.
I was pro Tea Party when that started. It started as a cyber movement to send a teabag to congress to protest George Bush and the bailouts. Then they got all right wing conservative on me.
This movement started out very similar. It started with protesting the bailouts, government subsidies, and against crony capitalism. Then it got all left wing socialist/anti capitalism on me.
That is a dilemma. May I ask if you've read the declaration of Occupy Wall Street published to the Internet on Sept. 30, 2011? And if so, what parts of it do you agree/disagree with? Do you agree with their views on corporations?
http://usliberals.about.com/od/socialsecurity/a/Declaration-Manifesto-Of-Occupy-Wall-Street-Movement.htm
I would say I agree with about 30% of that. My problem is that it is a big list of complaints and not a prolem/solution document. A good portion of the list is history.
I found this useful for myself. There are people on here trying hard to rally around solutions that everyone in the 99% can get behind.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-only-issue-the-only-issue-get-money-out-of-pol/
[Removed]
On this site, censorship is basically a two letter change: Ron Paul, to Ron Lawl. That's it. Two measly letters. Everything else goes. You can say anything your fanciful little mind wants. Two letters don't stop you from expression ideas or passing along information.
What is most disturbing is that people like you minimizing it by saying it is only two measly letters. You don't see the hypocrisy in that statement.
It is unwanted speech that needs to be protected.
I don't see it as hypocrisy because I have used other forums, and I very well know this is by far the least censored of them all. Go to the Ron Paul forums and start one hundred threads on Occupy. They will all be deleted. The posts here remain. Everyone knows Ron Lawl is Ron Paul. It's an easter egg by the programmer. A little joke. It doesn't stop you from talking about him and passing along any ideas and information you want. Again, everything goes here. Talk about whatever you want, but don't waste your time crying about censorship because of a little easter egg. It makes you look absolutely ridiculous.
Deliberately changing information programmatically is censorship.
Pretending it is not and claiming to be the least censored forum is the hypocrisy.
There is no such thing as “least censored”. It’s like saying "he was the least murdered person".
It's called an Easter Egg, not censorship per your definition. Provide some serious arguments. How does this measly two letter modification stop you from passing along ideas and information? Give us examples of ideas and information you are not able to discuss here because of this Easter Egg.
LOL,
You now you have a fancy name for censorship.
That is not the definition of an easter egg by the way. An easter egg is a hidden message or program that is hidden in an application. You have to know the usually complex set of keystrokes and mouse clicks to activate the egg.
This is censorship plain and simple. You are really trying hard to pretend it is not.
I have seem dozens of posters frustrated by their inability to get their message across.
Yes, it's censorship, but so is all moderation - and moderation is the more accurate term, because it is more specific and precise.
It doesn't take a genius to know you're going for the word "censorship" because of its negative connotations, so you can head on over to the Ron Lawl fanclubs and pull the victim card because your Ron-spam isn't being tolerated.
If you want to talk about censorship, because of moderation on a forum, then it should be far more general than just OWS. Moderation is used on most forums. If it's a problem, then you should be talking about it in general and complaining about the "censorship" on antique tractor forums and such as well. Of course that would not suit your dishonest agenda ...
Changing the spelling of someone’s name automatically is not moderation it is censorship.
If I make a statement:
During the presidential debate Ron Lawl said that Herman Cain was "blaiming the victims" when Cain criticized OWS for standing up against corporate greed and government bail outs.
That is not spam and it has been censored plain and simple. There is nothing dishonest about that. I am not selling anything and I do not have an agenda. I did not start this post. I just find it amazing that folks won't admit that automatically changing someone’s name is censorship.
As I said before, it is unwanted speech that needs protection. There is no need to protect "acceptable" speech.
Individual instances aren't spam, its the tidal wave in sum that is spam. This isn't a Ron Lawl forum. Ron Lawl supporters have their own forums, and nobody here is stopping them from having them. Ergo, their free speech is not at all being threatened.
Spam and disruption of their forums, that would be an attack on their freedom of speech - and that's exactly what Ron Lawl supporters are doing here.
I have not seen this tidal wave that you are talking about.
I just scrolled down through hundreds of posts and only found a few. Ironically one is called "Official Ron Lawl haters topic" another is called "How to talk to a Ron Lawl supporter" and a third is titled “Welcome to the united states of RonPaulistan”.
In the end this forum can do whatever it wants. I thought OWS was an open group and forum where all opinions are considered and any topic could be debated. Any forum has a right to keep unwanted opinions away. I just thought this group was something it is not.
I have not seen this tidal wave that you are talking about.
Well many of us have. I count dozens of them every day.
I wonder, don't Ron Lawl supporters have a website of their own?
I thought OWS was an open group and forum where all opinions are considered and any topic could be debated.
No, it is not. It is for discussion of topics pertaining to OWS and nothing else. If you want to talk about the latest video game, exchange baking recipes, or promote Ron Lawl - there are other websites for that. This is not the place.
My problem with your statement is that you are telling me a national candidate speaking about OWS at a nationally televised debate is not "pertaining to OWS"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqau48Wz4O0&t=0m5s
How can you say that clip is not "pertaining to OWS". He hit the nail on the head and is the only person with a national voice who has.
Well my problem with your statement is that such topics aren't even deleted. The only reason for the name change is the tsunami of spam from Ron Lawl supporters on this forum who are desperate to co-opt it for themselves, by means fair or foul. This is an attack on freedom of speech.
You guys go get your own website ... you can promote yourselves there. Nobody here is stopping you. And if it were limited to an occasional post such as the one you mentioned that are actually germane, you wouldn't be causing so much hostility towards yourselves here. Your spam is unwanted. Most people here aren't Ron Lawl supporters. Stop telling us to vote for your candidate, stop trying to co-opt us, go build your own movement you lazy bastards! Seriously!
So why change the mans name?
About an hour ago I went back through several weeks of posts and did not see this "tsunami" of posts. You can do it now yourself. Just keep scrolling down and the list keeps growing back through time.
The truth is that some people were posting about the man and someone didn't like it. I see about 100 times as many posts mentioning Fox News
I've asked them to try that.
They refuse.
It's just another reason I don't trust the the minions of Mr. P.
They're hypocrites.
I used to kind of like Mr. P too. That's no longer possible.
Complaining about the censorship here is absolutely the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. It's by far the least censored forum I have ever used. Pretty much anything goes. Read some posts, you'll see.
Yes..Partial and unbalanced.
We are guests.
Freedom of information must be blocked in order to prevent this movement from being recognized as a universial one without the Left/Right Paradiagm. This movement must be hijacked by Obama bots just like the Tea Party was hi-jacked by Neo cons. I mean Tea Party for Newt Grinich WTF. Carbon taxes, against Guns , part of the Fannie mae and Freddie Problem. The tea party was created to get rid of people that didnt share the values of Smaller goverment , individual freedoms and Fiscal responsibilty. The Tea Party was made to fight people like Newt. OWS let freedom Ring. Occupy OWS.org we want to speak.
No it is not. Please prove that it is.
flooding is a greater problem
I hope it is and encourage it...if it is NOT A DIRECT statement to OWS's mission statement wether you agree with or disagree with it ,it SHOULD NOT BE ON THIS PAGE...PETA not OWS statement,Global Warming NOT OWS statement, world food shortage NOT OWS statement,war NOT OWS statement,over population NOT OWS statement,crimes against humanity not OWS statement,pro Isreal NOT OWS statement,anti Isreal not OWS statement,,,,JEEZ almost EVERYTHING ON THIS SITE NOT OWS STATEMENT.....hint everyone AGAIN: egtrra/jgtrra IS OWS fight. Now if you are a true supporter for the OWS cause you will LOOK UP those abbreviations find out where it comes from READ ON IT,"study" it,"investigate" it than speak YOUR views from your heart and mind on it,MAYBE figure out a way to HELP fairly change it for everyone NOT JUST the 99 or the 1 % but the 100%,post those opinions,views and facts.A way to change it were in 10 years from now we do not have to say ooooops that was a mistake and than blame others for it. FIRST AMMENDMENT IS GREAT but you should know what you speak b4 speaking it,especially when you are "speaking" for "all" the people
I hope it is and encourage it...if it is NOT A DIRECT statement to OWS's mission statement wether you agree with or disagree with it ,it SHOULD NOT BE ON THIS PAGE...PETA not OWS statement,Global Warming NOT OWS statement, world food shortage NOT OWS statement,war NOT OWS statement,over population NOT OWS statement,crimes against humanity not OWS statement,pro Isreal NOT OWS statement,anti Isreal not OWS statement,,,,JEEZ almost EVERYTHING ON THIS SITE NOT OWS STATEMENT.....hint everyone AGAIN: egtrra/jgtrra IS OWS fight. Now if you are a true supporter for the OWS cause you will LOOK UP those abbreviations find out where it comes from READ ON IT,"study" it,"investigate" it than speak YOUR views from your heart and mind on it,MAYBE figure out a way to HELP fairly change it for everyone NOT JUST the 99 or the 1 % but the 100%,post those opinions,views and facts.A way to change it were in 10 years from now we do not have to say ooooops that was a mistake and than blame others for it. FIRST AMMENDMENT IS GREAT but you should know what you speak b4 speaking it,especially when you are "speaking" for "all" the people
Welcome to the internet, where forums that aren't moderated fill up with zit-faced monkeys throwing faeces. This forum needs more moderation not less. Of course the monkeys who have already infested the place are flinging turds in rage at the idea of any sort of moderation, because it gets in the way of their fecal funtime.
Regretfully, yes. It appears that certain moderators are using their own yardstick to measure the likeability of posts. If THEY don't like it (for any reason whatsoever, since no explanation is ever provided), the posts will be suppressed and visible only to the submitters as long as they are logged in, but not to the community at large.
[Removed]
Just say Ron.Paul 2012 and see what happens."with out the dot" Now type in any other politicians name and see what happens. Yes censorship is alive and kicking here and they expect this to be a U.S reformation movement, that's the real LAWL.
Why bother?
He presents fiction.
RonPaul predicted the housing bubble the market crashes and is the only peace candidate. He has a steady voting record for over 20ys always sticking to the Constitution. He is the only serious choice, so i say you are representing fiction now.
He gets all the press he needs on the site you named yourself after.
Good place for him too.
He is, after all, his own conspiracy theory.
People like you are repugnant, you will never be free until you learn what it is. Allowing / agreeing with the censoring of someone will only guarantee it will happen to you.
Too late, Republicans already did.
What's that letter after Pauls name?
Why it's an (R)
The only problem is that you think a Neocon is a republican it is not. Ron.Paul is a true Republican why do you think all the Neocons hate him so much?
He's just the foil of the group.
It's not the neocons, it's the neoliberalism, and Mr. P fits right in.
That's the conspiracy theory you should be looking into.
Why be so dishonest? Ron.Paul has been fighting the Neoliberal agenda for years. He was one of the few to vote against the patriot act, the wars and the police state. You should fact check or try and prove what you are saying as it is nonsense. You are a disinfoer!!
I voted for him once, back in '88'.
You need to look closer. I've been watching him for years.
Everything about him rings false.
Investigate how many earmarks he puts into the bills he votes down, all the while he knows his fellow republicans will pass it.
He's a foil.
How many Democratic bills has he voted for or supported?
He is the conspiracy theory.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWTyHbGcUQY
Really?
Then what is he?
Do you always talk out yo ass?
That's just a political excuse.
Look deeper than a press release.
Everything about him is false.
Why don't you i have been at this for years and frankly if this is all you have on Ron.Paul that's a laughable excuse to not vote for him. Who is better then Ron.Paul that is running? I believe in America's founding documents and he is the best at protecting it...so. Ron.Paul2012
Because you've done nothing but avoid questions.
Plus, I did answer many questions and provided new info for you.
Your attitude is why I no longer trust Mr. P.
What is he?
LOL Reread the conversation you have that reversed. Seriously who do you think you're fooling?
Then you tell me, Mr. conspiracy expert.
Just what is Mr. P?
I reject and ignore your insults, out of hand.
I've looked much deeper than prisonplanet.
Have you?
Boy, why did you purposefully avoid my question? So earmarks is the only fact you could bring? Now you resorted to the moronic he is a bigot. Tell you what you stick with....? Oh yea you never said who you support just it will NEVER be a republican. I wonder if it will be a DEMOCRAT?
Because he is false, and his minions are rabid, and I will NEVER vote for any republican, ever again.
How is he false?
He's a career politician, that's not a real career politician.
He's republican, that's not a real republican.
He's a libertarian, that's not a real libertarian.
He's a conservative, that's not a real conservative.
He's an independent, that's not a real independent.
he's a bigot, that's not a bigot.
Look deeper.
He's a Christian Reconstructionist.
I don't like those.
Do you?
LOL bigot, you gave yourself away and now are completely discredited. So earmarks is the only fact you could bring? Now you resorted to the moronic he is a bigot. Tell you what you stick with....? Oh yea you never said who you support just it will NEVER be a republican. I wonder if it will be a DEMOCRAT?
He is also the true definition of a liberal.
[Removed]
No. It's the least censored forum I have ever used.
Which makes the Ron Pa ul censorship even more disturbing.
You mean Ron Paul?
Yeah Ron Lawl.
Ron Paul?
Just because you used a charactor encoding used by less than 1% does not mean that 99% of the rest of us know that trick. We are talking about censorship of the 99% not the elite 1% like you
Let's not pretend the name Ron Lawl is not changed here for 99% of us.
Two spaces between Ron and Paul; no special encoding.
Now, your little mind should be content since there is no other form of censorship around here apart from those two measly little letters. This site should win the prize for least censored forum on the Internet. Have you ever used other forums? Now, go and write Ron Paul wherever you want, but don't cry about censorship anymore.
There you go again,
It is intentional censorship. You cannot say that it is not.
You are justifying a program that changes what 99% of the people who type sees after they hit save.
Let's not pretend they are not changed intentionally. It is deliberate control of information censorship. To pretend it is not shows you are either ignorant or arrogant.
It's called an easter egg. It's a joke. Try using other forums then come back here. This one is not censored per your definition which read : "Censorship -- the control of the information and ideas circulated within a society". Again, anything goes. You can pass along all the information and ideas you want. A little Ron Lawl won't stop you from doing that. Just type two spaces and go around the easter egg. You have nothing to complain about. You're making a mountain out of a hole. Stop acting like a teenager typing from his mom's basement.
You appear more rediculous as you go along.
Now you are calling censorship a joke.
No, I called an Easter Egg a joke. I don't consider this censorship at all. Again, this forum is the least censored on the Internet. Try using other forums and you'll see what I mean. Are you an Internet newbie by any chance?
The fact that you don't consider it censorship is why you appear to be an ass.
Calling the oppression of information a joke is, in my humble opinion, worse than the oppression itself.
Ron Lawl?
A R, an o, an n, a space, a space, a P, a a, a u, and a l.
a C, an E, a N, then a S followed by an O then a R ending with SHIP.
Id ot