Why I Left Speakfree Forum

[Guest]

I left the very good speakfree because a moderator named "TheToryScum" deleted 2 threads where I labelled some convicted foreign criminals "scum".


He said the word was unnecessary and vulgar.

The second time he did it I immediately left - I felt there was nothing wrong with labelling such disgusting individuals scum and felt the reason he didn't like it was because they were foreign.

If you can't post the truth on a forum, what's the point? If you are challenged - nothing wrong with that, but moderators going behind your back changing posts and threads is just pointless.

Please discuss.

[Guest]

I left the very good speakfree because a moderator named "TheToryScum" deleted 2 threads where I labelled some convicted foreign criminals "scum".


He said the word was unnecessary and vulgar.

The second time he did it I immediately left - I felt there was nothing wrong with labelling such disgusting individuals scum and felt the reason he didn't like it was because they were foreign.

If you can't post the truth on a forum, what's the point?  If you are challenged - nothing wrong with that, but moderators going behind your back changing posts and threads is just pointless.

Please discuss.

Andy why dont you have a crack at running your own forum and find out it is nowhere near as simple and easy as you think.

I have numerous spare ones over on ADO so why not put your money where your mouth is and find out for yourself?

[Guest]

lol I knew when I saw you had posted what to expect.

Nice try sphinx - I've told you - when you post there, I will.

Much love, BA9.

[Guest]

lol I knew when I saw you had posted what to expect.

Nice try sphinx - I've told you - when you post there, I will.

Much love, BA9.

That would be far more cutting if you had actually been there to see what was posted and when - instead it demonstrates you are not visiting.

However that is dodging the issue - I am not asking you post there I am suggesting you try running your own forum and ADO is just one suggested place - you could just as easily open one on forumotion and there are thousands of other other free forum providers.

[Guest]

i think moderators are the biggest problem with forums, the biased ones are the worst of all.
moderation should be about common sense, banter is fine but pure insults with no attempt to tackle the subject should simply be removed.

[Eilzel]

Admin cannot be available at all times so Moderators a needed if a forum is to remain decent. And there is a fine line between what some consider banter and insulting, it isn't easy on Moderators, I know haha

[Guest]

Admin cannot be available at all times so Moderators a needed if a forum is to remain decent. And there is a fine line between what some consider banter and insulting, it isn't easy on Moderators, I know haha

  

[Phoenix]

I left the very good speakfree because a moderator named "TheToryScum" deleted 2 threads where I labelled some convicted foreign criminals "scum".


He said the word was unnecessary and vulgar.

The second time he did it I immediately left - I felt there was nothing wrong with labelling such disgusting individuals scum and felt the reason he didn't like it was because they were foreign.

If you can't post the truth on a forum, what's the point?  If you are challenged - nothing wrong with that, but moderators going behind your back changing posts and threads is just pointless.

Please discuss.

I find that hard to believe that your threads were moderated for the use of the word scum it is common parlance on here to describe Tories. Was the word in general banned in which case it's at least balanced or only in relation to your threads?

[Guest]

I left the very good speakfree because a moderator named "TheToryScum" deleted 2 threads where I labelled some convicted foreign criminals "scum".


He said the word was unnecessary and vulgar.

The second time he did it I immediately left - I felt there was nothing wrong with labelling such disgusting individuals scum and felt the reason he didn't like it was because they were foreign.

If you can't post the truth on a forum, what's the point?  If you are challenged - nothing wrong with that, but moderators going behind your back changing posts and threads is just pointless.

Please discuss.

Good afternoon BA.

Andy,bearing in mind the name of that forum....Speakfree.Did you ever get to speak freely whilst you were posting there?

And so the poster with the user name Toryscum deleted two of your threads because of the use of the word scum?...Marvellous left wing double standards.They just can't take or reason with anything that they disagree with or which they don't understand.

Clearly,the deletion of your posts were proposed & then sanctioned by the usual culprits,being Catty,Sassy,Eilzel & Didge.

[Beekeeper]

i think moderators are the biggest problem with forums, the biased ones are the worst of all.
moderation should be about common sense, banter is fine but pure insults with no attempt to tackle the subject should simply be removed.

::smthg::  

WHY IS IT that those people who like to throw the phrase "common sense" around so much and so freely on the Internet (and quite probably in real life as well),  also just happen to be the very ones who themselves demonstrate so little of it in their own vacuous blathering ???

[Guest]

thing is everyone thinks moderating is a walk in the park until they try it

[Beekeeper]

I left the very good speakfree because a moderator named "TheToryScum" deleted 2 threads where I labelled some convicted foreign criminals "scum".

He said the word was unnecessary and vulgar.

The second time he did it I immediately left - I felt there was nothing wrong with labelling such disgusting individuals scum and felt the reason he didn't like it was because they were foreign.

If you can't post the truth on a forum, what's the point?  If you are challenged - nothing wrong with that, but moderators going behind your back changing posts and threads is just pointless.

Please discuss.

I find that hard to believe that your threads were moderated for the use of the word scum it is common parlance on here to describe Tories. Was the word in general banned in which case it's at least balanced or only in relation to your threads?

  

BigAndy' also has that bad habit of often labelling unknown persons as "foreign" based purely on their names or religion...

Even when their actual country of birth hasn't even been mentioned in a story..

SO just because BA claims that his posts in question were deleted for a certain reason, that isn't necessarily giving us the full story here, is it !

[Guest]

thing is everyone thinks moderating is a walk in the park until they try it

Moderating is ok, it's when you start to feel you should be moderating the moderator it becomes an issue

[Guest]

thing is everyone thinks moderating is a wank in the park until they try it

its a dogging issue.  

[Guest]

thing is everyone thinks moderating is a walk in the park until they try it

Moderating is ok, it's when you start to feel you should be moderating the moderator it becomes an issue

Very true I guess some are better at it than others  :D 

[Guest]

thing is everyone thinks moderating is a wank in the park until they try it

its a dogging issue.  

As long as it gets you out in the fresh air flower you go for it!

[eddie]

I was a moderator on the original ADO for a long time, when everyone, left and right wing, posted there.

There were certain posters who never stopped whinging and whining about "free speech" and what was allowed and what wasn't allowed, what they liked and what they didn't.

IMO Speakfree was never going to work because some of the mods there were too desperate to mod for the wrong reasons. They were the ones who moaned incessantly on ADO and then got it so very wrong themselves.

Moderating is about being unbiased, not taking your grudges out on others and just staying level-headed.

In my experience, we had a couple of those on ADO, and it still wasn't good enough.

[eddie]

thing is everyone thinks moderating is a walk in the park until they try it

Moderating is ok, it's when you start to feel you should be moderating the moderator it becomes an issue

Moderating requires no ego :-)

[Ben Reilly]

thing is everyone thinks moderating is a walk in the park until they try it

Moderating is ok, it's when you start to feel you should be moderating the moderator it becomes an issue

Moderating requires no ego :-)

Then I'm fucked.

[Guest]

Moderating requires no ego :-)

Then I'm fucked.

[eddie]

Moderating requires no ego :-)

Then I'm fucked.

I actually don't think you have an ego and I'll explain why.
You don't seem to hold a grudge (grudges suggest your ego is hurt), you don't mind laughing at yourself, you are forgiving, you are not out to serve yourself, you are prepared to say you're wrong, you are normally in a happy mood and don't allow yourself to get too angry or take yourself too seriously.

Sphinx is like that. That's why she was a pretty good admin until she started listening to certain posters.

[Ben Reilly]

Moderating requires no ego :-)

Then I'm fucked.

I actually don't think you have an ego and I'll explain why.
You don't seem to hold a grudge (grudges suggest your ego is hurt), you don't mind laughing at yourself, you are forgiving, you are not out to serve yourself, you are prepared to say you're wrong, you are normally in a happy mood and don't allow yourself to get too angry or take yourself too seriously.

Sphinx is like that. That's why she was a pretty good admin until she started listening to certain posters.

This is so nice of you to say, seriously; thanks. :D

[eddie]

I actually don't think you have an ego and I'll explain why.
You don't seem to hold a grudge (grudges suggest your ego is hurt), you don't mind laughing at yourself, you are forgiving, you are not out to serve yourself, you are prepared to say you're wrong, you are normally in a happy mood and don't allow yourself to get too angry or take yourself too seriously.

Sphinx is like that. That's why she was a pretty good admin until she started listening to certain posters.

This is so nice of you to say, seriously; thanks. :D

Well I only say what I mean. I'll even defend someone I don't like if I think they're right or being treated unfairly. I am honest to the very core. Always been my forum downfall.... Wear my heart on my sleeve lol

Dean is a good admin too, I like him, he slips sometimes, but hey, like you and I, he's only human!

[Ben Reilly]

I actually don't think you have an ego and I'll explain why.
You don't seem to hold a grudge (grudges suggest your ego is hurt), you don't mind laughing at yourself, you are forgiving, you are not out to serve yourself, you are prepared to say you're wrong, you are normally in a happy mood and don't allow yourself to get too angry or take yourself too seriously.

Sphinx is like that. That's why she was a pretty good admin until she started listening to certain posters.

This is so nice of you to say, seriously; thanks. :D

Well I only say what I mean. I'll even defend someone I don't like if I think they're right or being treated unfairly. I am honest to the very core. Always been my forum downfall.... Wear my heart on my sleeve lol

Dean is a good admin too, I like him, he slips sometimes, but hey, like you and I,  he's only human!

Yeah, it can be tough being an admin -- maybe we could have an Admin for a Day drawing? Might help build empathy  :D 

[eddie]

Well I only say what I mean. I'll even defend someone I don't like if I think they're right or being treated unfairly. I am honest to the very core. Always been my forum downfall.... Wear my heart on my sleeve lol

Dean is a good admin too, I like him, he slips sometimes, but hey, like you and I,  he's only human!

Yeah, it can be tough being an admin -- maybe we could have an Admin for a Day drawing? Might help build empathy  :D 

Hahaha takes more than a day though. Some days we all behave ourselves!!

[Guest]

Being a Moderator means being able to separate your own personal opinions and seeing everyone's perspective.  It's pretty hard to do that if

a) you have very strong political belief and are uncompromising
b) you are not prepared to accept that another might have a different opinion
c) regardless of whether you agree with that opinion they have the right to express it as long as it doesn't involve hate speech
d) you are not prepared to accept the very possibility that there might be a 0.001% chance you are wrong
e) you are not prepared to listen to your fellow Mod's opinions
f) you undermine other Mods actions directly on the forum
g) you can't see past posters style of posting rather than what they actually post
h) you are not prepared to accept Admin's decision is final
i) you ask people to post as you ask, not as you do
j) you persist in name calling
k) you cannot stick to the forum rules
l) you use foul language
m) you are not prepared to treat everyone as equal and their opinions as equally valid
n) you ban people just because you don't like their opinion or style of posting
o) you sneak back on forums when you are banned and then accuse others and request their banning on your own forum
p) when someone PM's you you are not prepared to reply
q) you PM more than you post
r) you lack a sense of humour  :D 
s) you care more about LW/RW than the actual opinion being posted
t) you'd rather continue the fight than find the peace
u) you put yourself first and foremost
v) you fail to feelthelove for the smileys!
w) you can't understand we all find different things offensive
x) you can't accept that words have differing meanings in other countries
y) you don't believe everyone has their own limits
z) above all you have to remain fair, unbiased, put your own personal beliefs to one side, you need the patience of a saint and 48 hours in a day

Hats off to you all xxx

[Eilzel]

Nice list FtL; just about sums it all up- Grief  

[eddie]

Being a Moderator means being able to separate your own personal opinions and seeing everyone's perspective.  It's pretty hard to do that if

a) you have very strong political belief and are uncompromising
b) you are not prepared to accept that another might have a different opinion
c) regardless of whether you agree with that opinion they have the right to express it as long as it doesn't involve hate speech
d) you are not prepared to accept the very possibility that there might be a 0.001% chance you are wrong
e) you are not prepared to listen to your fellow Mod's opinions
f) you undermine other Mods actions directly on the forum
g) you can't see past posters style of posting rather than what they actually post
h) you are not prepared to accept Admin's decision is final
i) you ask people to post as you ask, not as you do
j) you persist in name calling
k) you cannot stick to the forum rules
l) you use foul language
m) you are not prepared to treat everyone as equal and their opinions as equally valid
n) you ban people just because you don't like their opinion or style of posting
o) you sneak back on forums when you are banned and then accuse others and request their banning on your own forum
p) when someone PM's you you are not prepared to reply
q) you PM more than you post
r) you lack a sense of humour  :D 
s) you care more about LW/RW than the actual opinion being posted
t) you'd rather continue the fight than find the peace
u) you put yourself first and foremost
v) you fail to feelthelove for the smileys!
w) you can't understand we all find different things offensive
x) you can't accept that words have differing meanings in other countries
y) you don't believe everyone has their own limits
z) above all you have to remain fair, unbiased, put your own personal beliefs to one side, you need the patience of a saint and 48 hours in a day

Hats off to you all xxx

I completely and utterly agree!
You also have to,put aside your dislike of posters too and have no EGO!!!

Well said FTL though, as you know, I don't always like the smileys   

[Guest]

Excellent FTL!   

[Guest]

Being a Moderator means being able to separate your own personal opinions and seeing everyone's perspective.  It's pretty hard to do that if

a) you have very strong political belief and are uncompromising
b) you are not prepared to accept that another might have a different opinion
c) regardless of whether you agree with that opinion they have the right to express it as long as it doesn't involve hate speech
d) you are not prepared to accept the very possibility that there might be a 0.001% chance you are wrong
e) you are not prepared to listen to your fellow Mod's opinions
f) you undermine other Mods actions directly on the forum
g) you can't see past posters style of posting rather than what they actually post
h) you are not prepared to accept Admin's decision is final
i) you ask people to post as you ask, not as you do
j) you persist in name calling
k) you cannot stick to the forum rules
l) you use foul language
m) you are not prepared to treat everyone as equal and their opinions as equally valid
n) you ban people just because you don't like their opinion or style of posting
o) you sneak back on forums when you are banned and then accuse others and request their banning on your own forum
p) when someone PM's you you are not prepared to reply
q) you PM more than you post
r) you lack a sense of humour  :D 
s) you care more about LW/RW than the actual opinion being posted
t) you'd rather continue the fight than find the peace
u) you put yourself first and foremost
v) you fail to feelthelove for the smileys!
w) you can't understand we all find different things offensive
x) you can't accept that words have differing meanings in other countries
y) you don't believe everyone has their own limits
z) above all you have to remain fair, unbiased, put your own personal beliefs to one side, you need the patience of a saint and 48 hours in a day

Hats off to you all xxx

I completely  and utterly agree!
You also have to,put aside your dislike of posters too and have no EGO!!!

Well said FTL though, as you know, I don't  always like the smileys   

Your smileyphobia is no concern of mine Eddie, out of order  :D

[eddie]

Hahahaha I don't care about your smilies really. I'd rather look at them than some of the drivel people post FTL x

[Original Quill]

Then I'm fucked.

I actually don't think you have an ego and I'll explain why.
You don't seem to hold a grudge (grudges suggest your ego is hurt), you don't mind laughing at yourself, you are forgiving, you are not out to serve yourself, you are prepared to say you're wrong, you are normally in a happy mood and don't allow yourself to get too angry or take yourself too seriously.

Sphinx is like that. That's why she was a pretty good admin until she started listening to certain posters.

Jeeeezus, eddie.  Pleeeeeze.

FTL...you and Nems are two of the best mods I've ever seen.  Unfortunately, a bad mod undermines ten of the best mods, singularly, as we've seen.

You're doing fine, Ben.  You're a bit of a liberal, but I really don't think the conservatives have much to complain about.  One of the reasons why I oppose banning is it too easily gets caught up in the LW/RW debate.  You do a good job of skirting that, Ben.

I don't like it when LWers or RWers are exiled.  You need both to have life.  I still don't believe that RWers have an ounce of good thinking ability, but they are always there to raise good topics and give spirited talk until you defeat them finally...and inevitably.

Andy, you left Speakfree because you got your knickers in a knot.  Yes, there was one poster/mod who ran roughshod over you, but what you did was run.  Not cool.  Hardly admirable.  Political argument is a lot like fencing: You slice and parry until there is nothing left of your opponent.  Then you are satisfied with yourself, regardless of the bias of mods.  You know you did well...

Running?  You're never satisfied with yourself.

[Guest]

Sorry Quill but your stereotype of RW people borders on the same logic racists have of black people and I know you do not mean me, but political views are just one view point which often vary differently dependent on a particular view point.

So what you are doing is in fact stating that RW are set in their ways and only they are wrong because you are of the opposite view, without showing one way is right or wrong, when again one person may hold strong views on one topic but differ vastly on another which you would constitute as RW. Many in fact hold a variance of what is right and left views, with a leaning towards one side.

For example in this country you have liberal conservatives, traditional conservatives, UKIP and the BNP, though the later being the most nationalistic and extreme RW also has left wing policies. Again there have been BNP supporters who are not racist but vote for them on other issues, which again is silly in my book, but it is not as clear cut left and right as you make out and any extreme left wing view is as bad as any extreme right wing view. The reality is most people are in the middle with some more left or right.

[Beekeeper]

  G'day, 'Didge ! Your analytical observation above there was looking just a wee bit staid and boring ~ so I cut out a lot of the superfluous bits and excesses from it, and came up with this much more succinct effort for you :

AND I swear that I didn't change a thing, at least not much, with one (very) small exception :

......

stereotype of RW people borders on the same logic....      

political views are just one view point which often vary differently....

RW are set in their ways and only they are wrong....

when again one person may hold strong views on one topic but differ vastly on another which you would constitute as RW...

Many in fact hold a variance of what is right and left views, with a leaning towards one side...  

you have liberal conservatives, traditional conservatives, UKIP and the BNP, though the later being the most nationalistic and extreme RW also has left wing policies..

Again there have been BNP supporters who are not racist but vote for them on other issues, which again is silly in my book,

but it is not as clear cut left and right as you make out and any extreme left wing view is as bad as any extreme right wing view.

The reality is most people are in the middle - with some left right out.    

 

[Original Quill]

Well, I certainly am drawing on the American experience rather than the British one, Didge.

But when I wrote the argument above, I was thinking more about the ideology than the competition or slight nuances.  Conservatives--as Friedrich Hayek points out in his essay, Why I'm Not a Conservative--are inevitably at the hind end of history.  It is formulaic, and not doctrinal.  The history of ideas goes about addressing anomalies, or problems, and as such is always forward-looking.  Kuhn, Thomas, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962).  Conservatives, by definition, are backward looking.  You gain nothing by being backward.

Take political economy...conservatives subscribe to an economic theory that is more appropriate to 17th-century economies--a world of shopkeepers and artisans.  Smithsonian theories bear no relevance to the modern, post-Industrial world...particularly one which is integrated by technological means such as computers, telephones and the Internet.  

It is a geopolitical economy, not one of a group of shopkeepers gathered in a London coffee house.  Yet, we still hear conservatives piping such nonsense as austerity and lower taxes, as if slowing economic activity was the way to riches.

My point is that conservatives are an easy mark...like shooting fish in a barrel.  They are by definition has-been's.  Their arguments have been tried, and passed by.  It's no challenge...been there, done that.  Certainly not something to get all hot about...as some posters do.

Conservatives are motivated, not by ideas, but by certain bowel urges.  By that, I mean no disrespect.  But my point it that they do not derive their philosophy from thinking, but from some inner urgency (like having to go to poo--lol).  It's certainly not a challenge.

[Ben Reilly]

Sorry Quill but your stereotype of RW people borders on the same logic racists have of black people and I know you do not mean me, but political views are just one view point which often vary differently dependent on a particular view point.

So what you are doing is in fact stating that RW are set in their ways and only they are wrong because you are of the opposite view, without showing one way is right or wrong, when again one person may hold strong views on one topic but differ vastly on another which you would constitute as RW. Many in fact hold a variance of what is right and left views, with a leaning towards one side.  

For example in this country you have liberal conservatives, traditional conservatives, UKIP and the BNP, though the later being the most nationalistic and extreme RW also has left wing policies. Again there have been BNP supporters who are not racist but vote for them on other issues, which again is silly in my book, but it is not as clear cut left and right as you make out and any extreme left wing view is as bad as any extreme right wing view. The reality is most people are in the middle with some more left or right.    

Phil, I have to say, is far and away the guy who reminds me not to lump all right-wingers in with the likes of Allakaka. To his point, I think most people have some left-wing views and some right-wing views. Nobody is always right and very few are always wrong.

Many of our British members may not know about this, but back in the 1980s David Duke, a former KKK leader who is an unrepentant racist, ran for several high offices in the U.S. -- as a Democrat, which is our most left-leaning major political party. His racist views weren't very well known at the time but he was exposed by a Republican, Beth Rickey, who secretly recorded his speeches.

Now, Duke did go on to join the Republican Party and even said that the election of Michael Steele, a black man, to the head of the Republican National Committee would destroy his own party, but the fact of the matter is that a member of the party now identified (and not without warrant) as being more racist in the U.S. was the one who exposed Duke for what he is (just a nasty piece of work, look him up if you don't know about him). Stereotyping is NEVER fair. The truth resists simplistic explanations (not a phrase I coined, but John and Hank Green mention it from time to time and it's one of my favorite quotes).

[Guest]

Well, I certainly am drawing on the American experience rather than the British one.

But when I wrote the argument above, I was thinking more about the ideology than the competition.  Conservatives--as Friedrich Hayek points out in his essay, Why I'm Not a Conservative--are inevitably at the hind end of history.  The history of ideas goes about addressing anomalies, or problems, and as such is always forward-looking.  Kuhn, Thomas, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962).  Conservatives, by definition, are backward looking.  You gain nothing by being backward.

Take political economy...conservatives subscribe to an economic theory that is more appropriate to 17th-century economies--a world of shopkeepers and artisans.  Smithsonian theories bear no relevance to the modern, post-Industrial world...particularly one which is integrated by technological means such as computers, telephones and the Internet.  

It is a geopolitical economy, not one of a group of shopkeepers gathered in a London coffee house.  Yet, we still hear conservatives piping such nonsense as austerity and lower taxes, as if slowing economic activity was the way to riches.

My point is that conservatives are an easy mark...like shooting fish in a barrel.  They are by definition 'has-been's.'  Their arguments have been tried, and passed by.  It's no challenge.  Certainly not something to get all hot about...as some posters do.

Again you go off the back of what others have written and not thinking about this for yourself Quill. I am really of little opinion to what others themselves have written on the subject because be placing a stereotype onto people is as stated very much absurd. The reason you come to such unfounded claims, is because you are at odds with conservative views full stop without ever proving your views are correct, you and others will just think they are correct which is the same arrogance you will find in those you claim to stereotype. Again what you fail to grasp is the variance of views you will find in each person, you though are placing them solely into set groups, where my RW views will differ to other RW supporters.

From what I have seen of left wing economic policies they are not that good at all and lets face it the Democrats are not left wing either, they like the Tories are center right. You made have read many different aspects on political views, far more than me, but where we differ is I have researched in psychology views and understand the human mind from that point, where again you cannot just place people into categories, when many in one section will disagree in great details on a variety of issues, as you see on here daily

Again the logic you propose is the same logic that racists use, prejudice and when people quote others it shows to me those who do have little value or belief in their own words, sorry, not knocking you, but one man's views does not sway an argument even more so when you fail to understand the psychology of how each person is so different in their views

[Original Quill]

I repeat:

Conservatives are motivated, not by ideas, but by certain bowel urges.  By that, I mean no disrespect.  But my point it that they do not derive their philosophy from thinking, but from some inner urgency (like having to go to poo--lol).  It's certainly not a challenge.

[Guest]

Sorry Quill but your stereotype of RW people borders on the same logic racists have of black people and I know you do not mean me, but political views are just one view point which often vary differently dependent on a particular view point.

So what you are doing is in fact stating that RW are set in their ways and only they are wrong because you are of the opposite view, without showing one way is right or wrong, when again one person may hold strong views on one topic but differ vastly on another which you would constitute as RW. Many in fact hold a variance of what is right and left views, with a leaning towards one side.  

For example in this country you have liberal conservatives, traditional conservatives, UKIP and the BNP, though the later being the most nationalistic and extreme RW also has left wing policies. Again there have been BNP supporters who are not racist but vote for them on other issues, which again is silly in my book, but it is not as clear cut left and right as you make out and any extreme left wing view is as bad as any extreme right wing view. The reality is most people are in the middle with some more left or right.    

Phil, I have to say, is far and away the guy who reminds me not to lump all right-wingers in with the likes of Allakaka. To his point, I think most people have some left-wing views and some right-wing views. Nobody is always right and very few are always wrong.

Many of our British members may not know about this, but back in the 1980s David Duke, a former KKK leader who is an unrepentant racist, ran for several high offices in the U.S. -- as a Democrat, which is our most left-leaning major political party. His racist views weren't very well known at the time but he was exposed by a Republican, Beth Rickey, who secretly recorded his speeches.

Now, Duke did go on to join the Republican Party and even said that the election of Michael Steele, a black man, to the head of the Republican National Committee would destroy his own party, but the fact of the matter is that a member of the party now identified (and not without warrant) as being more racist in the U.S. was the one who exposed Duke for what he is (just a nasty piece of work, look him up if you don't know about him). Stereotyping is NEVER fair. The truth resists simplistic explanations (not a phrase I coined, but John and Hank Green mention it from time to time and it's one of my favorite quotes).

To me I am not suprised and what politics does is all about the smear campaign, more so than being there for the actual people. I just think people easily stereotype people into groups whether it be anything that constitutes a prejudice vuew Ben and all are guilty of this at times, just the ones that stand out get more attention like racism or homophobia, but even people with left wing views as seen will hold prejudice views onto others.

Very interesting that and had never heard that before, so thanks

[Guest]

I repeat:

Conservatives are motivated, not by ideas, but by certain bowel urges.  By that, I mean no disrespect.  But my point it that they do not derive their philosophy from thinking, but from some inner urgency (like having to go to poo--lol).  It's certainly not a challenge.

Complete gobbledygook Quill you base that upon a poor prejudice you have of people who are conservative, all you are doing is showing how poorly you can be to hold such stereotypes towards people, again this principle and logic is the same used by racists/homophobes/xenophobes.

If anything has shown us through history is no matter left or right in power many get it wrong

[Original Quill]

Sorry Quill but your stereotype of RW people borders on the same logic racists have of black people and I know you do not mean me, but political views are just one view point which often vary differently dependent on a particular view point.

So what you are doing is in fact stating that RW are set in their ways and only they are wrong because you are of the opposite view, without showing one way is right or wrong, when again one person may hold strong views on one topic but differ vastly on another which you would constitute as RW. Many in fact hold a variance of what is right and left views, with a leaning towards one side.  

For example in this country you have liberal conservatives, traditional conservatives, UKIP and the BNP, though the later being the most nationalistic and extreme RW also has left wing policies. Again there have been BNP supporters who are not racist but vote for them on other issues, which again is silly in my book, but it is not as clear cut left and right as you make out and any extreme left wing view is as bad as any extreme right wing view. The reality is most people are in the middle with some more left or right.    

Phil, I have to say, is far and away the guy who reminds me not to lump all right-wingers in with the likes of Allakaka. To his point, I think most people have some left-wing views and some right-wing views. Nobody is always right and very few are always wrong.

Many of our British members may not know about this, but back in the 1980s David Duke, a former KKK leader who is an unrepentant racist, ran for several high offices in the U.S. -- as a Democrat, which is our most left-leaning major political party. His racist views weren't very well known at the time but he was exposed by a Republican, Beth Rickey, who secretly recorded his speeches.

Now, Duke did go on to join the Republican Party and even said that the election of Michael Steele, a black man, to the head of the Republican National Committee would destroy his own party, but the fact of the matter is that a member of the party now identified (and not without warrant) as being more racist in the U.S. was the one who exposed Duke for what he is (just a nasty piece of work, look him up if you don't know about him). Stereotyping is NEVER fair. The truth resists simplistic explanations (not a phrase I coined, but John and Hank Green mention it from time to time and it's one of my favorite quotes).

David Duke was a victim of history. In 1964, the Democratic Party abandoned all pretense of Southern/racist leanings via the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It was then that Lee Atwater invented the Southern Strategy of the Republican Party. A major tenant of that strategy was to subtly incorporate racism into the Republican lexicon in order to seduce Southerners. Duke was just catching up in the 1980s, and as you say, he switched to the Republican Party when he realized they had adopted a racist platform.

[Original Quill]

I repeat:

Conservatives are motivated, not by ideas, but by certain bowel urges.  By that, I mean no disrespect.  But my point it that they do not derive their philosophy from thinking, but from some inner urgency (like having to go to poo--lol).  It's certainly not a challenge.

Complete gobbledygook Quill you base that upon a poor prejudice you have of people who are conservative, all you are doing is showing how poorly you can be to hold such stereotypes towards people, again this principle and logic is the same used by racists/homophobes/xenophobes.

If anything has shown us through history is no matter left or right in power many get it wrong

Yet, you offer no discussion, Didge.  I offer you, yourself, as evidence. That's what is wrong with conservatives.  They can't think, ergo they can't explain themselves.  They are not mentally dynamic.

Let's face it, Conservatives live in a world of labels and jingos.  They think in static symbols.  They have no flexible self-language by which they can move around ideas, compare and weigh, and make independent judgments.  Everything is in the past, hence there is no need for actual cerebral activity.  It's too bad, because some of them would do quite well.

[Ben Reilly]

Sorry Quill but your stereotype of RW people borders on the same logic racists have of black people and I know you do not mean me, but political views are just one view point which often vary differently dependent on a particular view point.

So what you are doing is in fact stating that RW are set in their ways and only they are wrong because you are of the opposite view, without showing one way is right or wrong, when again one person may hold strong views on one topic but differ vastly on another which you would constitute as RW. Many in fact hold a variance of what is right and left views, with a leaning towards one side.  

For example in this country you have liberal conservatives, traditional conservatives, UKIP and the BNP, though the later being the most nationalistic and extreme RW also has left wing policies. Again there have been BNP supporters who are not racist but vote for them on other issues, which again is silly in my book, but it is not as clear cut left and right as you make out and any extreme left wing view is as bad as any extreme right wing view. The reality is most people are in the middle with some more left or right.    

Phil, I have to say, is far and away the guy who reminds me not to lump all right-wingers in with the likes of Allakaka. To his point, I think most people have some left-wing views and some right-wing views. Nobody is always right and very few are always wrong.

Many of our British members may not know about this, but back in the 1980s David Duke, a former KKK leader who is an unrepentant racist, ran for several high offices in the U.S. -- as a Democrat, which is our most left-leaning major political party. His racist views weren't very well known at the time but he was exposed by a Republican, Beth Rickey, who secretly recorded his speeches.

Now, Duke did go on to join the Republican Party and even said that the election of Michael Steele, a black man, to the head of the Republican National Committee would destroy his own party, but the fact of the matter is that a member of the party now identified (and not without warrant) as being more racist in the U.S. was the one who exposed Duke for what he is (just a nasty piece of work, look him up if you don't know about him). Stereotyping is NEVER fair. The truth resists simplistic explanations (not a phrase I coined, but John and Hank Green mention it from time to time and it's one of my favorite quotes).

To me I am not suprised and what politics does is all about the smear campaign, more so than being there for the actual people. I just think people easily stereotype people into groups whether it be anything that constitutes a prejudice vuew Ben and all are guilty of this at times, just the ones that stand out get more attention like racism or homophobia, but even people with left wing views as seen will hold prejudice views onto others.

Very interesting that and had never heard that before, so thanks

No problem. I just hate to think of the "sides" no longer listening to one another, because (and you know how I like science) there is science to suggest that there are both liberals and conservatives in the world for evolutionary advantageous reasons and that each side has survived because in the long view, they benefit one another.

And I think it's quite unfair to say that either side has a monopoly on bigotry, as well. Plenty of right-wingers I know seem to sincerely believe in meritocracy.

[Guest]

Complete gobbledygook Quill you base that upon a poor prejudice you have of people who are conservative, all you are doing is showing how poorly you can be to hold such stereotypes towards people, again this principle and logic is the same used by racists/homophobes/xenophobes.

If anything has shown us through history is no matter left or right in power many get it wrong

Yet, you offer no discussion, Didge.  I offer you, yourself, as evidence.  That's what is wrong with conservatives.  They can't think, ergo they can't explain themselves.  They are not mentally dynamic.

Let's face it, Conservatives live in a world of labels and jingos.  They think in static symbols.  They have no flexible self-language by which they can move around ideas, compare and weigh, and make independent judgments.  Everything is in the past, hence there is no need for actual cerebral activity.  It's too bad, because some of them would do quite well.

Actually you offer opinion, not evidence, because you cannot formulate evidence off the back of a political concept that varies Quill or how each person may hold some of those views not all, where all you are doing is placing many people into this category you have formulated and again offer no view as to why it is wrong and now you claim they live in a world of labels, when you are thus now guilty of doing the same, showing again how absurd your claim is. Again everyone is different and even those on left and right will find views they agree on and where people on the left will different to views with other people on the left, the same with those on the right. You are thus casting a poor again prejudice view, based on a concept, that is absurd, that is as bad as to claim all religious people would be idiots, or blacks are criminally minded, you use the same flawed logic.

[Guest]

To me I am not suprised and what politics does is all about the smear campaign, more so than being there for the actual people. I just think people easily stereotype people into groups whether it be anything that constitutes a prejudice vuew Ben and all are guilty of this at times, just the ones that stand out get more attention like racism or homophobia, but even people with left wing views as seen will hold prejudice views onto others.

Very interesting that and had never heard that before, so thanks

No problem. I just hate to think of the "sides" no longer listening to one another, because (and you know how I like science) there is science to suggest that there are both liberals and conservatives in the world for evolutionary advantageous reasons and that each side has survived because in the long view, they benefit one another.

And I think it's quite unfair to say that either side has a monopoly on bigotry, as well. Plenty of right-wingers I know seem to sincerely believe in meritocracy.

Interesting points, your concepts I agree with Ben and what is also forgotten in great need no matter the view the vast majority will pull together to face a threat and then all political views are cast aside and people pull together for the greater need, their nations survival.

[Beekeeper]

Phil, I have to say, is far and away the guy who reminds me not to lump all right-wingers in with the likes of Allakaka. To his point, I think most people have some left-wing views and some right-wing views. Nobody is always right and very few are always wrong.

To me I am not suprised and what politics does is all about the smear campaign, more so than being there for the actual people. I just think people easily stereotype people into groups whether it be anything that constitutes a prejudice vuew Ben and all are guilty of this at times, just the ones that stand out get more attention like racism or homophobia, but even people with left wing views as seen will hold prejudice views onto others.

.................

 
  WHEN visualising where people may fall on the "political spectrum", I often like to use the idea of a "political compass" rather than simply imagining them sitting at one point along a straight line...

IN this view of people's opinions you put their political and economic beliefs along one axis and their social/humanitarian feelings along another at right angles ~ dividing a circle into four quadrants ~ roughly equivalent to those notions of :
* the more 'conservative' (i.e. inflexible..) Liberals and Socialists;
* Radical/progressive Liberals, humanists, democratic socialists (and communists out on the extremes);
* conservative and ultra-con' Tories and republicans, i.e. "reactionaries";
* the more liberal-minded and progressive Tories & Repub's..  

CHECK it out @  http://www.politicalcompass.org

On their test I end up in the lower-left quadrant => midway between Mahatma Ghandhi more to the left and Nelson Mandela slightly below, and the centre of the "compass"..

EVERYONE should give it a burl and see if they place where they might have hoped !   

[Ben Reilly]

Phil, I have to say, is far and away the guy who reminds me not to lump all right-wingers in with the likes of Allakaka. To his point, I think most people have some left-wing views and some right-wing views. Nobody is always right and very few are always wrong.

To me I am not suprised and what politics does is all about the smear campaign, more so than being there for the actual people. I just think people easily stereotype people into groups whether it be anything that constitutes a prejudice vuew Ben and all are guilty of this at times, just the ones that stand out get more attention like racism or homophobia, but even people with left wing views as seen will hold prejudice views onto others.

.................

 
   WHEN visualising where people may fall on the "political spectrum", I often like to use the idea of a "political compass" rather than simply imagining them sitting at one point along a straight line...

IN this view of people's opinions you put their political and economic beliefs along one axis and their social/humanitarian feelings along another at right angles ~ dividing a circle into four quadrants ~ roughly equivalent to those notions of :
* the more 'conservative' (i.e. inflexible..) Liberals and Socialists;
* Radical/progressive Liberals, humanists, democratic socialists (and communists out on the extremes);
* conservative and ultra-con' Tories and republicans, i.e. "reactionaries";
* the more liberal-minded and progressive Tories & Repub's..  

CHECK it out @  http://www.politicalcompass.org

On their test I end up in the lower-left quadrant => midway between Mahatma Ghandhi more to the left and Nelson Mandela slightly below, and the centre of the "compass"..

EVERYONE should give it a burl and see if they place where they might have hoped !   

I have taken that a few times, always ended up right there with you!  :D :D :D 

[Guest]

I actually don't think you have an ego and I'll explain why.
You don't seem to hold a grudge (grudges suggest your ego is hurt), you don't mind laughing at yourself, you are forgiving, you are not out to serve yourself, you are prepared to say you're wrong, you are normally in a happy mood and don't allow yourself to get too angry or take yourself too seriously.

Sphinx is like that. That's why she was a pretty good admin until she started listening to certain posters.

Jeeeezus, eddie.  Pleeeeeze.

FTL...you and Nems are two of the best mods I've ever seen.  Unfortunately, a bad mod undermines ten of the best mods, singularly, as we've seen.

You're doing fine, Ben.  You're a bit of a liberal, but I really don't think the conservatives have much to complain about.  One of the reasons why I oppose banning is it too easily gets caught up in the LW/RW debate.  You do a good job of skirting that, Ben.

I don't like it when LWers or RWers are exiled.  You need both to have life.  I still don't believe that RWers have an ounce of good thinking ability, but they are always there to raise good topics and give spirited talk until you defeat them finally...and inevitably.

Andy, you left Speakfree because you got your knickers in a knot.  Yes, there was one poster/mod who ran roughshod over you, but what you did was run.  Not cool.  Hardly admirable.  Political argument is a lot like fencing: You slice and parry until there is nothing left of your opponent.  Then you are satisfied with yourself, regardless of the bias of mods.  You know you did well...

Running?  You're never satisfied with yourself.

Nope, I left and I was happy to leave.

There was no political argument there - I like to post about sh1t bags making our country a dump. I like to post about useless judges giving out cr4p sentences.

If I can't do that, i'll leave.

Nothing to whine about and no political argument there.

The second I realised a guy called "TheToryScum" wasn't going to allow the word scum used for dirty criminals who beat up old ladies I knew it was time to go.

[Guest]

Well, I certainly am drawing on the American experience rather than the British one.

But when I wrote the argument above, I was thinking more about the ideology than the competition.  Conservatives--as Friedrich Hayek points out in his essay, Why I'm Not a Conservative--are inevitably at the hind end of history.  The history of ideas goes about addressing anomalies, or problems, and as such is always forward-looking.  Kuhn, Thomas, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962).  Conservatives, by definition, are backward looking.  You gain nothing by being backward.

Take political economy...conservatives subscribe to an economic theory that is more appropriate to 17th-century economies--a world of shopkeepers and artisans.  Smithsonian theories bear no relevance to the modern, post-Industrial world...particularly one which is integrated by technological means such as computers, telephones and the Internet.  

It is a geopolitical economy, not one of a group of shopkeepers gathered in a London coffee house.  Yet, we still hear conservatives piping such nonsense as austerity and lower taxes, as if slowing economic activity was the way to riches.

My point is that conservatives are an easy mark...like shooting fish in a barrel.  They are by definition 'has-been's.'  Their arguments have been tried, and passed by.  It's no challenge.  Certainly not something to get all hot about...as some posters do.

Again you go off the back of what others have written and not thinking about this for yourself Quill. I am really of little opinion to what others themselves have written on the subject because be placing a stereotype onto people is as stated very much absurd. The reason you come to such unfounded claims, is because you are at odds with conservative views full stop without ever proving your views are correct, you and others will just think they are correct which is the same arrogance you will find in those you claim to stereotype. Again what you fail to grasp is the variance of views you will find in each person, you though are placing them solely into set groups, where my RW views will differ to other RW supporters.

From what I have seen of left wing economic policies they are not that good at all and lets face it the Democrats are not left wing either, they like the Tories are center right. You made have read many different aspects on political views, far more than me, but where we differ is I have researched in psychology views and understand the human mind from that point, where again you cannot just place people into categories, when many in one section will disagree in great details on a variety of issues, as you see on here daily

Again the logic you propose is the same logic that racists use, prejudice and when people quote others it shows to me those who do have little value or belief in their own words, sorry, not knocking you, but one man's views does not sway an argument even more so when you fail to understand the psychology of how each person is so different in their views

And I thought you didn't accept people thinking for themselves - they have to quote somebody else, or produce statistics...

[Guest]

Jeeeezus, eddie.  Pleeeeeze.

FTL...you and Nems are two of the best mods I've ever seen.  Unfortunately, a bad mod undermines ten of the best mods, singularly, as we've seen.

You're doing fine, Ben.  You're a bit of a liberal, but I really don't think the conservatives have much to complain about.  One of the reasons why I oppose banning is it too easily gets caught up in the LW/RW debate.  You do a good job of skirting that, Ben.

I don't like it when LWers or RWers are exiled.  You need both to have life.  I still don't believe that RWers have an ounce of good thinking ability, but they are always there to raise good topics and give spirited talk until you defeat them finally...and inevitably.

Andy, you left Speakfree because you got your knickers in a knot.  Yes, there was one poster/mod who ran roughshod over you, but what you did was run.  Not cool.  Hardly admirable.  Political argument is a lot like fencing: You slice and parry until there is nothing left of your opponent.  Then you are satisfied with yourself, regardless of the bias of mods.  You know you did well...

Running?  You're never satisfied with yourself.

Nope, I left and I was happy to leave.

There was no political argument there - I like to post about sh1t bags making our country a dump.  I like to post about useless judges giving out cr4p sentences.

If I can't do that, i'll leave.

Nothing to whine about and no political argument there.

The second I realised a guy called "TheToryScum" wasn't going to allow the word scum used for dirty criminals who beat up old ladies I knew it was time to go.

The word 'scum' does indeed describe people who rob or beat up old ladies Andy, I agree, but that word is also reserved for the Jimmy Savile's and Gary Glitter's of this world...it seems way to kind of rather though, thieving and beating is one thing Andy, but fcuking pervs, paedophiles and rapists are the ultimate scumbags.

[Sponsored content]