Is Debate Restriction Now Open to All Areas?

[RealDealNeverstop]

After reading through the announcements i cant find anything that says Debate may be restricted in Discussion and Debate. However, in the Debate Staff Team forum there are two threads showing where Debate will be restricted. In the Policon Forum Guidelines Discussion thread one staff even says straight out debating posts may get removed on the basis of 'off topic' even if the post is exactly on topic. Is there something the site members havent been told or is this a case of staff trying to get around site rules? Thanks :-)

[ravenscape]

I don't think the OPer realized that this is a Wiki thread. I'm copying the OP to the discussion area, since the article is meant to be a summary of the points that come up in the discussion.

After reading through the announcements i cant find anything that says Debate may be restricted in Discussion and Debate. However, in the Debate Staff Team forum there are two threads showing where Debate will be restricted. In the Policon Forum Guidelines Discussion thread one staff even says straight out debating posts may get removed on the basis of 'off topic' even if the post is exactly on topic. Is there something the site members havent been told or is this a case of staff trying to get around site rules? Thanks :-)

[RealDealNeverstop]

Oopsies! See, having trouble keeping up :-)

[ravenscape]

You and me both! ^_^

[Lel]

We're discussing it in the Debate Staff Area, as you know. Join in the fun some more! :)

[RealDealNeverstop]

I just read the lastest announcement and the Congregation forums is the only place debate may be restricted by both members and positions. So, it appears the guidelines for policon are clearly overstepping the boundaries. I started this thread to get feedback from more than one place because things change around here faster than celebs checking into rehab :-)

[Lel]

It looks like I was possibly wrong in my suggestion that repeated postings in PoliCon or PeepPol against repeated requests could lead to other consequences. However, I think this part of the announcement still gives staff latitude to move non-conservative arguments from PoliCon to GPD, or non-liberal arguments from PeepPol to GPD.

However, each forum is allowed to take the FSR’s that they have in place and develop them to become guidelines for that forum. This means that a member will not necessarily receive an infraction (infraction system is still being discussed I believe) for violating a guideline, but may be asked to have the post deleted, edited, or moved to a different and more appropriate forum.

Right now it's part of guideline #3 for PoliCon (which restrictions by poster aren't going to fly, but by topic may well be fine).

[RealDealNeverstop]

'A different or more appropriate forum.' That doesnt give birth to debate restrictions latitude. It means in a political forum talking about pink turtles or fried bananas would be inappropriate. Discussing political issues in a political forum could not be inappropriate. Look at the only exception for debate restrictions-it even highlights posts must be within the creed, but that is applicable only in Congregational spots.

[ChristianCenturion]

'A different or more appropriate forum.' That doesnt give birth to debate restrictions latitude. It means in a political forum talking about pink turtles or fried bananas would be inappropriate. Discussing political issues in a political forum could not be inappropriate. Look at the only exception for debate restrictions-it even highlights posts must be within the creed, but that is applicable only in Congregational spots.

The Politics forum (http://foru.ms/f181-politics.html) has a forum that isn't designated for any particular ideology or position.:

General Political Discussion (http://foru.ms/f450-general-political-discussion.html)
A new open forum for general politics discussion.


The Politics forum also has:

Political Conservatives (http://foru.ms/f402-political-conservatives.html)
The forum for political conservative members.

The People's Politics: Liberal Philosophy (http://foru.ms/f403-the-peoples-politics-liberal-philosophy.html)
The forum for political liberals.


The latter forums are self-evident as having a set purpose for like-minded membership to gather and discuss/debate a topic.

But any time a forum has a set ideology, the nature of an internet forum draws trolls to those areas like a moth is drawn to a flame (pun intended). The members of those forums have a right to protect their environment from hostile, contradictory mindsets or even non-aligning mindsets demonstrating harassment of the group. If there are members who might not like the fact that there are provisions for ideologies to gather, those members might wish to petition having all those ideology-based forums removed from the other members so there is only one forum where it is a free-for-all (similar to what can be found in GPD).

The only thing I see lacking in the Politics area are forums for Moderates or another ideology for those who don't match Conservative or Liberal in a consistent and non-disruptive manner.

BTW - I believe each forum's wiki was morphed into being a guideline. So, grabbing a generalized comment about congregations is a bit lacking while making site-wide assertions. But if there was any doubt, the owner could always be asked whether or not the Political forum should or will have different categories. We also have all of Politics forum falling under Debate Team's domain, short of an owner's clarifying directive. :)

[RealDealNeverstop]

Could anymore sideways jabs be sqeezed in? There is a clear site wide directive and this is even emphasized in the announcement. So to claim there is ambiguity when something has been specifically addressed is equitable to ignoring the rule altogether. Some may think subforums have a 'right' to do whatever they want but they are mistaken since this is a privately owned site. The rules have been laid out crystal regarding where debate may be restricted.

[RealDealNeverstop]

Also, having different categories doesnt mean debate can be restricted. I have seen people claim all FSR will stay the same with the same consequences but now they will be called guidelines. This shows utter contempt for the new owner and rules that have been put in place. It was specifically highlighted where debate can be restricted. Period. That may change but as of right now there is no justifying doing an end run around site wide rules.

[E-beth]

The latter forums are self-evident as having a set purpose for like-minded membership to gather and discuss/debate a topic.

But any time a forum has a set ideology, the nature of an internet forum draws trolls to those areas like a moth is drawn to a flame (pun intended). The members of those forums have a right to protect their environment from hostile, contradictory mindsets or even non-aligning mindsets demonstrating harassment of the group.

That leads me to a question, one that has plagued me from the inception of these forums.

I have listed myself as a member of PoliCon. That is the way I vote, and that is the party I support. However, as a member of this subset, can't I voice a disagreeable opinion about what I see as unacceptable goings-on within that party without being accused of trolling? For example, if I were a Dem during the MonicaGate scandal, couldn't I safely complain about Party leaders making bad decisions which affect the entire US nation?

I guess what I am asking is, is it Stepford posting only within these forums or is one allowed freedom of opinion regardless?

[RealDealNeverstop]

One can disagree on an issue here or there and not be called a troll if they also jump on the bandwagon on other issues such as liberal bashing. The other problem is some actually believe a Christian Conservative is the same as a Political Conservative, therefore all conservatives must align themselves with the CR. It has been a pretty repressive environment for a while though things are slowly changing.

[JustOneWay]

I guess what I am asking is, is it Stepford posting only within these forums or is one allowed freedom of opinion regardless?
In policon, one is allowed freedom only if one is directing criticism towards any political party or individual OTHER than a republican or conservative.

That is their brand of freedom.

I criticized Ann Coulter and my conservative status was promptly questioned....and questioned by a moderator no less.

[ChristianCenturion]

That leads me to a question, one that has plagued me from the inception of these forums.

I have listed myself as a member of PoliCon. That is the way I vote, and that is the party I support. However, as a member of this subset, can't I voice a disagreeable opinion about what I see as unacceptable goings-on within that party without being accused of trolling?


As an active poster in PoliCon, I can opine yes because I am active in the forum, have voiced disagreement, and not been 'accused of trolling'. I have also seen others disagree and they were not 'accused of trolling'. I suppose someone could do a poll in Policon and get a consensus as to where the tally falls on disagreements and being 'accused of trolling', but I'm not seeing where that is necessary and the responses of yes would still have to prove that the person's own conduct had nothing to do with the 'accused of trolling' response from Policon members.

But let's think that question out a bit... if I disagreed and I WAS trolling, well then, should I expect to get a free-pass?
(btw - that is really a rhetorical question. I believe the obvious answer would be no.)

Trolling is trolling and typically requires a look into patterns and group; unacceptable goings-on within a party is unacceptable goings-on - two different issues that may or may not have a minor connection if circumstances are right.

Unless the presumption is that only the "special" can see, but can't produce the facts or the why something is unacceptable based on the ideology given, then I believe reasonable comes into play there as well.

But your question is practically answered if or when someone posts in the Policon forum and finds out for their self - everyone is different.

Personally, I have only seen your username pop up in the sign-in thread, perhaps the safehouse thread or the wiki thread that regulated the Policon forum. If those are the only places you've posted in Policon (and I might have just not seen other postings), maybe posting in threads where it is about the party that you support, the way you vote, etc. will definitively answer your question with tangible results - as opposed to hypotheticals or speculations.


For example, if I were a Dem during the MonicaGate scandal, couldn't I safely complain about Party leaders making bad decisions which affect the entire US nation?

I guess what I am asking is, is it Stepford posting only within these forums or is one allowed freedom of opinion regardless?

The Stepford or Freedom dichotomy... I like the simplicity. :)

I would say that it is -
A reasonable structure that allows freedom with practical provisions/protections to serve the membership of the given ideology... IMHO, of course.

However, I can ALSO see motivation where contradictory or non-aligning and aggressive mindsets would like to remove any type of provision or protection as such so that 'their' advocacy can be thrust into a preserved area. I can see where Liberalism would be against how conservatives might regulate their selves, and I can see where mindsets that are dramatically disadvantaged in a dissent might like the ability to draw thunder-by-numbers from other mindsets while in dissent on a topic or in general (but most of those can be done in GPD).

[ChristianCenturion]

In policon, one is allowed freedom only if one is directing criticism towards any political party or individual OTHER than a republican or conservative...

And what rule would you be referring to there? :scratch:

[RealDealNeverstop]

All fluff aside one can see at least a few threads in policon that are designed to intimidate/harrass anyone that doesnt belong to the in-crowd. Even people that simply observe have stated even though they are conservatives they fear posting there due to the backlash if they dont fall in lockstep. The ironic part is some complain about rule violations but pat each other on the back anytime a flame against others flies below the Rule Radar.

[JustOneWay]

And what rule would you be referring to there? :scratch:
Who cares? The question was "is one allowed freedom of opinion regardless", and the answer is NO.

Doesn't take me three paragraphs to answer a simple question ;)

[ChristianCenturion]

Who cares? The question was "is one allowed freedom of opinion regardless", and the answer is NO.


Ummm... you must be thinking of another post, because your post didn't have a question in it. It was nothing but opined claims of a stereotype for the entire Policon forum.

And of course if there WAS a question of "is one allowed freedom of opinion regardless" (assumed that you mean E-beth's post), it would have an obvious answer of no. The reason isn't related to your attempted reply though. Foru.ms still has rules that membership is to conduct their self by. If the desire was or is to say anything anyone wants WITHOUT being held accountable to common standards of conduct, then the logical step would be to go to a forum where the forum has rules that allow for 'regardless'.


Doesn't take me three paragraphs to answer a simple question ;)

I must assume that you intended that to be an "if" you answered a question.

But that still leaves the question you imply answering with a claim of:

In policon, one is allowed freedom only if one is directing criticism towards any political party or individual OTHER than a republican or conservative...

... being opinion only and unsubstantiated at best.

But I suppose I can thank you for not trying to do the same with three paragraphs. So... thank you. :)

[RealDealNeverstop]

Unsubstantiated? Rotfl! When people who dont participate in policon give an observant assessment, meaning they dont have a bias either way, state it's obvious there is an 'in crowd' that acts as self appointed gatekeepers it's safe to say there is a problem.

[JustOneWay]

Ummm... you must be thinking of another post, because your post didn't have a question in it. It was nothing but opined claims of a stereotype for the entire Policon forum.
Ummm.....perhaps you should follow more closely to the discussion.

Question: I guess what I am asking is, is it Stepford posting only within these forums or is one allowed freedom of opinion regardless?

Answer: In policon, one is allowed freedom only if one is directing criticism towards any political party or individual OTHER than a republican or conservative.

No stereotypes there....and policon rules back my statement

Trolling and harassment are prohibited. This includes: defamatory comments and attacks toward any recognized conservative political figure, conservative organization, or any conservative political party. It also included unsubstantiated accusations of spite reporting. (notice this rule allows defamatory comments and attacks towards recognized liberal political figure, liberal organization or any liberal political party)


And of course if there WAS a question of "is one allowed freedom of opinion regardless" (assumed that you mean E-beth's post), it would have an obvious answer of no.
I already answered this, but thank you for agreeing.

The reason isn't related to your attempted reply though. Foru.ms still has rules that membership is to conduct their self by. If the desire was or is to say anything anyone wants WITHOUT being held accountable to common standards of conduct, then the logical step would be to go to a forum where the forum has rules that allow for 'regardless'.
Which says nothing more than I already stated in one sentence.


I must assume that you intended that to be an "if" you answered a question.

But that still leaves the question you imply answering with a claim of:

In policon, one is allowed freedom only if one is directing criticism towards any political party or individual OTHER than a republican or conservative...

... being opinion only and unsubstantiated at best.

But I suppose I can thank you for not trying to do the same with three paragraphs. So... thank you. :)


Question? Do you type stuff like this just to prove you can type? Because it is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to debate whether or not one has freedom to post "regardless" in policon....when I already said no.

The truth of my post is irrefutable, although you tried and failed.
In policon, one is allowed freedom only if one is directing criticism towards any political party or individual OTHER than a republican or conservative.This quote states that FREEDOM is limited.

[ChristianCenturion]

Ummm.....perhaps you should follow more closely to the discussion.

Question: I guess what I am asking is, is it Stepford posting only within these forums or is one allowed freedom of opinion regardless?

Answer: In policon, one is allowed freedom only if one is directing criticism towards any political party or individual OTHER than a republican or conservative.

No stereotypes there....and policon rules back my statement

Trolling and harassment are prohibited. This includes: defamatory comments and attacks toward any recognized conservative political figure, conservative organization, or any conservative political party. It also included unsubstantiated accusations of spite reporting. (notice this rule allows defamatory comments and attacks towards recognized liberal political figure, liberal organization or any liberal political party)
The red part was your claims in this post, not the forum's guidelines. The earlier post was likewise an empty claim.

Here is the CURRENT Guideline thread in the Debate Team area:

http://foru.ms/t6364032-policon-forum-guidelines-discussion.html

Here is what was omitted while 'trying' to represent or interpret a rule about trolling (that had a clarifying part dealing with Conservative) :

1. All CF general forum rules apply.

...

4. Members, non-members and news sources may not be defamed including by misspelling of names.

Here is part of the main forum rules that would be referred to by Policon guideline #1:

Defamation is not allowed.


Presumption and a lack of information is not grounds to make claims, but I'm happy to have straightened out any misunderstanding.


I already answered this, but thank you for agreeing.


A good reason to read the whole post before replying to a part of the whole quote. :)


Which says nothing more than I already stated in one sentence.


It was an incorrect statement. ;)


Question? Do you type stuff like this just to prove you can type? Because it is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to debate whether or not one has freedom to post "regardless" in policon....when I already said no.

The truth of my post is irrefutable, although you tried and failed.
This quote states that FREEDOM is limited.

Look again, it was refuted. :D

[JustOneWay]

The red part was your claims in this post, not the forum's guidelines. The earlier post was likewise an empty claim.

Here is the CURRENT Guideline thread in the Debate Team area:

http://foru.ms/t6364032-policon-forum-guidelines-discussion.html

Here is what was omitted while 'trying' to represent or interpret a rule about trolling (that had a clarifying part dealing with Conservative) :

1. All CF general forum rules apply.

...

4. Members, non-members and news sources may not be defamed including by misspelling of names.

Here is part of the main forum rules that would be referred to by Policon guideline #1:

Defamation is not allowed.


Presumption and a lack of information is not grounds to make claims, but I'm happy to have straightened out any misunderstanding.
A good reason to read the whole post before replying to a part of the whole quote. :)


It was an incorrect statement. ;)


Look again, it was refuted. :D
So you are basing all this on the fact that the rules have changed, and that policon posts can be reported, and actioned, for casting disparaging remarks upon liberals and democrats?

[NeTrips]

Unsubstantiated? Rotfl! When people who dont participate in policon give an observant assessment, meaning they dont have a bias either way, state it's obvious there is an 'in crowd' that acts as self appointed gatekeepers it's safe to say there is a problem.

is there a link that confirms this often repeated claim?

:priest:

[ChristianCenturion]

So you are basing all this on the fact that the rules have changed, and that policon posts can be reported, and actioned, for casting disparaging remarks upon liberals and democrats?

I won't be using the same practice that you've used with:

Ummm.....perhaps you should follow more closely to the discussion...

Instead, I'll review what my posts in response to yours has been 'based' on.

Here are the claims:

In policon, one is allowed freedom only if one is directing criticism towards any political party or individual OTHER than a republican or conservative.

That is their brand of freedom.

Criticism is allowed toward any political party or individual - even if it happens to include conservative.
The claim that criticism could not include conservative was an opinion that wasn't even proven true when asserted and is, in fact, false.

The error was repeated or compounded in another post when trying to make another assertion (or back up the previous assertion) shifting the key issue to defamatory comments.



Question: I guess what I am asking is, is it Stepford posting only within these forums or is one allowed freedom of opinion regardless?

Answer: In policon, one is allowed freedom only if one is directing criticism towards any political party or individual OTHER than a republican or conservative.

No stereotypes there....and policon rules back my statement

Trolling and harassment are prohibited. This includes: defamatory comments and attacks toward any recognized conservative political figure, conservative organization, or any conservative political party. It also included unsubstantiated accusations of spite reporting. (notice this rule allows defamatory comments and attacks towards recognized liberal political figure, liberal organization or any liberal political party)

Which was shown to be another false claim here:

The red part was your claims in this post, not the forum's guidelines. The earlier post was likewise an empty claim.

Here is the CURRENT Guideline thread in the Debate Team area:

http://foru.ms/t6364032-policon-forum-guidelines-discussion.html

Here is what was omitted while 'trying' to represent or interpret a rule about trolling (that had a clarifying part dealing with Conservative) :

1. All CF general forum rules apply.

...

4. Members, non-members and news sources may not be defamed including by misspelling of names.

Here is part of the main forum rules that would be referred to by Policon guideline #1:

Defamation is not allowed.


In short, my posts were 'based' on references.

[RealDealNeverstop]

I can point to several posts where peeps call me a phony conservative, little green monser under the bridge, a liar, etc-just from the last week! I used to get mad but now i just feel sorry for adults that resort to such behaviour. This problem needs resoluton for all CF members.

[E-beth]

My follow up question is, if one were to follow Lel's suggestion and posted an opinion in GPD which went against the accepted groupthink of his or her affiliated party, would they then be scrutinized on their affiliated party fora as being a infiltrator with no good intentions?

I was just wondering, because it seems that even doing it the way you are supposed to could come to no good end if you dared to have an unpopular opinion.