Rule 5 is officially up
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-10-2013, 10:21 AM
RE: Rule 5 is officially up
(07-10-2013 10:20 AM)Stark Raving Wrote:  
(07-10-2013 10:11 AM)cjlr Wrote:  (I submit it to you that the best way to allow free speech is with certain exceptions, hence why why every case ever has certain exceptions)

Interesting. I'll ponder your submission further.

Your perspective on continuum however, I cannot agree with. At least not to that degree. It's not a smooth, gradual climb from free speech to no speech. There are leaps and bounds. A big leap from free speech to no speech is caveats. That's not to say that caveats make this a "no speech zone", but we have definitely leapt away from free speech. Far enough away that I still feel the need to call into question the use of the term.
(Does that make what I'm saying a little clearer?)

Free speech is allowed as long as it doesn't impede free speech?

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-10-2013, 10:28 AM
RE: Rule 5 is officially up
(07-10-2013 10:21 AM)Dom Wrote:  
(07-10-2013 10:20 AM)Stark Raving Wrote:  Interesting. I'll ponder your submission further.

Your perspective on continuum however, I cannot agree with. At least not to that degree. It's not a smooth, gradual climb from free speech to no speech. There are leaps and bounds. A big leap from free speech to no speech is caveats. That's not to say that caveats make this a "no speech zone", but we have definitely leapt away from free speech. Far enough away that I still feel the need to call into question the use of the term.
(Does that make what I'm saying a little clearer?)

Free speech is allowed as long as it doesn't impede free speech?

Exactly. Thumbsup

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-10-2013, 10:52 AM
RE: Rule 5 is officially up
I believe the rules have been reworded to show our evolved position of "free speech".

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-10-2013, 10:54 AM
RE: Rule 5 is officially up
That type of vagueness is EXACTLY why the term "free speech" should be removed entirely from the forum rules.

[Image: StarkLord01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Stark Raving's post
07-10-2013, 10:56 AM
RE: Rule 5 is officially up
(07-10-2013 10:20 AM)Stark Raving Wrote:  Your perspective on continuum however, I cannot agree with.

Well, maybe it's quantized after all. When you look closely enough most things are. Thumbsup

Should've said spectrum...

(07-10-2013 10:20 AM)Stark Raving Wrote:  At least not to that degree. It's not a smooth, gradual climb from free speech to no speech. There are leaps and bounds. A big leap from free speech to no speech is caveats. That's not to say that caveats make this a "no speech zone", but we have definitely leapt away from free speech. Far enough away that I still feel the need to call into question the use of the term.
(Does that make what I'm saying a little clearer?)

I suppose if your use of free speech only admits of the "no restriction at all ever" definition, that is consistent. But that is not, and has never been, the implementation anywhere, ever. It is an unapproachable ideal! That's not to say it's not good to be close to it (for those who accept it as an ideal), but actually reaching it would be utterly dysfunctional.

There are types of speech which cannot be free under the law (threats, plagiarism, libel).

There are types of speech which cannot be permitted if the forum is to actually function. Shall we remove the anti-bot and anti-spam software? Free speech, right?

There are types of speech which cannot be compatible with their setting; personal insults in the support section, f'r'ex. The environment is provided for a purpose, which does not and cannot include all types of speech by its express intent.

Thus the disagreement here is not, and never was, between "some rules" and "no rules".

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-10-2013, 10:56 AM
RE: Rule 5 is officially up
(07-10-2013 10:54 AM)Stark Raving Wrote:  That type of vagueness is EXACTLY why the term "free speech" should be removed entirely from the forum rules.

It's only used once, though. And, it's an allusion. You still think so?

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-10-2013, 10:59 AM
RE: Rule 5 is officially up
(07-10-2013 10:56 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  It's only used once, though. And, it's an allusion. You still think so?

It's used once in Rule 5 to specifically say that people don't have it totally. The only other mention was in one of the Additional Info paragraphs and I altered the sentence to remove it about an hour ago.

We don't actually have anything to argue about here do we?

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-10-2013, 11:00 AM
RE: Rule 5 is officially up
(07-10-2013 10:56 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(07-10-2013 10:54 AM)Stark Raving Wrote:  That type of vagueness is EXACTLY why the term "free speech" should be removed entirely from the forum rules.

It's only used once, though. And, it's an allusion. You still think so?

If, indeed, his definition of free speech is "no rules at all ever", then yes, its inclusion is contradictory (since, as it happens there are rules Tongue ).

But no court or constitution ever would use that definition. And that's why I'm a bit puzzled by it...

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-10-2013, 11:01 AM
RE: Rule 5 is officially up
Hughsie,

"In the event that it felt by the forum... "

"In the event that it is felt by the forum..."

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
07-10-2013, 11:01 AM
RE: Rule 5 is officially up
(07-10-2013 11:00 AM)cjlr Wrote:  If, indeed, his definition of free speech is "no rules at all ever", then yes, its inclusion is contradictory (since, as it happens there are rules Tongue ).

But no court or constitution ever would use that definition. And that's why I'm a bit puzzled by it...

OK, can someone tell me what use of it we arguing over cos I'm totally lost here. Huh

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Evolution Kills continually violates Rule 1 Heywood Jahblome 179 3,168 08-03-2014 03:59 PM
Last Post: Free Thought
  SavedWheat needs warning about rule 1. Reltzik 6 137 20-12-2013 06:39 AM
Last Post: WitchSabrina
  Rule suggestion for the boxing ring ELK12695 2 145 06-07-2013 04:47 PM
Last Post: Julius
Forum Jump: