So, whose forum is this, anyway?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-07-2013, 01:28 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 01:16 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  We ain't arguing US Amendments as interpreted by some American court justices. We are arguing what speech is protected by the TTA's rules. As far as I can tell, all is fair 'cept threats.

Never hurts to consider smarter people than me's take on shit. Tongue

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
07-07-2013, 01:29 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 12:58 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  If nothing else, the pedo threads have made me reexamine my own feelings towards free speech and investigate it further. In the US at least, it is a complicated issue that the Supreme Court Justices have had to revisit again and again. I ain't no Supreme Court Justice, but this exclusion (i.e. speech which is not protected) to the First Amendment feels apropos here:

"Fighting words

Inflammatory words that are either injurious by themselves or might cause the hearer to immediately retaliate or breach the peace. Use of such words is not necessarily protected 'free speech' under the First Amendment. If the hearer is prosecuted for assault, claiming fighting words may establish mitigating circumstances.[8]"


Not an american, so not my issue, but the wording and meaning is so subjective to be almost meaningless. What words are in of themselves injurious.

"I used to be an adventurer, but then I took a pronoun to the knee"

The very concept of a word that injures makes as much sense as a war on terror, and frankly discussions were one side advocates the curtailing of freedom of speech could lead me to immediately retaliate or breach the peace. Seems to me the only use this piece of legislation will ever be is to act as defence for assault, as any issue under the sun may illict the the conduct that is said may establish mitigating circumstances for assault.

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Humakt's post
07-07-2013, 01:34 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
All it means is that if person A keeps provoking person B, and B ends up losing his cool, B is not going to be punished as hard as he would be if no one had provoked him.

[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
07-07-2013, 01:37 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 01:34 PM)Dom Wrote:  All it means is that if person A keeps provoking person B, and B ends up losing his cool, B is not going to be punished as hard as he would be if no one had provoked him.

In such an instance both parties could be charged with assault since the B could show that while B attacked first A had provoked the encounter. Had there been no words and B attacked A A could claim self defense.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
07-07-2013, 01:43 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 01:34 PM)Dom Wrote:  All it means is that if person A keeps provoking person B, and B ends up losing his cool, B is not going to be punished as hard as he would be if no one had provoked him.

No it does not, the wording is specific in that the words must cause an "immediate" response. In that it specifies an immediate response, it is explictly not addressing the effects of a prolonged conversation.

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2013, 01:44 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 01:17 PM)Hobbitgirl Wrote:  I sometimes wonder if we remember how to be human. I don't think we do.

Was this directed at me, or....?

(07-07-2013 01:17 PM)Dom Wrote:  
(07-07-2013 01:13 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  You are using A FALSE example. First of all, the solider IS NOT HURTING ANYONE in your example. Now, lets say he did, would that still make it OK? Lets say the solider was brought back to a time with that thunder stike and KILLED his wife and kids because he thought he was a solider and they were the enemy.

Does he get a free pass? Does he still get punished? Drinking Beverage Yes, Yes he does. He pays for the crime by being in a mental ward.

Deep doesn't get a free pass on this. No matter what he went through, that doesn't make it ACCEPTABLE to say that to fortylegs, the abuse makes it UNDERSTANDABLE.


Do you UNDERSTAND the difference between the two words?

I give up. I am done talking with you on this topic. Other topics, fine. Deep wasn't even there. You missed the entire point. And now, please don't address me on the topic of abuse anymore. I find your comments very upsetting. All you want to do is win an argument, and you don't want to understand that you do not at all understand what a repressed traumatic event is and does. Yours is not repressed, you remember just fine, it's not the same.

I only wish to win an argument? Please, I was defending myself from the claim that Deep was "Viciously attacked." Considering I was the one going up against him, one can assume you meant "When A2 viciously attacked Deep" which was not the case. I gave you my defense, you used an example that was false, and I gave you my rebuttal to it.

You now claim that my comments are upsetting. Ok, you have that right to be upset. Just as I have the right to be upset when people call me a petulant child, or say that I am a spokesman for pedophile's rights.

Yet I recognize that I have to address this issue as rationally as possible.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
07-07-2013, 01:48 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 01:43 PM)Humakt Wrote:  
(07-07-2013 01:34 PM)Dom Wrote:  All it means is that if person A keeps provoking person B, and B ends up losing his cool, B is not going to be punished as hard as he would be if no one had provoked him.

No it does not, the wording is specific in that the words must cause an "immediate" response. In that it specifies an immediate response, it is explictly not addressing the effects of a prolonged conversation.

Hmmm, I never even thought of conversation. The scene that flashed in front of my eyes was some sort of bully berating someone, and the berated person takes a swing at the bully.

[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
07-07-2013, 01:59 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 01:29 PM)Humakt Wrote:  Not an american, so not my issue, but the wording and meaning is so subjective to be almost meaningless. What words are in of themselves injurious.

"I used to be an adventurer, but then I took a pronoun to the knee"

The very concept of a word that injures makes as much sense as a war on terror, and frankly discussions were one side advocates the curtailing of freedom of speech could lead me to immediately retaliate or breach the peace. Seems to me the only use this piece of legislation will ever be is to act as defence for assault, as any issue under the sun may illict the the conduct that is said may establish mitigating circumstances for assault.

Want to know what is almost meaningless to ME? For the lot of us to sit here and act like this forum represents the real world. That's bullshit plain and simple and the Porn thing proved that much. Want to know what else proves it? The fact that SPAM is a bannable offense here. You can spam all the eff you want in the real world and no one can arrest you unless you are defacing public property. Yup, I can post as many pointless fliers as I want in any public location and no one can do shit about it.

I've been trying to hammer this point to you guys over and over. Stop flying the free speech banner. It doesn't hold up here. Free speech is limited here whether or not you allow pedophiles in.

Why do you guys ban spam then considering the lengths you all are going to, to defend free speech? I bet you're going to say because it is disruptive and does nothing to contribute to the community. I bet people feel the same way about the pedophiles here. I dunno, call that one a wild hunch.

Be real with yourselves and admins, be real to TTA's community. Don't fly this shit under the false guise of "YEA, FREE SPEECH BRO, ALL THE WAY." Lay your rules out plain and simple. Say free speech is honored to a limit. List EXACTLY what will ban you outright and the criteria to get you considered for a ban. Don't call this place truly Free Speech friendly. We aren't in the real world. There's no police, courts, or jail. You guys can do whatever you please for better or for worse.

I have half a mind to test this forum's free speech policy's limits. A little demon on my shoulder is telling me to plaster a link to this place in every pedophile, racist, rapist, snuff, and whatever god-awful site. Let's see if you guys walk the walk the whole way.

My last point... want to know why we can't and shouldn't restrict free speech in the real world? BECAUSE IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO POLICE THAT FAIRLY. The beauty of an Internet forum though is that fairness doesn't matter. You got banned? You move onto the next forum. Don't like the rules? You move onto the next forum. Can't do that in real life unless you have the means to hop countries. Even then, you're going to run out of options very quickly.

So how about we drop the Free Speech talk?

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2013, 02:07 PM
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 01:59 PM)NoahsFarce Wrote:  I have half a mind to test this forum's free speech policy's limits. A little demon on my shoulder is telling me to plaster a link to this place in every pedophile, racist, rapist, snuff, and whatever god-awful site. Let's see if you guys walk the walk the whole way.

That is very evil. And it has crossed my mind. I would never do it, but one wonders what would happen to free speech then.

Besides, it looks like the membership purges periodically, unfortunately it purges the good contributing members and retains the - others. How many purges before it is all newbies and - others?

[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
07-07-2013, 02:18 PM (This post was last modified: 07-07-2013 02:21 PM by NoahsFarce.)
RE: So, whose forum is this, anyway?
(07-07-2013 02:07 PM)Dom Wrote:  
(07-07-2013 01:59 PM)NoahsFarce Wrote:  I have half a mind to test this forum's free speech policy's limits. A little demon on my shoulder is telling me to plaster a link to this place in every pedophile, racist, rapist, snuff, and whatever god-awful site. Let's see if you guys walk the walk the whole way.

That is very evil. And it has crossed my mind. I would never do it, but one wonders what would happen to free speech then.

Besides, it looks like the membership purges periodically, unfortunately it purges the good contributing members and retains the - others. How many purges before it is all newbies and - others?

I would never do that to this place... especially Seth. He has been a big part of deconversion.

I know you know this, but I'm just trying to drive home a point. I doubt most of the "free speech" defenders would hold their ground if the above happened. Everyone has a limit and since this is an Internet forum, it's quite easy to draw that line and start banning.

EDIT: I would like to fully disclose that I am quite flustered now over this subject. Last night's incident fucked me up and I'm not even a victim. I've stomached some bad shit no problem. But last night was where my line was drawn. Can't tell you how much I kissed my kids and just hugged the shit out of them last night.

I might fly off the handle if I see a post like that again. But that's alright... I have freedom of speech here. I can vent if I want to.

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: