So most here seem to think free speech means you are free to speak your mind as long as its a socially acceptable opinion. Or @ least an opinion that the listener likes.


Quote:

Freedom of speech is the political right to communicate one's opinions and ideas via speech. The term freedom of expression is sometimes used synonymously, but includes any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. In practice, the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations, as with libel, slander, obscenity and incitement to commit a crime.

First paragraph out of wikipedia. I am not a supporter of free expression so much because that can be destructive but free speech doesnt hurt anyone.


SOB

Poll

Freedom is not free.

Well ppl seem to want to discuss it in other threads. Seem to be silent now though.

SOB

I don't think that "freedom of speech" exists in any country.

falah wrote on May 31^st, 2012 at 11:07am:

I don't think that "freedom of speech" exists in any country.

Nope. However (for now) it exists in some places on the internet. This is why ACTA etc are being brought in.

SOB

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/FreedomofSpeech.jpg

The pertinent point…..

“the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations, as with libel, slander, obscenity and incitement to commit a crime”

You CAN NOT say what eve you want.

You have shown incredible obstinacy in the face of fact, kudos.

;)

I never said it was absolute in any country.

On the other hand there are places where you can have your own opinion without being "gagged" online and even in the real world (domain in sydney for 1 place).

There is no reason certain opinions should be banned from any forum online or even in real life. Everyone should have the right to say what they think.

Obviously I comply buy the rules here and dont swear but the "judgmental" rules are too obscure to grasp. PP got banned for being "anti-semite" according to some. Was that the actual reason? If so why is that punishable by banning and not saying the same thing about muslims?

SOB

The cure for people who believe in absolute free speech is to put them in charge of something for a while, preferably a group of people.

I can give you an example from another discussion board I frequent.
There was this member who was a full-blown anarchist (or so he was forever claiming). He was forever slandering and disrupting threads everywhere. He was eventually banned for this very reason. In an act of defiance he decided to create his own forum. What then happened was some of the aggrieved members he trolled on the previous discussion board decided to join up to his new forum and do to that forum what he did to the previous forum. In the end this self-confessed 'anarchist' ended up censoring and banning those disruptive members because his forum couldn't operate or attract new members under the 'anything goes' rules.

This is also applicable to other areas. Imagine having to run a business with an employee content on abusing customers and fellow employees all day. The business just couldn't operate.

Most anarchists have never been in a position of power or responsibility so they've never had to actually deal with the practicalities of everyday life.

you are obviously calling me an anarchist. I said in the Op that i am not so keen on freedom of expression just speech.

Also I run a forum. It has been going for about 10 years. I also have several chatrooms and some are free speech and some are not (gotta comply to some restrictions when theres kids around). Before the internet I ran a BBS so I have been around a while. Obviously your analogy is flawed. Try coming up with an argument instead of trying to analyse and insult me somehow - its not working.

I do not kick ppl out of the forum for having objectionable opinions. Ppl are free to say what they like. We do have an area to put whining though.

Tell me. Where does it stop? If one opinion is banned then another then another sooner or later we wont be able to say anything. How would you like to not be able to say bad stuff about gillard because ppl objected to hearing your opinion? We need differing opinions to keep a board running anyway.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 31^st, 2012 at 4:07pm:

I never said it was absolute in any country. SOB

Correct, you said....

"Ever heard of free speech? Free speech is where everyone is allowed to speak their mind no matter if others disagree"

Which even your OP...

"In practice, the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations, as with libel, slander, obscenity and incitement to commit a crime"

Disagrees with.

Freedom of speech has limitations.

Get over it.

::)

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 31^st, 2012 at 4:13pm:

The cure for people who believe in absolute free speech is to put them in charge of something for a while, preferably a group of people. I can give you an example from another discussion board I frequent. There was this member who was a full-blown anarchist (or so he was forever claiming). He was forever slandering and disrupting threads everywhere. He was eventually banned for this very reason. In an act of defiance he decided to create his own forum. What then happened was some of the aggrieved members he trolled on the previous discussion board decided to join up to his new forum and do to that forum what he did to the previous forum. In the end this self-confessed 'anarchist' ended up censoring and banning those disruptive members because his forum couldn't operate or attract new members under the 'anything goes' rules.

Ha! Good example.

Quote:

Disagrees with. Freedom of speech has limitations. Get over it.

you obviously have selective eyesight. Thats about 3 times now you have just skipped over the bits where I say that there is still free speech on the internet.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 31^st, 2012 at 4:28pm:

you are obviously calling me an anarchist. I said in the Op that i am not so keen on freedom of expression just speech. Also I run a forum. It has been going for about 10 years. I also have several chatrooms and some are free speech and some are not (gotta comply to some restrictions when theres kids around). Before the internet I ran a BBS so I have been around a while. Obviously your analogy is flawed. Try coming up with an argument instead of trying to analyse and insult me somehow - its not working. I do not kick ppl out of the forum for having objectionable opinions. Ppl are free to say what they like. We do have an area to put whining though. Tell me. Where does it stop? If one opinion is banned then another then another sooner or later we wont be able to say anything. How would you like to not be able to say bad stuff about gillard because ppl objected to hearing your opinion? We need differing opinions to keep a board running anyway. SOB

You're obviously a highly insecure and sensitive individual. I wasn't singling you out, I merely brought forth an example where absolute freedom of speech cannot work.


If I had more time on my hands and was a more childish person, I'd join your forums and pollute it and disrupt it with the most vulgar insults possible. I'd insult every member and attempt to drive all current and potential members away. You'll then realize that some 'opinions' aren't worth having around.

Ppl have already tried that,. They got bored and wandered off when they didnt get a reaction or if it was spam they got moved to the spam bord.

SOB

I found that in this forum, insult someone the moderators like and you are banned, insult someone they don't like, and it's OK ....

John Smith wrote on May 31^st, 2012 at 5:32pm:

I found that in this forum, insult someone the moderators like and you are banned, insult someone they don't like, and it's OK ....

Heh. Yeah and the mods seem to like the worst culprits.

SOB

SHUDDUP

Freedom of speech does not have to imply freedom from just consequences. Acknowledging this is not the same as rejecting freedom of speech in principle, as people like Falah imply. I think he once tried to tell me that stoning someone to death for apostasy is just a 'different take' on freedom.


Quote:

On the other hand there are places where you can have your own opinion without being "gagged" online and even in the real world (domain in sydney for 1 place).

Is there anything you can say there that you can't say anywhere else? It appears to me that this is merely a place 'designated' for soap boxing. Being put in a place makes you less free, not more.


Quote:

There is no reason certain opinions should be banned from any forum online or even in real life.

Why should a forum be treated any different to any other private space? You can kick someone out of your home for any reason you want. Why not your website?


Quote:

Try coming up with an argument instead of trying to analyse and insult me somehow - its not working.

Don't be so precious Borg. He was just giving an example. It doesn't have to be all about you.


Quote:

Thats about 3 times now you have just skipped over the bits where I say that there is still free speech on the internet.

You can still get done for slander on the internet. It's just a bit harder to enforce (but not much).

You didnt address what I said about the bannings for being "antisemitic". Apparently saying some opinions here will get you banned for antisemitism? This is what is being said. Andrei and I think soren said it. Is it true? If I say the yanks deserved 11/9 and jews are terrorists will I be banned?

SOB

Quote:

Don't be so precious Borg. He was just giving an example. It doesn't have to be all about you.

comon. It was my thread. It was my topic. It was my points he was addressing. I can respond to it.


Quote:

Why should a forum be treated any different to any other private space? You can kick someone out of your home for any reason you want. Why not your website?

You are absolutely right. If its your forum you can ban whoever you want. However if you arent applying your rules consistently you need to fess up. You also need to be clear about what opinions are not allowed. You opened up the forum to the public - you obviously want it to keep going. You need conflicting opinions to make it work.

I have obeyed your no swearing rules. I read them on the rules page when I joined. However there was also a rule about abusing other members and I copped heaps of abuse (you saw it you know) yet I saw 1 member banned because he got angry when they did it to him and no action was taken against the perpetrators. I would have gotten banned too if I wasnt laughing so much @ soren thinking i was a woman. In fact i am pretty sure that if i did what they do I would be banned anyway.

Is this true? Is this how it is?


Quote:

You can still get done for slander on the internet. It's just a bit harder to enforce (but not much).

Yeah well that is true too I guess but @ this point we are still safe to discuss politics without getting done for sedition.


Quote:

Freedom of speech does not have to imply freedom from just consequences. Acknowledging this is not the same as rejecting freedom of speech in principle, as people like Falah imply. I think he once tried to tell me that stoning someone to death for apostasy is just a 'different take' on freedom.

To tell the truth falah isnt a good example. You use him as an example a lot i see but actually I usually skip his posts (and yaddas) unless I am in a discussion with them because of all the copy/pastes and the holybook verses. My mind just skips over them unless I actually asked for 1.

SOB

John Smith wrote on May 31^st, 2012 at 5:32pm:

I found that in this forum, insult someone the moderators like and you are banned, insult someone they don't like, and it's OK ....

thats about right...mind you I am against insults.. personal stuff.. well it isnt debating is it??

the mods on here have funny ideas... when longy was a mod they all ganged up on him..he dared disobey some rule..

yet we see all sorts of things going on all the time that they claim is wrong.. as you say if its one from their own side its okay..

I am almost sure if blackadder posted as many threads in  a day as deadhorsemeat does.. he would be banned..

I would try it to see what happens..

but I am sick and tired of seeing the front page of Politicians suck stuffed up day after day.


and I dont believe two wrongs make a right.


so it wont happen

Quote:

It was my thread. It was my topic.

No Borg. It is mine. You are just borrowing it.


Quote:

I can respond to it.

I didn't say not to respond. I just said it was not all about you. If you did intend to make the thread about you, you should have said so in the opening post, rather than making people think it was about a free speech.


Quote:

Yeah well that is true too I guess but @ this point we are still safe to discuss politics without getting done for sedition.

Are you suggesting the internet is responsible for this, or is this another topic changer?


Quote:

To tell the truth falah isnt a good example. You use him as an example a lot i see

There are not many people who oppose freedom on principle to use as examples. I could use puppet, but no-one has any idea what he is on about. I use him as an example with you because you defend a lot of the evil stuff he posts in the name of religion, as if it is OK to promote stoning people to death so long as you are a minority.

I see you addressed the questions.

SOB