Printable View
I guess this not only question for Jamie, but everyone.
Whilst I don't necessarily agree with jesus4u's religious rantings, and whilst I think that posting "Jesus Loves You" as a thread certainly constitutes spam (of sorts), is it really justifyable to mute the guy by closing his thread?
I see so many crap threads stated that are as equally inane as j4u's last literary masterpiece.
I say...
Let Jesus4U have his say.
We all love the guy and this forum needs an arch nemesis.
Gaffer
He's hardly been muted, has he? When J4U has posted those sort of threads before, he usually never comes back to them anyway, just enjoys the fact that he has attracted attention.
At the end of the day, he can still carry on posting elsewhere.
Besides, if it's against the forum rules to spam, he must comply of face the consquences...
well, when i attempted to debate with him on his forum, he locked my thread twice, and another one once (but that was because i called him an idiot for locking the other one ;)). so i don't have much sympathy for him, although i don't agree with locking/deleting threads unless they get out of control.
Quote:
Originally posted by simonm
Gaffer
He's hardly been muted, has he? When J4U has posted those sort of threads before, he usually never comes back to them anyway, just enjoys the fact that he has attracted attention.
At the end of the day, he can still carry on posting elsewhere.
Besides, if it's against the forum rules to spam, he must comply of face the consquences...
He did get muted - the thread got closed.
I hear what you're saying: He posts once and lets the argument explode, he enjoys the attention; I basically acknowledged that in my first post.
But how is what he posts any different form some of the other spammy ****e posted here?
I'm not saying that spam should be accepted, I just think it looks like he's being targetted. either boot him, or let him post.
I Like spammy ****e.Quote:
Originally posted by Gaffer
He did get muted - the thread got closed.
But how is what he posts any different form some of the other spammy ****e posted here?
I'm not saying that spam should be accepted, I just think it looks like he's being targetted. either boot him, or let him post.
Chit Chat is 20 % spammy ****e.
I realise that but he has hardly been stopped from posting, has he?Quote:
He did get muted - the thread got closed.
Perhaps it isn't any different. I agree that an even handed attitude should be applied across the board and that he should be targeted uniquely.Quote:
But how is what he posts any different form some of the other spammy ****e posted here?
However, I think there's a difference between spamming and the posting of meaningless posts.
I'm the one who closed the thread by the way.
The way I see it... he just does that stuff to attract attention and annoy everyone.
He's not interested in debating with anyone.
Its all just provocation - and invariably, those sorts of threads end up as religious wars.
I wouldn't mind if he was debating... but he doesn't.
Therein lies the problem ... for me anyway...
I never suggested he had. I was questioning the reason's why there is selective muting.Quote:
Originally posted by simonm
I realise that but he has hardly been stopped from posting, has he?
And this is the issue. Don't get me wrong here, I am not against censorship of posts at all, I just don't see why this particular post is judged different to thisQuote:
Perhaps it isn't any different. I agree that an even handed attitude should be applied across the board and that he should be targeted uniquely.
However, I think there's a difference between spamming and the posting of meaningless posts.
That thread is meant in jest though
I guess everyone has a little filburt in them. :D
no offense plenderJ, but
Gaffer's got a good point.
J4U's posts are no worse than anybody elses.
in fact they are much better than mine, except that one about
the fuzzy bunnies, but that was a long time ago.
The only real annoyance was when he was automatically posting
to the Post Race! thread.
Another thing you have to consider, is the fact that I, and the rest of the other mods are human.
As hard as we try, we're still succeptible to bias and irrationality...
And I suspect j4u inanely posts his crap in the same jestful way, laughing at the way people respond to it.
Pre-emptive analysis of a thread that "may" go wrong is not overly democratic.
Just playing devil's advocate, Mr. P. Someone's got to ask the tough questions :)
Well, think about it if you were in my position.
You know jesus4u used to always annoy you and many other people, and sooo many people have wanted him banned.
Now that you have the power to make that happen, its only logical that you would at least try to moderate this posts a little...
JESUS was always persecuted.
Jesus4U Must be loving this.
LET MY PEOPLE GO!!!
...and there's no doubt your moderation skills have been admirable to present (specially compared to one Mr Filburt). I'd just refer back to this thread title...Quote:
Originally posted by plenderj
Well, think about it if you were in my position.
You know jesus4u used to always annoy you and many other people, and sooo many people have wanted him banned.
Now that you have the power to make that happen, its only logical that you would at least try to moderate this posts a little...
/at this point you and me would retire to the pub and talk ****e now ;)
Everything is better over a few pints.Quote:
Originally posted by Gaffer
/at this point you and me would retire to the pub and talk ****e now ;)
Lets head :)
Ooooh a debate ... get simon in !
Trouble with FOS is that you have to allow everyone to speak. No censorship.
I'm sure if I started spouting neo-nazi crap around here I'd be banned in a second although I'd only be conveying my point of view.
So you have to draw the line somewhere and since you are required to do that (without it this forum degrades to a flamefest) you can't really be talking about FOS.
So there :p
But then that begs the obvious question as to who has the right to decide whether something would be offensive to others or not.
For example, if we started talking hitler being the greatest thing since sliced bread, some of us might totally agree, some of us mightn't care less, and some of us might get offended
That's the whole point here Jamie.
FOS means you have to allow them to carry on. As soon as you censor there's no FOS.
It's up to the mods, admins and rule book to decide what is acceptable behaviour.
A forum isn't a democracy :)
Quote:
Originally posted by plenderj
I'm the one who closed the thread by the way.
The way I see it... he just does that stuff to attract attention and annoy everyone.
He's not interested in debating with anyone.
Its all just provocation - and invariably, those sorts of threads end up as religious wars.
I wouldn't mind if he was debating... but he doesn't.
Therein lies the problem ... for me anyway...
naw, i think he really means his posts u guys just think its nuts, sigh i might as well say this so u guys can all laff at duc even more. i believe in the exact same stuff as he does :)
Wally :
Sadly yes, its not a democracy.
as who ?Quote:
Originally posted by duc
i believe in the exact same stuff as he does :)
Jesus4u ?
If this forum proported to allow freedom of speach, it would be wrong to censor anyone.
However, it doesn't. There are certain rules imposed (presumably by the owner) and J4U fell foul of them.
The only issue here, if there is an issue attall, is if the rules are not being applied evenly and fairly.
wonder what the rules are
/grabs retreating Jamie by the collar
oh no you don't ... you've got some explaining to do young man ! :)
as a matter of fact someone else this morning asked for a copy of the rules, and I'll be ****ed if I have a clue where to find them!
So we make it up as we go then ? Good thinking ! :thumb:
nah. martin keeps posting a link to the page.
the agreement with which you have to agree in order to join
But freedom of speech is not absolute. God forbid we ever had threads about links to child pornography. Freedom of speech is the right for people to speak within the rules, or to fight to have the right to speak on topics within repressed societies. The laws are ever flexible on this, throughout the democrtic world.Quote:
Originally posted by simonm
If this forum proported to allow freedom of speach, it would be wrong to censor anyone.
However, it doesn't. There are certain rules imposed (presumably by the owner) and J4U fell foul of them.
The only issue here, if there is an issue attall, is if the rules are not being applied evenly and fairly.
In this case however, there are no clearly defined rules. The decision is autocratic. Then again, how can it NOT be autocratic without the whole thing turning into a bureaucrtic pile of toss.
Finally, I would say there is an issue here. The chiefs have to step in line as much as the indians...
I nominate that for the "Profound statement of the week" award...Quote:
The chiefs have to step in line as much as the indians...
Lets Crucify Jesus4U.
Go on.........it might be fun.
CRUCIFIXION
CRUCIFIXION
CRUCIFIXION
I second that :)Quote:
Originally posted by simonm
I nominate that for the "Profound statement of the week" award...
(I'm probably too sleepy to post right now so if I don't make any sense...) With J4U's posts (in chit chat) you pretty much know what to expect before even opening them... I cannot remember what the thread was exactly but I do remember that I was offended. BUT I opened it knowing that it was most likely something of that nature. How this applies to FOS, well it doesn't (as far as my post goes), J4U is a special case.
k I should probably not hit submit
m
Quote:
Originally posted by msimmons
k I should probably not hit submit
m
and yet you still did ;)
Some people mistakenly think the FOS is FTB (freedom to *****) :)
Well, it is, isn't it? If you are restricted in any way, it isn't freedom of speach.Quote:
Some people mistakenly think the FOS is FTB (freedom to *****)
So where is this supposed thread?Quote:
Originally posted by Gaffer
He did get muted - the thread got closed.
Was it closed immediately after he made it, or after several responses were made.
And, you must consider, the closeing of a thread isn't just silencing 1 individual, it silences all.
Perhaps a feature could be created someday that allows threads to be locked on a user by user basis, ie... leave the thread unlocked, but restrict access to j4u,, instead of entirely closeing it.
||
:)
There's already a lovely feature for that kind of thing.Quote:
Originally posted by NotLKH
Perhaps a feature could be created someday that allows threads to be locked on a user by user basis, ie... leave the thread unlocked, but restrict access to j4u,, instead of entirely closeing it.
Its called the "Ban User" feature.
Would work a treat on Jesus4U :rolleyes:
http://www.vbforums.com/showthread.p...hreadid=210138Quote:
Originally posted by NotLKH
So where is this supposed thread?
religion was created long long ago at the beginning of man as a way to explain why things happened. in ancient times people wondered why the river flowed.. and why the sun was in the sky.... so they dubbed that the GODS put it there and controlled it... sacrificed food/animals/people to appease the gods...
of course we now know what the sun is and why the rivers flow thanks to science..
but the one thing that has always boggled the human mind is where we came from... which is why religion exists... that and the fact that when we die, there is no way for the living to determine what happens... but while religion has been what it has been over all these years... science continues to prove its facts and I believe that eventually it will overcome religion and prove it all wrong.. I don't doubt that Jesus was a real person and all that... he just was not the sun of god.. because god doesn't exist
(and you are hearing this from someone who went to a catholic high school)
I know science has not proven religion to be entirely false yet.. but religion hasn't proven its truth either and science is gaining ground quick....
now being an atheist.. many people consider me to be someone who loves chaos and is a "devil" worshiper that will rot in hell :D
well since there is no hell I don't have to worry about that... and honestly.. I am more peaceful than most religious people I feel..
knowing right from wrong has nothing to do with religion... it is common sense... and since I don't believe that we go to this eternal resting place in the clouds when we die it makes me love life even more.. because it is so short... unlike these religious people that will die for what they believe and think they are going someplace other than the ground...
religion helps people cope with death of loved ones and other things like that.. so for that it is good... but only for that...
other than that the church (catholic church anyway) is just a money grubbing scam that has a bunch of so called gods people that took advantage of the trust they obtained from society and molested a bunch of little kids...
the sad thing is that these people waste their lives living it according to these guide lines that were made up so long ago..
sorry if I ramble.. just wanted to put in my 2 pennies
Amen
This is a private board, you do not have the right to freedom of speech here.