Subject:
|
Re: Eduardo is out of line (was: Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms")
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 22 Dec 2001 22:11:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
306 times
|
| |
|
|
"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message
news:Gor26t.98p@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.admin.general, Tim Courtney writes:
> > So you can justify punishing someone for an opinion?
>
> Only for expressing the opinion, I think.
So, do you advocate a 'speech code' system for LUGNET? Careful, read this
first:
http://www.compleatheretic.com/pubs/essays/pccodes.html
Other suggested reading - anything by Larry Elder.
Look at it this way. I don't think you were around when I came on the scene
in 96 - I might be mistaken, but I don't remember you from back then. I was
basically Eduardo, minus the profanity and ESL (English as a Second
Language).
By expressing opinions and having those opinions challenged I grew as a
person. Without being able to express myself for fear of not being
'politically correct,' its likely I would have shut out critical thinking as
a reaction to such codes.
Expressing opinions and having them challenged is a place where people can
grow. RTL and LUGNET have been one of the biggest growth factors in my
life. I've held on to my core beliefs, but learned to think critically -
and as of yet, the process of thinking hasn't damaged what I believe.
Stifle the expression of opinions and you give a bit less room for personal
growth. Not to mention you open the door to take away more freedoms. And
when you read Larry Elder you'll see how silly the victim mentality which
drives the idea of 'political correctness' is.
I'm sure Eduardo has seen the results of his opinion - its been challenged.
Good for him, maybe it will cause him to think. But definitely don't punish
him for expressing a naive opinion.
(note: I'm not interested in a long drawn out debate here. Start one if you
like, but I don't have time to maintain such a debate. I'll discuss this
insofar as it relates to LUGNET policy. The above statements I made are
only intended to explain the basis for my position.)
> > I wouldn't approve of any racial slur being used, but that doesn't mean I
> > would want to see it banned. There's a difference I think between making
> > something socially unacceptable and disallowing it by a mandate.
>
> But then why do you support the mandate against profanity?
>
> I've assumed the goal of these rules is to make LUGNET a place where • adults can
> do their thing and still be a place that parents are comfortable letting • their
> kids roam. Right? If the F word will drive them off then surely open • racism
> will as well. Frankly -- as a parent of two, I'm much more concerned with • my
> kids being exposed to accepted biggotry than to profanity.
Nice try, trying to catch me on a double-standard.
See above for the reason why I disagree with punishing someone for
expressing an opinion.
Profanity is not an opinion. Profanity (talking about common 'swear' words
here - D,F,S,etc...) hampers level-headed intellectual discussion in my
opinion.
I'd hate to see o-t.debate littered with juviniles who cuss each other out
instead of well-reasoned discussions on matters of fact and opinion.
Profanity casts an impression of the user of the profanity - less educated,
hot-tempered, disrespectful, etc... Profanity is unnecessary to the person
who has a well-developed vocabulary and can reason with someone rather than
trying to persuade, intimidate, one-up, whatever... someone else with how
dirty their mouth is.
Allowing the use of profanity on LUGNET is unnecessary, and if allowed it
would make LUGNET a much less pleasant place for the vast majority of people
who visit it. Not to mention, it wouldn't be a place LEGO would want to
associate with, nor would some kids feel comfortable in, nor would parents
feel comfortable allowing their kids visiting.
Profanity in the sense of the common swear word is just that - a bunch of
words. Disallowing 'F---' isn't disallowing an opinion from being said,
neither is disallowing 'S---,' etc.
Do I think swearing should be banned in the public square? No. Do I think
its beneficial for LUGNET to ban swearing? Yes. It creates a much more
pleasant environment for everyone.
But wait, isn't allowing the free expression of non-politically correct
opinions creating a more pleasant place?
I'd say yes, to an extent. By doing that we'd be setting a premise for a
padded world where no one is allowed to get their feelings hurt, and where
percieved 'victims' are given special treatment.
By allowing the free expression of opinions, we're allowing those with
illogical naive views to express them and then learn from people who have
thought it through more. Not too bad of a thing if you ask me.
"The exaggerated sensitivities of others are not my responsibility, nor do
their hurt feelings empower them to abolish my right to free speech."
"Gender, sexual orientation, skin color and ethnicity are accidents of
birth, not an entitlement for life-long victimhood."
-- T.D. Treat - http://www.larryelder.com/tentruths.html
Something tells me you'll still try to pin a double standard on me though.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
22 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
