Govt tends to grow if you use violence against it

[Kat Kanning]

I've got a great idea!  Let's have a contest in your name, Kevin.  Everyone can come up with their best stories detailing the gang rape of my daughter.  The winner will get the 2007 Underground Free Speech Award!  The more graphic, the better!

[Lloyd Danforth]

To those of us who have children and friends who can be placed in harms way, in the real world, by behavior on this forum... I say think about what good will come from your contributions here.

If the authorities that we deal with regularly think that we may pose a violent threat, things can get dangerous real quick. I don't want my son, who has been to most of the protests and made the papers on more than one occasion, to be caught in the middle between thugs.

Roger, you can't have it both ways any more than Tim could take his family to Ed's house and spin it as a harmless sleepover. Our supposedly "radical" politics may have consequences, and we all need to understand and accept that.

"Martha, I've decided not to sign the Declaration of Independence. Our family could be placed in harm's way."

"Good idea, Thomas. Let's go have a picnic."

I don't think Roger is involved in any kind of politics at all, radical or not.  He does take part in activism.  Only he can judge how much and what kind is safe for him.  Making it clear in public how far he will go, and, distancing himself from Freaks is the best protection he can arrange and still stick his head out.
Although I am a single guy with no responsibilities other than my self, I don't think the opinion of single guys with no responsibilities other than themselves is worth much here.

[aworldnervelink]

[replying to Kat, not Lloyd]

I thought I asked a pretty straightforward question. If the hosting cost is an issue I will gladly bear it in the interest of free speech. If not, do you have some other agenda?

I haven't read the offending post since it was censored. However, I'm quite certain from the descriptions given that it was a hypothetical situation used as an example in the course of a debate. This type of rhetorical device goes back to the ancient Greeks. Does it not make sense to portray a particularly chilling situation in order to illustrate the importance of self-defense? Nobody was seriously suggesting that anyone be gang-raped, and if they were... well, hit the Ignore button.

I firmly believe that ideas need to be brought out and debated openly. A forum is a marketplace of ideas, just as a store is a marketplace of consumer goods. The best will win out in the end, and the worst will disappear and be forgotten.

On a related note, I made a promise to myself a few years back... I guess you could call it a resolution. I determined that any time a thought popped into my head that involved controlling other human beings, I would do my best to push it out, trace it back to where it came from, and eradicate it. It's an interesting perspective.

I'm off to work on my entry for the contest. When everyone is ready we'll have a party and there will be a chocolate fountain.

[aworldnervelink]

Making it clear in public how far he will go, and, distancing himself from Freaks is the best protection he can arrange and still stick his head out.

And that is certainly his right and duty to do so. However, unless I'm seriously misunderstanding, Roger seems to want to silence others whose opinions he disagrees with so that he will not be "tainted by association."

[LordBaltimore]

The idea of a supposedly libertarian forum being censored is absurd.

It's only censorship if the government imposes the silence.  Kat is not the government.

This is her home, and she gets to make her own rules in her own home.  Nothing could be more libertarian in concept than that.

[Lloyd Danforth]

And, yet, so many just don't get it

[Lloyd Danforth]

Making it clear in public how far he will go, and, distancing himself from Freaks is the best protection he can arrange and still stick his head out.

And that is certainly his right and duty to do so. However, unless I'm seriously misunderstanding, Roger seems to want to silence others whose opinions he disagrees with so that he will not be "tainted by association."

No, he is merely supporting the property owner who provides him a safe place to be.  He is glad Kat tries to keep it safe and comfortable for him and would protest an arbitrary (non owner) authority, like the government, from censoring anyone.

[Raineyrocks]

Who is Roger?

[LordBaltimore]

I haven't read the offending post since it was censored.

It wasn't censored, it was deleted.  And the sick, hyperviolent freak who posted it was only banned after numerous warnings and being asked politely to leave.  This is Kat's property; good for her for asserting her property rights.

[aworldnervelink]

And, yet, so many just don't get it

I get it quite clearly, Lloyd. Nowhere have I said that it is not Kat's right to create any policies that she wants. My point is that I find these policies offensive and it creates an atmosphere in this forum that makes me no longer want to participate in it. If Keith Murphy started throwing my friends out of his restaurant and ran around duct-taping people's mouths, I would no longer go there. Same thing here.

Nobody has provided a convincing explanation of why the Ignore button is not solving our problem here. I've read all kinds of drivel on the forums, from the boring to the frustrating to the downright enraging. If I don't like it, I skip it, and in very extreme cases I push Ignore. I think I've only done it for that Grennon character.

I think that Kat is reacting on an emotional level and carrying out a vendetta. I'm holding out hopes that we can all be a bit more intellectual about the process.

[aworldnervelink]

And the sick, hyperviolent freak who posted it was only banned after numerous warnings and being asked politely to leave.

That "hyperviolent freak" is my friend, neighbor, and was a guest in my home just the other day. I don't know who you are, bro.

And just to make it clear, I would vigorously defend anyone's right to freely post, no matter what my association or opinion of them is. Not even Grennon deserved to be banned.

[eques]

Okay, wait, who was Bill Grennon?  Didn't he post here as "FrankChodorov"?  If so, I don't think he was banned.  I thought it was quite clear that he left the forums and deleted his own account voluntarily based on his promise to himself that he would "try this out for a year" or something to that effect.

[MaineShark]

It's only censorship if the government imposes the silence.  Kat is not the government.

This is her home, and she gets to make her own rules in her own home.  Nothing could be more libertarian in concept than that.

Indeed, and Kevin has offered to buy this piece of property, and run it as he chooses.  As long as he doesn't go to Concord and demand that they seize it by emminent domain and give it to him (and that would certainly boggle the mind, wouldn't it?), he's just making an offer on the free market.

Kat is free to accept or decline the offer, as she sees fit.

Okay, wait, who was Bill Grennon?  Didn't he post here as "FrankChodorov"?  If so, I don't think he was banned.  I thought it was quite clear that he left the forums and deleted his own account voluntarily based on his promise to himself that he would "try this out for a year" or something to that effect.

I believe Kevin was saying that Grennon wouldn't deserve to be banned, not that he actually was.

Joe

[eques]

Yeah.

His comment would have been a little more convincing if Grennon actually had been banned.

[aworldnervelink]

Right. I was just using him as an example of someone I saw fit to Ignore.

For another example, mvpel frequently posts pro-war screeds that I vehemently disagree with. Here we are talking about the advocation of violence on a mass scale - the initiation or continuation of war. I would not call for these posts to be removed. Mike is also a friend of mine, so maybe not the best example, but you get my drift.

There must be someone on this forum who I don't know or just don't like who posts inflammatory stuff... but I still would not want their right to post restricted.