Rick, clarify this for members:
Define "gratuitous profanity" and also help me understand "non-gratuitous
profanity". I want to be able to use non-gratuitous profanity (if I deem it
important) without you censoring me or initiating an administrative reprisal.
What comprises a "sexist slur" since we must assume that you have
intentionally demarcated it from the more usual "profanity" to be able to
monitor it.
What about racist slurs? Is trailer-trash permitted but white,
trailer-trash forbidden?
Is the visually, literal euphemism "f*ckhead"(which you have used in your
email about the new guidelines) an example of an allowed or disallowed term?
So
Don't want to explicitly answer these questions? Then you choose to
deliberately obscure the horizon between permitted and forbidden speech. This
can only mean that you intend to exercise your edicts based upon personal likes
and dislikes whether about ideas or persons.
Don't like being forced to monitor member's posts for content, style and
intent? Welcome to the world of Stazi informants. You are now the oberstfurher.
And please dont give me that
Im light with my trigger finger. Youve
already proved that you are easily manipulated by the pathetic sentimentality
of Bronte and the machinations of New Morning.
So
find the thought of monitoring it all rather taxing? Need help to make
it all work? Just go offline and turn it over to your seconds-in-command, your
obergruppenfurhers - New Morning for obvious outrages, Bronte Baxter for
emotionally insensitive offences and Edg for intuitively recognizable
insults.
Oh, and by the way - just so I don t leave anyone with any ambiguity,
which is what I believe will soon happen regularly:
1. I believe that you, Rick Archer, have made an extremely foolish
decision to jeopardize the independent speech of FFL members.
2. I believe that Bronte Baxter is too sentimental and cowardly to
fight for her own points-of-view and has cut a deal (consciously or
unconsciously) with you to create a special FFL privileged status for herself.
Such a status would allow her to speak without incurring the confrontation that
the rest of us might reasonably incur as a result of firmly stating our point
of view. Based upon the gender-driven definitions of Brontes recent emails,
and New Mornings insistence that you are not doing your job, which you have
explicitly sympathized with, you are subjecting the rest of us to the secret
domination motives of these two members. I have noticed that Peter is already
afraid to use language stronger than I agree or I disagree when replying to
Bronte.
3. For years Judy Stein has rationally slugged it out with anyone who
wants to take her on and has endured being called slut and cunt. You, Rick
Archer, have never intervened, and for you to do so now, generally and without
cause, renders Judys forbearance worthless and the duplicity in Baxter and New
Morns domination strategy especially egregious and destructive.
4. I believe that New Morning has conspired to excise the free speech
of FFL members. I believe this renders her actions nothing less than traitorous
to the spirit of FFL. I consider her efforts not only fundamentally dishonest
but a blatant attempt to destroy the free-speech integrity of this forum.
For you, Rick Archer, to frame these domination attempts as just an
exercise is like the Maoist officer declaring the Tiananmen Square massacre as
just the end of a democratic experiment.
---------------------------------
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
