Jump to content

Moderating

richary

By richary
in General geocaching topics

Followers 4

Recommended Posts

carleenp

+carleenp

Posted
Posted (edited)
Just thought you would want to get it right, I am sure it was an ovesight on your part.

No problem, glad I could help.

You're confusing civil rights with civil liberties.

 

Civil liberties are protections from the power of governments. Examples include freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and trial by jury. These are usually created and protected by a constitution.

 

- Wikipedia

 

I don't think Groundspeak is a government entity.

 

(edit: grammar)

I am not confusing the two at all. No entity can deny anyone any of the rights known as the bill of rights. There is no real difference between the two, civil rights or civil liberties, Although civil liberties are more inclusive. A good lawyer can make any case for anything.

 

Again glad I could help and I am sure it was an over site on your part . :):laughing:

Private entities can basically deny speech all they want. If I wasn't tired I would give a bigger lecture on it than I am about to, but I AM tired. So here is the short version: The US Constitution appiles to government. In some instances with protected classes (not speech, which is not a class but is an action), it applies to discrimation against certain classes in public accomodations such as restaurants (e.g. can't discriminate based on race). That is different than speech.

 

With speech look at it this way: A City owns a street. If people want to politically protest on that street and the City (government) stops them, they can sue. But if they start ringing doorbells on private property to spout their views, the property owner does not have to listen. The owner is free to shut the door in the protestor's face. That is the nice thing about speech. You can make GOVERNMENT allow you to speak, but you can't make private property owners listen to it or publish it.

 

The upshot is that non-government owned internet forums can do the same as a private property owner. They can tell you that they don't want to hear it. There is no legal Constitutional protection there.

 

Sorry, but one of my pet peeves that I see constantly on the internet is when people don't understand the difference between Constitutional free speech and private speech. Many confuse the two. One is Constitutionally protected. The other has no protection. You can dislike it, but that doesn't give Constitutional protection.

 

But more important, this is a game. Go caching, have fun. That is what this should be about. :wub:

 

Standard disclaimer: I am not providing legal services or legal advice and am solely expressing a personal legal opinion. Oh the joy of law! :)

Edited by carleenp
Link to comment
as77

+as77

Posted
Posted
Jeremy - You have been warned.

:laughing:

BTW I don't really mind your tone. But what I mind or don't doesn't matter, it's the guidelines that are supposed to regulate the communication here.

 

What I wrote are not facts, it's just how I see the things. I may be wrong, just as anyone else, you included. I didn't think it was necessary to explicitly state this obvious fact (this time a fact indeed).

Link to comment
Renegade Knight

+Renegade Knight

Posted
Posted
I didn't think anyone would be that ignorant. Turns out you're a sockpuppet account. Buh Bye.

I spent all that time composing a speech to a sock puppet when I am tired? ACK!

 

Oh well, it happens....... I will go back to my DVD watching or OT now. :wub:

Sock pupets have real people behind them. It wasn't wasted. It's just a question of which real account read it. :laughing:

Link to comment
woof n lulu

+woof n lulu

Posted
Posted
Just thought you would want to get it right, I am sure it was an ovesight on your part.

No problem, glad I could help.

You're confusing civil rights with civil liberties.

 

Civil liberties are protections from the power of governments. Examples include freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and trial by jury. These are usually created and protected by a constitution.

 

- Wikipedia

 

I don't think Groundspeak is a government entity.

 

(edit: grammar)

I am not confusing the two at all. No entity can deny anyone any of the rights known as the bill of rights. There is no real difference between the two, civil rights or civil liberties, Although civil liberties are more inclusive. A good lawyer can make any case for anything.

 

Again glad I could help and I am sure it was an over site on your part . :):laughing:

Private entities can basically deny speech all they want. If I wasn't tired I would give a bigger lecture on it than I am about to, but I AM tired. So here is the short version: The US Constitution appiles to government. In some instances with protected classes (not speech, which is not a class but is an action), it applies to discrimation against certain classes in public accomodations such as restaurants (e.g. can't discriminate based on race). That is different than speech.

 

With speech look at it this way: A City owns a street. If people want to politically protest on that street and the City (government) stops them, they can sue. But if they start ringing doorbells on private property to spout their views, the property owner does not have to listen. The owner is free to shut the door in the protestor's face. That is the nice thing about speech. You can make GOVERNMENT allow you to speak, but you can't make private property owners listen to it or publish it.

 

The upshot is that non-government owned internet forums can do the same as a private property owner. They can tell you that they don't want to hear it. There is no legal Constitutional protection there.

 

Sorry, but one of my pet peeves that I see constantly on the internet is when people don't understand the difference between Constitutional free speech and private speech. Many confuse the two. One is Constitutionally protected. The other has no protection. You can dislike it, but that doesn't give Constitutional protection.

 

But more important, this is game. Go caching, have fun. That is what this should be about. :)

 

Standard disclaimer: I am not providing legal services or legal advice and am solely expressing a personal legal opinion. Oh the joy of law! :D

Thank you Carleen, you put it in such a way that a non enquiring mind like mine understood it perfectly..... :wub::D:)

Link to comment
Grajek

+Grajek

Posted
Posted (edited)
Sock pupets have real people behind them.  It wasn't wasted.  It's just a question of which real account read it.  :wub:

This was from a banned member.

Which banned memeber am I?

 

Sorry could not resist.

 

I am sorry. Was not trying to stir things up. just trying inform others that the statement was wrong. I never called anyone names and really was being genuine.

 

I will not do it again.

 

:laughing:

 

I really do hope you all get things worked out. I have a lot of friends here and would love to see GC.com get past all the bad blood from the past year.

 

For my part I apologize if I offended anyone. renaming my cache the way I did was wrong and should have picked a different name and other means to make a point. Although I do not use the site I do go out with people from the area and hunt caches,, who are GCers. I think the other sites complement GC.com and Vis Versa. I hope cachers everywhere come together and work things out.

 

I just approved a GC.com event on another site and for my part am pushing for people to heal the deep wounds on both sides. I will continue to always work towards that goal on the other sites. And, I know from the other sites, GC.com is pretty well respected. People have a lot of good things to say about this site.

 

Thanks

Grajek/”El Che”

 

Again Sorry.

Edited by Grajek
Link to comment
as77

+as77

Posted
Posted (edited)

I think what people may be confusing the freedom of speech part of the First Amendment with is the "freedom of opinion and expression", which is included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and says "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."

 

Of course, this still doesn't mean that forums cannot be moderated. But it means, for example, that the moderators cannot come to your house to confiscate your keyboard. :laughing:

Edited by as77
Link to comment
Mopar

+Mopar

Posted
Posted
I think what people may be confusing the freedom of speech part of the First Amendment with is the "freedom of opinion and expression", which is included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and says "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."

Dude! The Declaration of Human Rights aren't laws anyway, they're more like guidelines. :laughing:

 

Besides, half the goverments that set that up routinely break most of them themselves.

Link to comment
as77

+as77

Posted
Posted

Yes, dude, it is mostly symbolic in the US, dude! Unlike First Amendment, whose actual text is this:

Congress shall make no law establishing religion, but shall act as if it did; and shall make no laws abridging the freedom of speech, unless such speech can be construed as "commercial speech" or "irresponsible speech" or "offensive speech;" or shall [not] abridge the right of the  people to peaceably assemble where and when permitted; or shall [not] abridge the right to petition the government for a redress of  grievances, under proper procedures.

 

(Yes, it's a parody.)

Link to comment
carleenp

+carleenp

Posted
Posted
Guess I better show the other side of the glass so people don't think it's MY Signature Item.

 

(snipped image)

 

I got it from the guy with the ugly Avatar :laughing: (just joking RD).

 

Hmmm....Carleen's comment gives me an idea. How about a Signature Pilsner Glass :wub:

That is a darn cool glass. And yes, I like the idea of a signature beer glass. I might have to look into that!

Link to comment
TresOkies

+TresOkies

Posted
Posted

Hmmm....Carleen's comment gives me an idea.  How about a Signature Pilsner Glass  :laughing:

That is a darn cool glass. And yes, I like the idea of a signature beer glass. I might have to look into that!

If CoyoteRed has a laser engraver, then you should be able to get them there. If not, a trophy/engraving shop should be able to do it. Look in the YP under "Awards". My building tenant has a laser engraver and that's how I get my signature cards. He laser engraves them onto 1/8" ash plywood. I'm rather happy with them.

 

(have we successfully hijacked this thread? I think so.)

Link to comment
AuntieWeasel

+AuntieWeasel

Posted
Posted
So now it's OK to derail the thread with off-topic messages?

It's always been okay with me. Deliberately derailing a topic is an effective way of expressing contempt for it.

 

Ahhhhh...you're not going to call for more moderation in a topic about excessive moderation, are you? Because I would enjoy that way too much.

Link to comment
Mopar

+Mopar

Posted
Posted
So now it's OK to derail the thread with off-topic messages? Guys, go take your beer glasses to the Off-Topic forum.
The rest of you US moderators slapping down on things can go and enjoy your Hitler status.

 

There was a thread here?

Yes, please let's get back on the topic of bashing mtn-man. :laughing:

Link to comment
New England n00b

+New England n00b

Posted
Posted
So now it's OK to derail the thread with off-topic messages?

It's always been okay with me. Deliberately derailing a topic is an effective way of expressing contempt for it.

 

Ahhhhh...you're not going to call for more moderation in a topic about excessive moderation, are you? Because I would enjoy that way too much.

BWWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

*coughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughHHHHAAAAACCCK*

 

"Whew..."

 

BWWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

*coughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughHHHHAAAAACCCK*

 

"Whew..."

 

BWWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

*coughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughcoughHHHHAAAAACCCK*

 

"Whew..."

 

BWWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

Link to comment
as77

+as77

Posted
Posted
So now it's OK to derail the thread with off-topic messages?

It's always been okay with me. Deliberately derailing a topic is an effective way of expressing contempt for it.

 

Ahhhhh...you're not going to call for more moderation in a topic about excessive moderation, are you? Because I would enjoy that way too much.

What makes you think the guidelines don't apply to this thread?

Besides, it's not exactly the criticisms of moderation that would require moderation in this thread.

Link to comment
briansnat

+briansnat

Posted
Posted
So now it's OK to derail the thread with off-topic messages?

It's always been okay with me. Deliberately derailing a topic is an effective way of expressing contempt for it.

 

Ahhhhh...you're not going to call for more moderation in a topic about excessive moderation, are you? Because I would enjoy that way too much.

LOL, you're too much AW!

Link to comment
as77

+as77

Posted
Posted
What makes you think the guidelines don't apply to this thread?

Mostly because the original post refers to the moderators' "Hitler status" and wasn't locked immediately. Basically, if you start a thread with a guideline violation, I reckon anything goes from there...up until somebody musters the energy to lock it.

I don't think someone else's guideline violation entitles you to violate to guidelines as well.

Link to comment
New England n00b

+New England n00b

Posted
Posted
What makes you think the guidelines don't apply to this thread?

Mostly because the original post refers to the moderators' "Hitler status" and wasn't locked immediately. Basically, if you start a thread with a guideline violation, I reckon anything goes from there...up until somebody musters the energy to lock it.

I don't think someone else's guideline violation entitles you to violate to guidelines as well.

Oh? Then what are we to discuss in here? How much we think the moderators are Nazi warlords?

 

I don't think so. Have a beer cup. :laughing:

Link to comment
TresOkies

+TresOkies

Posted
Posted
So now it's OK to derail the thread with off-topic messages? Guys, go take your beer glasses to the Off-Topic forum.

Is it OK? No. But I'm sick of all the bitching and back-biting. This is my not-so-subtle way of dealing with it. I'll continue to do so until my warning meter hits the roof. The OP started the conversation by invoking Hitler--the thread was derailed before it even started.

 

I don't mind opposing viewpoints and even a large quantity of heated debate. The atmosphere of these forums right now is not about that, though. It's a rotten place and I'm doing my part to derail those who are being unpleasant for the sake of being unpleasant. Arguing opposing viewpoints with those who are making the forums unpleasant does no good--tsunami aid is merely the latest topic they can use for their purposes.

 

I'm here to talk about GPSes, hiking equipment, trade schwag and hunting tupperware. That is the purpose of these forums (less off-topic), not tsunami aid or the right of free expression.

 

If you'd like to talk about GPSes, et. al., I'll be happy to discuss them here. If you want to talk about politics, tsunami aid, cricket matches and the right of free expression, I'll be happy to do so any you want to stop by. N35 33 W98 34 (more or less). Ask for Eric. I'll even buy the first round.

 

PING!!!

Link to comment
as77

+as77

Posted
Posted
What makes you think the guidelines don't apply to this thread?

Mostly because the original post refers to the moderators' "Hitler status" and wasn't locked immediately. Basically, if you start a thread with a guideline violation, I reckon anything goes from there...up until somebody musters the energy to lock it.

I don't think someone else's guideline violation entitles you to violate to guidelines as well.

Oh? Then what are we to discuss in here? How much we think the moderators are Nazi warlords?

 

I don't think so. Have a beer cup. :laughing:

If you replace the word Hitler in the OP with "dictator" the basic message remains the same and it won't violate the guidelines. The fact that the poster used the word Hitler just means that he feels strongly about the subject. It doesn't mean at all that the topic he raised cannot be discussed. And it certainly doesn't justify the derailing of the thread.

Link to comment
New England n00b

+New England n00b

Posted
Posted

AS another poster has said, the train never left the station. The OP started with a tremendous amount of disrespect, and s/he is getting it by the truckload in return. I have no pity for them at all.

 

Now, if someone were to start a thread with the serious intent of discussing the moderation of this site, RESPECTFULLY, then i would be happy to participate wth the thread.

 

In the meantime, I do believe I will discuss.... Beer Pong!

Link to comment
Stunod

+Stunod

Posted
Posted
AS another poster has said, the train never left the station. The OP started with a tremendous amount of disrespect, and s/he is getting it by the truckload in return. I have no pity for them at all.

 

Now, if someone were to start a thread with the serious intent of discussing the moderation of this site, RESPECTFULLY, then i would be happy to participate wth the thread.

 

In the meantime, I do believe I will discuss.... Beer Pong!

Beer Bong? :laughing:

Link to comment
as77

+as77

Posted
Posted
AS another poster has said, the train never left the station. The OP started with a tremendous amount of disrespect, and s/he is getting it by the truckload in return. I have no pity for them at all.

 

Now, if someone were to start a thread with the serious intent of discussing the moderation of this site, RESPECTFULLY, then i would be happy to participate wth the thread.

 

In the meantime, I do believe I will discuss.... Beer Pong!

The guidelines don't allow disrespect even in reply to disrespect.

Link to comment
Pipanella

Pipanella

Posted
Posted
So now it's OK to derail the thread with off-topic messages?

It's always been okay with me. Deliberately derailing a topic is an effective way of expressing contempt for it.

 

Ahhhhh...you're not going to call for more moderation in a topic about excessive moderation, are you? Because I would enjoy that way too much.

:laughing::):wub::):):D:D:D:)

Link to comment
The Leprechauns

+The Leprechauns

Posted
Posted

124791_1700.jpg

 

Here is a picture of me playing beer pong. The year is 1979. I am on the right. The hat is from Philmont Boy Scout Ranch; since replaced by a Geocaching.com hat.

 

The picture was taken during our fraternity's annual beer pong tournament. Under "tournament rules" a cup of beer consisted of six sips. Each time the ball hit a cup, but was not returned by the cup owner on the first bounce ("saved"), the cup owner had to take one sip. Each time the ball went *into* the cup, this was a "chug" and the cup owner needed to finish all remaining beer in the cup. A game was played to 15 chugs and thus required the losing team to drink 20 or so 12-ounce beers. Each.

 

We lost this particular match. As you can plainly see, my partner had been "chugged" more times than me.

 

As I reflect back upon my beer pong days, I marvel that I am still alive and in possession of a percentage of my brain cells.

 

PING!

Link to comment
AuntieWeasel

+AuntieWeasel

Posted
Posted
If you replace the word Hitler in the OP with "dictator" the basic message remains the same and it won't violate the guidelines.

Okay, that's just silly. He didn't, so it does.

 

The fact that the poster used the word Hitler just means that he feels strongly about the subject.

No, it makes him a complete maroon. I am so bloody sick of the Hitler comparisons. The defining characteristic of Adolph Hitler was that he murdered millions of people in the most ghastly way because he didn't like the sort of people they were. Okay? Anyone failing to see this and using Hitler to define an inconvenience is dangerously subnormal, as far as I'm concerned.

 

It doesn't mean at all that the topic he raised cannot be discussed. And it certainly doesn't justify the derailing of the thread.

Obviously, quite a few disagree. The fact that someone with the ability to shut the topic down agrees with you is neither here nor there.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
Followers 4
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...