Liberal Forum

R.Suave » 03 Jan 2024, 11:24 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 11:24 am

Yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater would satisfy a definition of "misinformation".

OK...your point?

FYI...that is a question.
 

R.Suave » 03 Jan 2024, 11:20 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 11:20 am

(......fixes bayonet....)

 

 

ConsRule » 03 Jan 2024, 11:28 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 11:28 am

OK...your point?

FYI...that is a question.

Take me too long to type up my conditions.

You know how that can be.

Now proceed with Equine Suffocating Hypocrisy Theater.
 

R.Suave » 03 Jan 2024, 11:31 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 11:31 am

Take me too long to type up my conditions.

You know how that can be.

Now proceed with Equine Suffocating Hypocrisy Theater.

Just as I suspected...still too scared and child like to answer a question.

You are consistent...I'll give you that.
 

usa360 » 03 Jan 2024, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 10:17 am

One can hope I guess. Surely there are more than a handful of serious political thinkers on this forum. There are a lot of members according to the forum stats. It would be nice to have the administration create a specific board for serious political thinkers and ban or remove all flamers and all slanderous content from it as it appears keeping it strictly serious and non abusive. Misinformation, conspiracy theories, promotion of lies, hate speech and propaganda are not apart of free speech in my opinion. They are forms of chaos and destruction and provide no good service to our society or mankind as a whole. I will continue to believe there are good and decent people willing to create a progressive future rather than a chaotic one and I know there are some one this forum as well. Patients is paramount.

 

Misinformation, conspiracy theories, promotion of lies, hate speech and propaganda are not apart of free speech in my opinion

The next question is who determines what is propaganda, promotion of lies, misinformation, etc etc etc?  Whatever regime occupies the WH?  Congress? 

Much of what were were told during the pandemic was misinformation.  At the time it may have been well intentioned, but anyone speaking out with another opinion was not ostrichsized but attempts to cancel them occured.   

ConsRule » 03 Jan 2024, 11:33 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 11:33 am

Just as I suspected...still too scared and child like to answer a question.

You are consistent...I'll give you that.

still too scared and child like to answer a question.

You are consistent..

Writes itself.

Maybe I should insist you seek out all the questions you've run from and oblige you to answer them first.

But just so your **** talk backs up on you.


The peddling of misinformation during a public health crisis is the equivalent of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

Acknowledge that your question was answered, directly.

usa360 » 03 Jan 2024, 9:25 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 9:25 am

...intelligent and challenge solving discussions without the rhetoric and the slanderous defamation. I will reply to mature statements, remarks and responses but never to juvenile or mean spirited remarks and or flaming feedback.

That's okay - your mom is responding to those in another room.   

user1704207230 » 03 Jan 2024, 9:46 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 9:46 am

Then again, it appears that other participants are not able to view my posts. If any of you do see this post, will you please let me know? Thank you in advance.

Why don't you try - oh, Idunno - JOINING THE **** BOARD?

You know how many people accuse the board of using AI auto-generated posts when we approve posts like yours?

The world is not all about you, kid. 
 

The usual giveaway that something is propaganda and therefore of no value is when the person only uses strong language, hyperbole, and predicts the end or eminent demise of something or someone. If someone is both realistic and objective.. they can explain something and not have to be chicken little.

Skans » 03 Jan 2024, 10:00 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 10:00 am

This has been tried numerous times.  Both on this forum and the one that no longer exists - Dot Org. The truth is most people get bored with this type of debate. While I can enjoy a serious debate, there are only a handful of others that do too.  So, it ends up being maybe 2-4 people debating a topic and then a bunch of hecklers.

Good luck with this - we'll se how it goes.

The reason it goes to **** is **** posters. 

I've also tried serious debates. I have cordoned off threads and made it where only the participants in a debate are allowed to post - and started a companion thread where folks can weigh in from the cheap seats.

All that ever happens is the guy losing the debate refuses to be an honest broker. I am approachable to police a serious debate thread - but in truth, anyone can have a serious debate WITHOUT my assistance. You people (sorry if that sounds ray ciss) have all the power in the world to make it happen. 

You can call out a poster, and if he agrees, you can begin a thread that is just for the two of you. Purchase the peanut gallery designation, and **** any posts that are not made by one of the two participants. You can start a companion thread where folks who wish to comment are free to do so. 

Good **** luck.

PS - I will sticky both the debate thread AND the companion thread on day one of the debate. Just signify. Serious debate IS possible on this board. 

Cannonpointer » 03 Jan 2024, 11:51 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 11:51 am

The reason it goes to **** is **** posters. 

I've also tried serious debates. I have cordoned off threads and made it where only the participants in a debate are allowed to post - and started a companion thread where folks can weigh in from the cheap seats.

All that ever happens is the guy losing the debate refuses to be an honest broker. I am approachable to police a serious debate thread - but in truth, anyone can have a serious debate WITHOUT my assistance. You people (sorry if that sounds ray ciss) have all the power in the world to make it happen. 

You can call out a poster, and if he agrees, you can begin a thread that is just for the two of you. Purchase the peanut gallery designation, and **** any posts that are not made by one of the two participants. You can start a companion thread where folks who wish to comment are free to do so. 

Good **** luck.

PS - I will sticky both the debate thread AND the companion thread on day one of the debate. Just signify. Serious debate IS possible on this board.

What is the intention of this subforum?

viewforum.php?f=21

I failed latin in High School.

usa360 » 03 Jan 2024, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 10:17 am

It would be nice to have the administration create a specific board for serious political thinkers
 

This has been done. The separate forum quickly turns to "dead air". A graveyard of one or two serous debates and then Crickets. Plus, it takes up a lot of moderator time to keep the **** out. 

However, there is a Peanut Gallery function that you can use on this forum, when you build up enough "greenies" (likes, reputation points, whatever you want to call them).  This allows you to moderate your own thread.  You can set the rules out in your OP and then delete trolls and non-responsive posts. Note, this will require work on YOUR part to keep up with it.

Misinformation, conspiracy theories, promotion of lies, hate speech and propaganda are not apart of free speech in my opinion.

Then, you do not understand the nature of "free speech".  First of all, this is not a government run website, so "free speech" does not even apply.  Second however, this is a NO HOLDS BARRED political forum.  You might want to look up the meaning of "no holds barred" before giving your opinion on what kind of speech should or should not be permitted.  It is the speech you despise the most that must be protected if we are all to enjoy genuine freedom.

They are forms of chaos and destruction and provide no good service to our society or mankind as a whole.

Speech seldom destroys anything, other than people's egos.  And, as far as providing "good service" to our society or mankind, you might want to remember that half our country hates the other half.  Yeah, its kind of like that right now and has been that way since Obama got elected to office.



 

RedheadedStranger » 03 Jan 2024, 11:55 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 11:55 am

What is the intention of this subforum?

viewforum.php?f=21

I failed latin in High School.

It used to be a forum for serious debate. It is no longer moderated. Or visited. 

As to the legitimacy of the Latin, I strongly suspect it is bastardized at best.

****, I just kind of made it up. "Profundum Diputatio" sounded like how I would say deep arguments if I DID understand Latin. 

I should look it up, just for **** and giggles - see whether it's close.   
 
Edit - it's perfect. No doubt I looked it up back then, and forgot looking it up.  
 

RedheadedStranger » 03 Jan 2024, 11:55 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 11:55 am

What is the intention of this subforum?

viewforum.php?f=21

I failed latin in High School.

Now that you have brought that subforum to my attention, I have a thought.

People could have their serious debate there, sub rosa. Once the debate is over, I will gladly move the debate to the NHB for everyone to sully. 
 

Cannonpointer » 03 Jan 2024, 11:51 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 11:51 am

The reason it goes to **** is **** posters. 


 

I can't argue with that.

I've also tried serious debates. I have cordoned off threads and made it where only the participants in a debate are allowed to post - and started a companion thread where folks can weigh in from the cheap seats.

Yes, I pointed out to the OP that once he gets enough points, he can do this too.  But, it takes work doesn't it.

All that ever happens is the guy losing the debate refuses to be an honest broker.  I am approachable to police a serious debate thread - but in truth, anyone can have a serious debate WITHOUT my assistance. You people (sorry if that sounds ray ciss) have all the power in the world to make it happen. 

You have a point about the guy losing the debate refuses to be an "honest broker", and that's a shame.  At the very least, in a good debate after you have isolated the real points of disagreement and can really go no further, then just "agree to disagree" on the disputed point (unless its a point of fact). I will say this, there are people here on this forum with whom you can have a good debate. Neither side may be swayed, but at least you can have a good debate.  I agree with you that occasionally a serous debate is possible on this board.

Skans » 03 Jan 2024, 12:03 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 12:03 pm

I can't argue with that.

Yes, I pointed out to the OP that once he gets enough points, he can do this too.  But, it takes work doesn't it.

You have a point about the guy losing the debate refuses to be an "honest broker", and that's a shame.  At the very least, in a good debate after you have isolated the real points of disagreement and can really go no further, then just "agree to disagree" on the disputed point (unless its a point of fact). I will say this, there are people here on this forum with whom you can have a good debate. Neither side may be swayed, but at least you can have a good debate.  I agree with you that occasionally a serous debate is possible on this board.

They can go here: viewtopic.php?f=21&t=83789
 
@usa360  - here is your format ^

R.Suave » 03 Jan 2024, 11:24 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 11:24 am

Yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater would satisfy a definition of "misinformation".

SHHHHHHHHHH, NOBODY YELL FIRE
ITS MISINFORMATION AND I'M
BUSY WATCHING THE MOVIE

usa360 » 03 Jan 2024, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 10:17 am

Patients is paramount.

Patients ARE paramount - at least, to those in the medical profession. 

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=83789

Cannonpointer » 03 Jan 2024, 12:06 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 12:06 pm

They can go here: viewtopic.php?f=21&t=83789
 
@usa360  - here is your format ^

I forgot about this.  Lets see if anyone uses it.
 

R.Suave » 03 Jan 2024, 11:42 am » wrote: ↑

03 Jan 2024, 11:42 am

still too scared and child like to answer a question.

You are consistent..

Writes itself.

Maybe I should insist you seek out all the questions you've run from and oblige you to answer them first.

But just so your **** talk backs up on you.

The peddling of misinformation during a public health crisis is the equivalent of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

Acknowledge that your question was answered, directly.
 

Question answered...see, that wasn't so difficult.

From a legal standpoint, you could not be more incorrect. From a political standpoint, it depends on the audience.  From a whiny *** liberal viewpoint, you are...in my opinion...100% correct (unless, of course, the misinformation is coming from a source liberals like...then it's just a case of them misspeaking).