I decided to become a member of this forum because it's advertised as fair and balanced. It's been my experience that most forums on the net are anything but fair and balanced. Even when this site isn't fair and balanced, as I'm sure it can be, at least those are its ideals. Without fair and balanced moderation a forum just becomes a big circle jerk. People who go to forums like that can't seem to think for themselves. At the very least, people who go to forums that aren't fair and balanced are people who have positions that cannot withstand scrutiny.
Lotta "robo-posters" putting forth an agenda too, being another problem. There are posters who have been here for 10 years, spinning a certain agenda. Objectivity kinda goes right out the window.
There is no such thing as objectivity but there is 'fair and balanced' which is a presentation of the most notorious and opposing opinions of issues. Here at the Forum, there are a myriad of opposing opinions, philosophies, etc......Heck. folks like 'RtWngaFraud' (for instance) can lecture everyone on losing their 'objectivity.'
Well, the membership is all over the place. Lots of leftists, rightists, libertarians, national socialists, regular socialists, anarchists, marxists, you name it. The Mods are really good here, and are fair to all viewpoints (as long as they are properly expressed!) The site itself, though, or maybe it's the mysterious owners of the site, have a subtle bias toward the left. This can be seen in things such as the word filter, which will only filter out derogatory terms for people who aren't white, male, or heterosexual. It can also be seen in rule #9, which essentially states that you'd better be pro-gay, or your posts are "subject to infraction."
9. PROFANITY, ADULT CONTENT, AND GRAPHIC IMAGES Any posts, signatures, or images that are considered obscene or profane are forbidden, as well as any links to any such material. This includes (but is not limited to) profane language, nudity, and pornographic or excessively graphic images. Keep in mind that profanity in a relatively obscure language is still profanity. We'll allow as much latitude as we reasonably can for images or quotes that are directly related to a legitimate event, but if in doubt, you might want to check with a moderator before posting. This website employs a filter to block out banned language, and any attempt to circumvent that filter (including the use of asterisks) will be considered an infraction of this rule. I don't see it....
"7. RACIAL, ETHNIC, HOMOPHOBIC, GENDER, OR RELIGIOUS SLURS Any post or image that is - in the judgment of a moderator or administrator - a slur against any such group will be subject to infraction. " I suppose if one was intending to bash gays, they might consider this rule restrictive, and thus promoting a homosexual lifestyle.....but, again I don't see it. This would also mean we are being compelled to be a Christian because we are being asked to respect religion. I do not much care for any religion, yet have no problem being nice whn interacting with those of faith.....seems pretty straight forward and obvious when debating.
RACIAL, ETHNIC, HOMOPHOBIC, GENDER, RELIGIOUS. One of these things is not like the others. Can you guess which one? Racial includes ALL races. Ethnic includes ALL ethnicities. Gender includes ALL genders. Religious includes ALL religions. "Homophobic" protects one side only, and even just the use of the loaded word shows a bias. P.S. I never said you had to BE gay, so your comment about having to become a Christian is a bad analogy (especially since the rule doesn't even mention Christianity, but "religion").
I suppose I was simply questioning this comment, and trying to point out there is a difference between being "Pro Gay"...and not being disrespectful of someone who is Gay.
But that's the thing about the ill-defined word "homophobic". Let's say someone disagrees with gay marriage, not because of religion, but because "it's icky". Is that a homophobic thing to post? I think it fits the word as well as anything does(seeing as how it's not a real phobia). So, should that opinion not be represented? Do we want an echo chamber?
You do realize with these Rules that some of our senior & esteemed congressmen, Pelosi and Reid for ex., if members, with their typical public performances would be quickly banned from this site by carrying their same conduct on here...
Of course it needs to be represented, and such a statement would not receive infraction. I personally find the very idea of male on male intercourse "Icky" as well...and I just stated it as my opinion which is unlikely to be edited or infracted. This is not a Homophobic statement it is my personal opinion and was represented as such with no debasement of others. The word may be what you refer to as "Ill Defined", but unless one does not understand respectful conversation the intent of the rule should be quite clear. I also find those who accept religion as truth to be misguided....but I do not call them the many other things I could have used. Do I have religiofobia?
They didn't do it in large enough numbers...all across the board. Do "sick outs" all at once. Nobody says you can't come back in a day or two, when EVERYBODY is 'feeling better'. If the masses would unite, the big boys within the corporate, fat cat core, would have no choice but to change their practices. You can't force people to be screwed. They have to accept it. STOP ACCEPTING IT (or, keep getting screwed).
Compared to other sites I have been on, the moderators seem less involved in the discussions (at least the discussions I participate in) and do not try to dominate with their personal agenda. Users run the spectrum I guess, but some of the discussions are more like discussions with a flaming troll popping in as opposed to every thread being a troll war like dominate other sites. I guess my only real complaint is that I feel like maybe the secular atheists are a bit disruptive of religion discussions and flood the site with anti-religion threads, but beyond that, I have seen far worse sites.
By & large, the mods are good.. i tend to see a bit of left wing bias, which usually translates into a leftist echo chamber.. but they realize it would kill the forum, so they allow the rabid right wingers to rant away. Some of the posters play the game better.. dancing on the edge of insults, or snark.. i tend to be more straightforward, & say 'f*** y**' if it is warranted. I have gotten warned for that, but it's no big deal. rulz is rulz, & you play by them or get penalized.
The mods on this site are great, and I don't see much of a bias from them. As for the users, there is a definite right wing slant, but that's because there's just more of them than moderate or left wing posters.
I've been coming in here for exactly 3 days and have already been censored. Until there is a political forum that allows complete freedom of speech, I will always long for the good old days when that constitutional right still meant something. I reserve the right to offend as a means of bringing out the REAL person behind the screen beret façade.
