:dito:Purusha said:"The second problem I have is being loathed to be at odds with Cabbage folk because you are all the people whose respect matters most to me and while my methods may be awry sometimes my intentions are entirely honourable." - Pete North
Well that puppy's been shot then eh?
Finger-pointing? Pot, kettle, black. The thread started out as a discussion on the Danish cartoons and the BBC, which was quickly taken over by a continuation of a debate from the Cabbage forum - I'm not impressed with Purusha for his part in that, but at least he apologised. Last time I took part in the thread it had moved on to Testimony's criticisms of NGOs, and I have no idea what that has to do with cartoons, the BBC, Islam, or anything. Then it rumbled on for a while until a mod kindly locked it. Then Testimony started this thread, which also is pointless and is about the way the forum is run, not politics.AcidTrash said:Fine. You can shut yourself off from opposition if you like. Must keep it fluffy or those who "aren't normally violent" might have to take action if we go near them.
Prohiniting debate is exactly the kind of cowardly response that causes right wing extremism. The more you freeze it out, the louder it will shout. The longer you shreik in horror at all the "isms" flying about the more you ignore what ordinarily moral and decent people are telling you, until the point whe huge numbers stop listening to you because you've failed to engage when the problem was managable.
Hardly any of you made a solid effort to engage the debate without resorting to politically correct finger pointing. I thought you locked it just as it was starting to go somewhere.
There you had a thread with some excellent contributions and some passionate debate, the likes of which you rarely see and that's just too much for you to handle isn't it?
This is exactly the same tactic the new labour spin machine uses and in that respect you are accomplices to the tyranny of the politically correct "moral" elite.
Furthermore, did you read the terms and conditions you agreed to before joining this private forum?Squagnut said:Do you know how forums work?
Continuum said:Furthermore, did you read the terms and conditions you agreed to before joining this private forum?
I think you'll find you don't have any legs to stand on.
Psyforum is a privately-owned forum, which means it's somebody's bat and ball. There is no legal guarantee of the right to free speech on Psyforum. That's the distinctionJason Frog said:The T&C of Psyforum are great.
But the way in which Psyforum is set up does not make it a private forum.
A private forum (or club or whatever else) means the conditions of membership are limited to people that either meet a certain criteria or are invited by existing members.
Psyforum is a public forum as anyone can join without any selection process whatsoever.
I think the whole debate was relavant to the issue. The Cartoon wars is all about the focus on free speech and the Griffin trial is very relavant.Squagnut said:Finger-pointing? Pot, kettle, black. The thread started out as a discussion on the Danish cartoons and the BBC, which was quickly taken over by a continuation of a debate from the Cabbage forum - I'm not impressed with Purusha for his part in that, but at least he apologised.
I have a feeling I know where it was going but I guess we'll never find out now. There was a line of questioning to establish basic precepts for which the debate could continue on. Could have been interesting.Squagnut said:Last time I took part in the thread it had moved on to Testimony's criticisms of NGOs, and I have no idea what that has to do with cartoons, the BBC, Islam, or anything. Then it rumbled on for a while until a mod kindly locked it. Then Testimony started this thread, which also is pointless and is about the way the forum is run, not politics.
Squagnut said:Pete, please look at some of your own posts, and then ask yourself whether you're discussing or soapboxing. Either you're an idiot or you know perfectly well you ain't going to win many votes from here, as many of us don't believe in voting at all, never mind voting for a frankly unelectable party to the right of the Tories (I think voting Green is just as much a waste of time too, but I'm sure you can see that a vote for UKIP is a waste of time. You're not going to get in, after all). Please at least have the decency to listen to what people here have to say, and make an effort to understand that a lot of people here choose not to see Islam in the UK as a problem, even if it does have some undesireable elements. You choose
Squagnut said:Soapboxing? Not at all. Part of being controversial is to draw out the issues quickley rather than asking a seemingly long and tedious fray of elemental questions.
If I were on a vote winning mission I would not have come here at all. I am not seeking people in agreement. I am seeking opposition and where else am I more likely to find it than here.
I find your assertion interesting that people here do not see Islam as a problem. If it were christianity uprising in response to the film Dogma I'm sure many people here would be queing up to slam christianity in all its forms as is consistant with left wing post colonial guilt.
Squagnut said:A lot of people here reckon that chavs present a much bigger problem than Islam.
Many would argue that our own chav underclass is a result of political correctness in the classroom where the dogma of social inclusion and light handedness has given them licence to do as they will. It is the same mentality that gives Islamism a foothold. I would say the problem of chavs is equal to Islamism and a symptom of the same bad governance. The reason I take my hard line on Islam is that we have no authority that Islamism recognises as superior to that of their rather warped interpretation of true Islam.
I think this is relavant under this topic headin because political correctness is a form of moral cowardice and that is the notion we are exploring here.
Now, If we could have had that kind of focussed and mature response from you and others in the prior debate we might well have got somewhere.
Send it to any one of us .. it was a fairly unanimous decision by the lot of us ...AcidTrash said:Speaking of cowardice. I note that whichever moderator sent me a PM has neglected to state who it was from therefore denying any right of reply. I have a perfectly reasonable reply but no idea who to send it to . Can the culprit please own up?
Yep. Me too. I'll delete the post and try to stop sounding like such an arsey wanker. :ibiggrin:Jason Frog said:Blimey, that seems a little bit paranoid to me.