Are there any rules at this board?

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

I've tried to find some, but there do not appear to be any!

[JJM 777]

Maybe this is an anarchist forum, so it cannot have any laws whatsoever.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

No, it's a Trotskyist forum.

[Christopher Hill]

So nobody will delete the child porn posts Introduction thread? That is pretty disturbing.

[Pie]

I suppose the rules are whatever the administrators want. Why are you even trying to find some official set of rules? On such an informal and inactive forum like this, some set of official rules seem to be a waste of time. I've got no problems with the way things are being handled.

As for the porn, yeah that stuff shows up a lot and it takes awhile before it and the accounts posting it are deleted, this forum is not very active now and the administrators only seem to show up every now and then as with a lot of the posters.

[Christopher Hill]

At the risk of making myself sound Fascist let me say that a rigid set of rules would be improper for an organic body such as this.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

I was just wondering how much reactionary stuff you are prepared to put up with from JJM 777?

Remember, if there are no rules, any action taken will always look arbitrary.

[Christopher Hill]

It would be best to ask a mod, but I think it is best as is.

[JJM 777]

I was just wondering how much reactionary stuff you are prepared to put up with from JJM 777?

Are you sure that repressive censorship of casual free discussion is "progressive"? You are walking on very thin ice, where most people on the planet will not want to try their luck. Freedom of speech is what people want, and "Socialism = what people want".

Remember, if there are no rules, any action taken will always look arbitrary.

Also rules can be arbitrary, reactionary or repressive.

[JJM 777]

I was just wondering how much reactionary stuff you are prepared to put up with from JJM 777?

So you want to "censor debate", Rosa?

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/socialist_unity_censors_debate.htm

You are making all the classical moralist mistakes, known already since Biblical times:

- Complain about censorship when others do it, while you personally promote censorship of others. ("Notice the dust in another person's eye, ignoring a beam in your own eye.")

- Try to sift a small gnat from the food, while swallowing a big camel. (Which is a bigger issue for the society: active and widespread repression of free speech, or a small person somewhere freely saying something that is not in perfect line with the ideologies of the political leadership?)

This is so historical, typical and predictable.

Another quote of Rosa doing herself what Rosa tells others not to do:
"ensure that they stay small, waste time on attacking one another, make serious political mistakes, and thus leave the ruling-class laughing"

[Christopher Hill]

I was just wondering how much reactionary stuff you are prepared to put up with from JJM 777?

So you want to "censor debate", Rosa?

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/socialist_unity_censors_debate.htm

You are making all the classical moralist mistakes, known already since Biblical times:

- Complain about censorship when others do it, while you personally promote censorship of others. ("Notice the dust in another person's eye, ignoring a beam in your own eye.")

- Try to sift a small gnat from the food, while swallowing a big camel. (Which is a bigger issue for the society: active and widespread repression of free speech, or a small person somewhere freely saying something that is not in perfect line with the ideologies of the political leadership?)

This is so historical, typical and predictable.

Another quote of Rosa doing herself what Rosa tells others not to do:
"ensure that they stay small, waste time on attacking one another, make serious political mistakes, and thus leave the ruling-class laughing"

I am against censorship, and I really don't care if you stay here and continue to expose just how misguided you are, in fact I ask you in good faith to stay and enjoy yourself.

I was just wondering how much reactionary stuff you are prepared to put up with from JJM 777?

Are you sure that repressive censorship of casual free discussion is "progressive"? You are walking on very thin ice, where most people on the planet will not want to try their luck. Freedom of speech is what people want, and "Socialism = what people want".

Remember, if there are no rules, any action taken will always look arbitrary.

Also rules can be arbitrary, reactionary or repressive.

Socialism is not in simple terms "What the people want" (Or else we would likely see a large reactionary populations returning to Feudalism or some such state) but more "what the people decide is best for society" the people will not of course fold to backwardness and institute slavery on women, this is contrary to the spirit of Socialism itself.

[Joshua Purcell]

I'm going to pretend I have a say in this matter :D. Anyone can post on this forum as long as they aren't seen as harassing another person specifically. If anyone has a problem with the political ideology that is most frequently held by members of forums like this one, then there obviously plenty of people around to target with the harassment.

A quick note about harassment: Many times debating topics can cross the line into harassment. One or both parties get so fired up at the other side that anything coming from the other party is something needing to be shot down as proof of the faulty basis that serves as the foundation for everything that person believes in. I've been on the receiving end. I'm OK with being targeted for both debate and harassment. Most people are OK with debating, and some people are understandably not OK with harassment.

Here's a litmus test: if you are replying to anything a specific user posts in the hopes of firing up a political debate (is there any other?) then there is a good chance you are harassing them... especially if that person isn't even posting political commentary to begin with.

Here's another litmus test: If you are having a political debate with someone, theres a very good chance that person is some form of Leftist. If you are either harassing or being harassed, well then you could be trying to have a debate with a right-winger, conservative, religious type, etc. and you may as well accept the reality of the situation. You can still benefit from the situation in some ways no doubt, but don't think you will get anywhere on the actual debate by continuing along the path.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

JJM777:

So you want to "censor debate", Rosa?

And where did I mention 'censorship'?

Seems you are intent on living up to your Rebel Without a Clue persona.

[Christopher Hill]

Censorship is definitely not the right decision, yet that is also not what was suggested, bit funny how most people on this forum have common sense isn't it?

[CyM]

No, there are no bureaucratic rules on this forum. Administration and moderation are dealt with on a case by case basis. In this case, I don't think JJM 777 is reactionary, just incredibly misguided.

Banning him would be replacing democratic debate with bureaucratic action, and that's not our method.

I consider you pretty misguided Rosa, but I'm not gonna ban you, just debate and try to win people away from your ideas.

You should treat JJM 777 the same way.