09 May 2009
Daily Chat 09/05/09
Nearly 3 hours late starting this again. Oh well. Twenty-five years ago today, the US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee opened impeachment hearings against Richard M. Nixon. Birthdays today: Geraldine McEwan, Roger Hargreaves, Albert Finney, Glenda Jackson, Dave Gahan, Paul Heaton, and Paul McGuigan. And it's Romanian Independence Day.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
good evening Montana,,glad to see we got the missing month back,,
ReplyDeletei have seen the rise of 9 (at least) blogs via cif,,few have taken off (and sustained) i think the approach of everyday "heres the new,,the old is finished" and the sparse but suggestive contents of the little header,, rather than a detailed and academic/polemic/emetic (tick as appropriate)
works well for this place since you have the variety of posters to carry it off,,
the tribal ritual of "who is doing dinner music ?" is really special,,seems to be as organic and REAL an interaction as is possible,,
twenty five years ago i was ,,
"talk to much,,listen not enough"
your turn
3p4
..."o"
ReplyDeletecan someone put that where it should be please ?
thanks
3p4
o, twenty five years ago i was . . .
ReplyDeletei meant "talk TOO much,,funny not enough" (you)
ReplyDelete@yeractual,, :)
so what were you "25 yrs ago ?,, (not "o",,not "doh!" but "oh!?
"anonymous" is the only logon option for me but since i am pathological about double commas,,i wont bother to put 3p4 at the bottom any more,,
3p4
I'm not sure, but I think I may have been starting to read this blog.
ReplyDeleteWhen you post, can't you choose 'Comment as:' and choose Name/URL? Just put your name in and leave the URL bit blank.
Montana, let's change something else. C'mon, it'll be a riot.
ReplyDeleteStraw Poll: Should we turn on the "edit posts" feature?
I selected name/URL and put in billplaster. I didn't add a URL.
ReplyDeleteThis is the result.
Editing comments isn't an available option on Blogger.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the benefit of becoming a follower?
i swear it dont work for me unless something just changed,,this isnt the only site where i have this issue,,
ReplyDeletesee its still here!!@*&6~~,, and not there,,cos i put 3p4 and no url,,
xclick bloody click dont go,, back to anonimity
still it makes it easy for disguises
signed 7carrot2
What is the benefit of becoming a follower?
probably dick all for a confirmed and accomplished contrarian,,"follower !" get real Bill
I think if I couldn't even manage to sign in properly I'd try to exhibit a little more humility, potatocakes.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what all the anger is about. Could it have its basis in overwhelming fear? Is living in Britain that bad?
Anyway, I'll rephrase so as not to offend your sense of righteousness. What is the benefit to a good person of becoming a "follower" on this site?
Works for me.
ReplyDeleteI think you'll find that 3p4dropindoublecomma,,hullo thereN:) lives across the pond and then north a bit
ReplyDeleteSo, what is it then, cabin fever? Itchy shirt syndrome? Eh?
ReplyDeleteHaving looked over the utter farce that is the Cif "New" Moderation Article and following thread, I KNOW I'm not going back. How many ways can Sister George* say "Back you miserable curs! Make up the numbers in cap-in-hand silence or you'll feel the bite of my lash"? And how many times can the miserable curs lap it up?
ReplyDeleteVideo footage of the miserable curs returning with the good news just in:
miserable curs leader played by Eleanor Bron
billp played by Peter Cook
I notice that "you asked for blah and blah to write above the line..." brought all the sycophant hopefuls out of the woodwork. Sad.
It seems the only way to put that rag out of its hypocritical misery is to compete it out.
Let's.
*From Wiki:
The Killing of Sister George is a 1964 play by Frank Marcus that was adapted as a 1968 film directed by Robert Aldrich.
Sister George is a beloved character in the popular radio series Applehurst, a nurse who ministers to the medical needs and personal problems of the local villagers. She is played by June Buckridge, who in real life is a gin-guzzling, cigar-chomping, slightly sadistic masculine woman, the antithesis of the sweet character she plays.
Oops, forgot the video footage...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtAGwqibKHc
I wonder why nobody saw fit to ask WHY they decided the moderation policy needed "changing"?
ReplyDeleteWhat would drive a historically stone deaf business to start to (pretend to) listen to its clients, and care about their desires?
Please, no "perhaps faced with so many complaints, they just saw the error of their ways" nonsense. The complaints have been going in since the journalists revolted (the ones that made the most noise back then, have the tightest moderation - at least on non-article comments) and the 5000 character thing and the rest of the restrictions began. So, why pretend to listen now?
I'm guessing they're going belly up (at least the print edition). If not that, like the Big Brother that preceded the last bout of limitations being made to free speech, they're softening up the proles for the introduction of Phase II.
Really though, you saw the words "be more pleasant" in an article introducing clearer community standards and moderation guidelines, and you didn't see fit to challenge it?
I wasn't pleasant and they came for me. And by that time there were no pheasant pluckers left to speak up.
"Lighten up" is attempted censorship.
ReplyDeleteWell the weather here in Umbria is lovely. Last night my italian neighbour said that Freedom House (some US organisation- no, I don't know...) now rates Italy as 71st on the freedom scale and only 'partially free', mainly because Berlusconi owns most of Italy. At the same time he's more popular than ever amongst the Italians.
ReplyDeleteThe subject came up because I was cursing Brown and NuLab for being such sleazebags and she raised her eyebrows in astonishment.
Now I'm very fond of the Italians, particularly for their cynical attitude towards their rulers, but they clearly have some unattractive qualities such as an unhealthy respect for criminals and racism.
Having lived in London for 25 years, I loved it for its genuinely cosmopolitan makeup and a real tolerance for diverse ethnicity which seems to be lacking in such cities as Rome or Milan.
Berlin, by contrast, is a wonderfully relaxed and tolerant cosmopolitan city, it's just too bloody cold...
"...mainly because Berlusconi owns most of Italy. At the same time he's more popular than ever amongst the Italians."
ReplyDeleteDoes he pay for the circuses or the bread, or both?
dan, why don't you tell us a little about the ins and outs of the politics of the cartoon strip business?
ReplyDeleteNot much to tell really. I've been interested in the form all my life. My great hero is Robert Crumb whose stuff I first saw in '67. The trouble was that the UK has little appreciation for adult comics- it's regarded as kid's stuff.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I've been a self-unemployed illustrator since leaving art school doing only the occasional comic strip for magazines and music papers (remember Sounds?- heavy metal garbage), usually terminated because of differences of opinion with whoever pays- never enough.
I was heavily involved in anti-nuclear power campaigns in the late 70s which resulted in an anti-nuke comic book featuring my character Drain Pig (suggested by Bruce Robinson). 'Critical Mess' had a print run of 5000 but was remaindered when the publishers went bust...
Since I left the UK paid work has predictably dwindled and I've been concentrating on painting and doing my comics which are the two things I really love doing. Unfortunately, they are both things least likely to bring in any cash.
I find myself almost completely out of sympathy with most adult comics because of the sex and violence content (I've been a feminist ever since i read Greer's 'Female Eunuch') and also because I think the greatest gift is to make people laugh.
So I've spent most of the last 10 years vainly searching for a publisher who might be interested and have eventually decided to just get my stuff up on the net and see if anyone's interested.
My Oscar Wilde strip- 'Oscar, The Second Coming' can be seen on Oscholars.com
attempted censorship? Nah..just a suggestion that you get out and smell the flowers.
ReplyDeleteMorning Ciffers
ReplyDeleteBeautiful day today. Trying to decide what to do with it that doesn't involve housework wherever possible.
Really good thread on I/P by Max Hastings, btw, in case people haven't seen it.
Get out and smell the flowers? It's the middle of the night! Islander!
ReplyDeleteI wish you every success with the net drive, dan.
ReplyDeleteSo get out and howl at the moon or whatever else gets you going.
ReplyDeleteWho told you about that?
ReplyDeleteReposting from "New Thread" in case you missed it...
ReplyDeleteHi Dan. I had a look at Comix. I like the strip and the paintings.
The latter don't look like the work of a person with the condition you describe in "About". They're actually quite light and jolly. They probably have a dark double (Lynchesque) meaning that I can't see. They look very buyable (I hope that doesn't sound condescending; it's not meant to be).
The strip at first glance seems mundane, yet I have a feeling I'll be going back to see what happens next. The central character is interesting. Nice drawing style. The theme/content style reminds me of something that I can't quite put my finger on.
Well, cock-crow. Time for bed. Whoever said contrarian doesn't know the half of it.
ReplyDeleteMorning monkeyfish
ReplyDeleteJust read your posts on yesterday's thread. Couldn't agree more. There was definitely a more rigorous application of the "talk policy" over the last couple of months and I ain't going back if the new regime isn't a bit more liberal.
But I had a couple of posts deleted last night and, given Pinchy's short posting history, that would recently have been enough for a spell in pre-mod. Certainly was for FatTony. But MrP still has full posting rights today so maybe they're being a little more relaxed.
I've also posted on the modding thread asking for clarification about the application of the pre-mod terms. Hank's resurrection depends on their response.
Ha! No, they're not. Not at all. I'm cursed with an ability to draw!
ReplyDeleteBut I've never been a professional painter- it something that soothes the savage breast and yes, they are saleable, I hope.
But there's a political context in that I've never been keen on the ludicrous value of paintings, per se, which is why I love doing comics- they are disposable- if you don't like them you can chuck em.
Must go now, busy afternoon but we'll continue this later...
Hank
ReplyDeleteWTF? If you go back, you're in premod? Fuckin Hell. What's all that about? I'm not being treated like a fuckin outlaw.
Mind you...I always wanted to be on a wanted poster...
The governor can't come flat out and give you amnesty now. First you have to prove you deserve it.
Ah. So all we have to do is just stay out of trouble till the governor figures we deserve amnesty?
In the mean time, we'll still be wanted?
Well, that's true. Till then only you, me and the Governor will know about it. It'll be our little secret.
[cut to scene where another posse is in hot pursuit of Heyes and Curry]
I sure wish the governor'd let a few more people in on our secret!
I've said before, I'm not doing premod. It's too frustrating. Tbh, I stop looking at the articles. Knowing you can't post makes it all a bit academic. I shot of a reply to a couple early on making a couple of points only to have to wait an hour for the thing to appear by which time the debates moved on and I'm left feeling like I'm barking at the caravans. Fuck that. I'd rather go back with a new moniker.
I'm getting rather fond of MrPinchy, it has to be said.
ReplyDeleteMonkeyfish, you need to come back with a different nick too.
Yep - if you came back as Fishymonk I reckon you'd get away with it.
ReplyDeletekewl!
ReplyDeleteDid fishymonk a while back. Forgotten the password and email. Maybe monkfishy or fishmonkey. Not rushing to a decision; world's my oyster on this one. Might go for a name with supernatural properties; something sorta spooky happens when you type it. Do you get words like that? I forget.
ReplyDeleteWhy's nobody on here tonight? Spooky...was it something I typed? Which one was it?
ReplyDeleteSaturday night. They're all out clubbing...
ReplyDeleteAll out clubbing seals if our favourite newbie had his way.
ReplyDeleteI'm here, just reading the Seabrook thread, which is, so far, required reading. Even waltz is making some reasonable points.
Half way through and I have to congratulate BB for some top posts, particularly the one where you've asked LatimerAlder to explain the BNP's manifesto in detail. Oh and the one where you told "north" to use para breaks. I was thinking exactly the same thing. He does make some interesting points but it's so bleedin difficult to read I sometimes don't bother.
Still mulling over whether to go back. Disappointed, but not surprised that Seaton has yet to come back, as promised, on the "talk policy" thread and, in particular to address MrP's queries about pre-mod and the status of the Banned.
Response to JayReilly's post, posted today at the bottom of YESTERDAY'S chat thread....
ReplyDeleteDo you consider yourself a twat, JayReilly? Do you suppose all the readers of this site (and Cif) enjoy your obsessive renderings on the subject of ultimathule? Or your foul-mouthed diatribes on the goes-without-saying idiocy and ridiculousness of the opinions expressed by "right wing loons"?
Do you recognise that you have serious control issues and that you, as with all bullies, don't take criticism well, and can't take at all what you so liberally dish out to others (usually, I've noticed, to posters who you've identified as being somehow in a minority, usually of one)?
I didn't pick fights with anybody. I made some suggestions, and some control freaks got all bent out of shape at my upstart audacity (I feel I threatened their supposed "minister without portfolio" status here).
I didn't buckle or back off, so they, along with some other control freaks got stroppier, while yet other control freaks tried to gently convince me that I was wrong for desiring to indulge my freedom of expression (I don't know which I despise the most).
I defended my right to make those suggestions (especially since I had been asked to make them) and to express any opinion I see fit to express, anywhere there is an open forum to express it on. This is an open forum.
But please, don't let the recorded (nothing's been edited or deleted, you can go back and reread it all) facts get in the way of your self-delusion.
Meanwhile, you are STILL trying to restrict my freedom of expression, by whining and name-calling, with a view to marginalising my opinion as that of a "troublemaker".
If this site is truly an open forum, then ANYTHING goes, and the site may evolve according to the what is best able to survive in its ever-changing environment (small talk is a dinosaur having noticed an ever-growing star in the sky). Your notion that such a forum could forever remain the same (or cosy) is ludicrous. As each new poster contributes something, the environment MUST change. It's inevitable.
Therefore, it's not he who doesn't like the status quo who must leave or adapt, but he who can't stand change.
In 'Brave New World' there's an Alpha-Double Plus who was a bit of a rebel in his youth, but who chose to embrace the system rather than be exiled. So if anyone fancies the moniker Mustapha Mond...
ReplyDeleteWhy do you suppose GU and Cif don't attract more financially-rewarding ads?
ReplyDeleteBasically, all they advertise are Google Ads and their own little jumble sale of household gadgets and clothing.
Why does nobody want to advertise on that site?
Of course, every society also needs at least one Epsilon-Minus. We're quite lucky here in that respect.
ReplyDeleteCheers Hank - hi everyone.
ReplyDeleteFighting the fash is becoming a full time occupation on CiF these days. I have changed strategy though. No more "look at you, you're a nazi" stuff as it serves no purpose. Attack on the policies, see what they come up with. Which is usually bugger all because it is all hot air and bollocks other than "get rid of dem pesky immugrunts and you can haz dere jobs and houses innit?"
Ok billp, I'll address your points as reasonably as I'm able to.
ReplyDeleteNobody is restricting your freedom of expression. You haven't been banned or moderated on here because there is no scope for either of those sanctions.
You first broached the idea of moderation. No-one else saw the need for it. Even now, after your frankly noxious impact, no-one is seriously calling for it, except you.
If you think that your freedom of expression is curtailed by other posters calling you a twat, or ignoring you, or telling you to piss off, then you don't really understand the concept of censorship.
If you continue to tell other posters on this site that you despise them, or their views, you are alienating yourself from "the community", a concept much prized on CiF but more real on here because we do actually have shared values, and look out for each others' interests, as kiz, BB and others have shown by campaigning for some of us to have their posting rights reinstated (yours included, incidentally).
I know how much contempt you have for my wishy washy worldview but maybe you'll listen to a word of advice from me anyway.
Don't abuse other posters on here. You're the first person to have done so in the two months this site has been up and running. It's not necessary and it's not going to win you any friends or arguments.
If you want to stick around, then recognise that we do have informal rules which we all instinctively understand because we're all, basically, decent human beings.
I told you to piss off the other day. I stand by that if your agenda is simply to be disruptive and destructive. I'm not impressed by your Nietzschean persona, your vision of yourself as the Superman, the holder of the Key of Truth and Integrity, and I'm fairly confident that nobody else here is either.
But if you want to go with the flow, have a bit of a crack, the occasional argument about the issues of the day without smearing others on here, then I'll withdraw the "piss off" request and invite you to stick around.
Your choice.
@ HankScorpio et al
ReplyDeleteHope to see/read you back on CiF ASAP
Miss your wit.
Regards
Cheers deano30 - cheque's in the post (-;
ReplyDelete@ monkeyfish
ReplyDeletea suggestion for a temp moniker - candirufish if you've not already used it ?
I'm not a fisherman or fish person but as you may/maynot know this little sod has a charming habit that might make the mods feel uncomfortable. Especially if a rumour were to circulate that one had been seen in the Guard's toilets
http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Most-Dangerous-Fish-in-the-Amazon-River---The-Candiru&id=1360653
Sorry don't yet know how to post a "live/direct" link on this thread. Hence:
ReplyDeletehttp://ezinearticles.com/?The-Most-Dangerous-Fish-in-the-Amazon-River---The-Candiru&id=1360653
Hank,
ReplyDeleteCould you please state your current position on ignoring me, I've lost the place. I ask, because I've been holding back addressing you directly (i.e., not as a response).
You wrote: "Nobody is restricting your freedom of expression."
I know, but it's not for a lack of their trying. I just haven't LET them restrict it.
"You haven't been banned or moderated on here because there is no scope for either of those sanctions."
Do you admit that there is more than two ways to skin a cat as far as restriction (or attempted restriction) to freedom of expression is concerned? Do you admit that calls from the audience of "Boo, boo, hiss!" represent attempted restriction of FoE, and may, possibly, lead to such a restriction, if other audience members are easily led by that and other marginalisation techniques?
In short, is the marginalisation of a person or his opinion a form of censorship?
"You first broached the idea of moderation."
No. I didn't. I have only ever called for no moderation of OPINION. AT ALL (althoigh I can see that moderation is necessary to prevent people from freely making untrue statements of fact). Go back and check. All I suggested was that some control be placed over the number and timing, and broad definition-meeting, of "articles", and who may actually physically posts the articles on the site.
Apart from that, I made a few sugestions regarding making the Daily Chat threads more user-friendly, e.g., opening a new one each day, and closing the old one, and naming them by date.
"No-one else saw the need for it. Even now, after your frankly noxious impact, no-one is seriously calling for it, except you."
"Noxious" reflects your personal opinion. It is both unreasoanable and unfair to link that word with "no-one". You make it sound (deliberately, I suspect) that you have consulted ALL other posters and have been appointed their spokesman. I'm guessing you haven't. I value your personal opinion as much as I do anyone else's, or any collective opinion you could discover here. There is absolutely no need to try to impress me with any fantastic collective opinion.
"If you think that your freedom of expression is curtailed by other posters calling you a twat, or ignoring you, or telling you to piss off, then you don't really understand the concept of censorship."
I feel it is you who doesn't really understand the concept. Calling someone else a twat (or other derogatory epithet), for the benefit of an audience, is propaganda. the aim of propaganda is to minimise the value or impact of another's POV. Hence, "treehuggers", "right wing loons", etc. If the poster can be made to appear foolish, or troublesome, or "evil", what chance is there that his opinion will be given serious consideration.
People are free to ignore whomever they please. Calling for the ignoring of other posters is attempted censorship.
All of the above involves a technique called marginalisation, and it has far more power than does deletion of the opinion. If successful, the person stating the opinion is, to all intents and purposes, deleted (along with all of his opinions).
"If you continue to tell other posters on this site that you despise them, or their views, you are alienating yourself from "the community","
Well, I DO despise any attempt to censor my opinions, via marginalisation or any other technique. Would you have me lie about that in order to prevent being "alienated" from the community? Wouldn't that be a little cowardly, and very dishonest?
"a concept much prized on CiF but more real on here because we do actually have shared values, and look out for each others' interests, as kiz, BB and others have shown by campaigning for some of us to have their posting rights reinstated (yours included, incidentally)."
What are these shared values? What are your shared values with respect to the exercise of Freedom of Expression? Are you sure that kizbot and BB weren't really campaigning to have their own right to FoE upheld? Anyway, by campaigning here for MY right to FoE to be upheld, do I not exhibit like-mindedness? Shouldn't you be lauding my efforts?
"I know how much contempt you have for my wishy washy worldview but maybe you'll listen to a word of advice from me anyway."
I don't have contempt for your wishy-washy worldview. I just don't share it.
"Don't abuse other posters on here. You're the first person to have done so in the two months this site has been up and running."
I may have been the first poster to HAVE BEEN ABUSED, I don't know, but I haven't "abused" anyone. I have, at most, given as good as I got. Better, actually.
"It's not necessary and it's not going to win you any friends or arguments."
I agree that abusing people is not necessary. So, please consider refraining from doing so in future. I already have friends. How could the posters here ever become my friends, in any practical sense of the word? I've already won arguments here. I plan to win more.
"If you want to stick around, then recognise that we do have informal rules which we all instinctively understand because we're all, basically, decent human beings."
Are you the same people who post on Cif that unclear, ambiguous, open-to-abuse Talk Policies are unfair and unreasonable, and will only end in problems? Meanwhile, I'm sticking around anyway. I don't see where that is dependent on my working out what "your" informal, but instinctive rules entail, and abiding by them. Why don't you just formally list THE RULES?
"I told you to piss off the other day. I stand by that if your agenda is simply to be disruptive and destructive."
I have no agenda. I tell nobody to piss off. And, if I did, I wouldn't make spurious justifications for having done so. You don't have any authority to make me piss off. Therefore, your statements in that regard are wind.
"I'm not impressed by your Nietzschean persona, your vision of yourself as the Superman, the holder of the Key of Truth and Integrity, and I'm fairly confident that nobody else here is either."
How many Guineas do you usually charge per hour? What prompted you to take on my case pro bono?
"But if you want to go with the flow, have a bit of a crack, the occasional argument about the issues of the day without smearing others on here, then I'll withdraw the "piss off" request and invite you to stick around."
Please, send the bad cop back in. And ask him to bring a bucket.
"Your choice."
My choices here, as I see it, based on the absolute lack of any rules to the contrary, are to post whatever opinions I see fit, or not post such opinions.
If you want a cosy coffee club, you're going to have to get together and make and post some rules. That's how societies function. History has shown that all attempted anarchic cosy coffee clubs have ended as a pile of rubble.
If this thing continues, it will have stated, formal rules. Unfortunately, those rules will probably be drawn up and issued by "us" to prevent "them" from causing trouble. That thinking is the basis of corrupt government of a corrupt society. All formal rules should be drawn up with a view to preventing "me" from unfairly abusing my fellow's freedom.
Of course, when you're perfect, you can't see that.
Ok bill, I tried to offer the olive branch, a bit of friendly advice. You've refused it. No surprise really given your obvious issues.
ReplyDeleteYou really could start a fight in an empty room.
How about you set up your own blog with your own rules and invite all your friends over? Should be a riot.
Night night for now, big kisses and don't let the bed bugs, or the straitjacket, bite
Hank xx
The marginalisation of dissent – a challenge for civil society
ReplyDeleteIn 2007, the Carnegie UK Trust Inquiry into the Future of Civil Society in the UK and Ireland undertook an extensive futures exercise to explore the possible future threats to and opportunities for civil society, looking out to 2025.
Contributors to the futures work highlighted the marginalisation of dissent as a key concern. Given that for many civil society associations one of their key roles is to seek change by challenging power, this issue is central to the future of civil society.
What is dissent?
The Encarta Dictionary cites dissent as ‘disagreement from a widely held or majority opinion’. A better definition must place the disagreement in relation to power; dissent is to disagree with the opinion and/or ideas of the powerful regardless of whether these views are widely held. It is therefore conceivable that a person can dissent even if their
views are the majority opinion. In some circumstances, power is the majority opinion, but this is not always the case.
It is the reaction of the powerful that determines whether an alternative idea or opinion should be treated as dissenting and beyond the pale, or whether they find ways to deal with and respond to opposing opinions by engaging with them in some way, shape or form.
Dissent is crucial for a healthy democratic society and in an increasingly diverse society freedom of speech should be encouraged so that all points of view can be articulated and deliberated.
Whilst the State is the obvious focus for this theme, dissent can be marginalised and/or suppressed by any organisation or individual that has power over the dissenter. Employers, an industry or profession, a faith group, a trade union, an NGO, a community, a school and even a family are all capable of marginalising and suppressing dissent. In addition, the individuals themselves can self-suppress their dissent for fear of reprisals. {...more}
http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:Y-T6kF2d2psJ:democracy.carnegieuktrust.org.uk/files/Dissent.pdf+marginalisation+censorship&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk
Hank: "Ok bill, I tried to offer the olive branch, a bit of friendly advice. You've refused it. No surprise really given your obvious issues."
ReplyDelete'Do as I say, or piss off' does not equate to an olive branch, except in the mind of a control freak.
An example of an olive branch might be: 'Okay, let's agree to disagree on that and other future issues. I'm prepared to forget all about it and start afresh, if you are.'
Contexts
ReplyDeleteWhat becomes clear from the above is the number of contexts where dissent can be articulated and the number of ways that dissent can be suppressed and/or marginalised. In many cases it is the dissident rather than the dissent
that is suppressed; those seeking to suppress dissent often use spurious reasons to justify their suppression.
Employers will often dismiss employees for reasons other than the dissent itself, for instance, often claiming poor performance [sound familiar, re banning, premodding for "abuse" -billp]; trade union representatives often are top of the list for redundancy when companies restructure.
Other strategies include an attack on an individual’s character and behaviour in an attempt to discredit the individual.
What all these strategies have in common is that they refuse to engage with the dissent itself. This makes it very difficult to
know when and where dissent is being suppressed.
{same link as above}
BeautifulBurnout
ReplyDeleteIf you're jumping from CIF to here just wanted to say hello. Thought about saying: "see you at the other place" but I'd just get deleted.
The stats I was quoting on that thread are just an area of interest to me. I don't want to give encouragement to majorityrights types but I can't be arsed arguing with them. It gets you nowhere.
Hey bill, read my post of 22.15 again and digest the contents. I said that if you stop abusing other posters, stop telling people that you despise them or their views, try and engage with the generally easy going culture on here, then I would withdraw the "piss off" comment.
ReplyDeleteRead it again, bill. Stop playing the fucking victim card. Engage with people without dissing them, and you might be more welcome on here.
If you can't, if you don't understand what's obnoxious about slagging Jay off for trying to get reinstated on Cif, or abusing Brusselsexpat because you don't like her lifestyle...
...If you read the archive on here and realise that you're the only poster, seriously the only one, who's abused fellow posters (other than those who've retaliated to your nasty rants), then you might see why I won't be ready to start afresh until you show that you want to be part of the community as opposed to someone who wants to destroy it.
I'll say it again, it's your choice. Play nice. Stop being such a pain in the arse. It's really fucking childish.
The "new moderation policy" is nothing more than a notice of the continuation of the present strategies, perhaps also with a view to reinforcing a "well shouldn't unpleasant people be banned?" smokescreen.
ReplyDeleteI was deleted, moded, premoded, then banned for DISSENT, pure and simple. They may be able to actually produce an instance or series of rule violations on my part, but that's not what I was banned for.
And it had nothing to do with "left" or "right" either, which are also smokescreens and establishment-created dividers. It had everything to do with my attacking and denying the right of the establishment to restrict the expression of my OPINION on anything.
So, although my individual opinion isn't important in the grand scheme of things, that I wasn't responding poperly to the conditioning represented a threat, in that it interfered with the smooth-running of the experiment.
Sometimes I wonder if these forums aren't just little conditioning labs. What other explanation could there be for the existence of "premodding"? Can nobody else see the dystopian connotations of such a practice?
Really, they don't even try to disguise the fact that the whole point is for the "offender" to emerge reconditioned to comply with their wishes. Ready to take his place in a society of their creating, functioning according to their laws. A docile tongue-biter who will help maintain the illusion that a debate is taking place and is permitted.
We all may have come to accept such a concept (even if it is a lie) when applied to real criminals and the purported rehabilitation ends of imprisonment, but what criminal tendencies are being rehabilitated in the premodding Skinner Box? Talking out of turn? Not knowing your place? Raising your voice? Criticising the wrong people? Using resticted words and terminology?
Once you take that first step in allowing yourself to be conditioned, however, where will you draw the line?
And, if ads aren't funding that particular experiment, who or what is?
Interesting points billp. Did the mods ever give you a reason for premod?
ReplyDeleteWhen I was in the cooler they emailed me to say that I was overly aggressive (to put this into perspective I was on the book blogs calling for elitist posters to fucking imagine life outside of ivory towers ... but I digress). So when you say:
"So, although my individual opinion isn't important in the grand scheme of things, that I wasn't responding properly to the conditioning represented a threat, in that it interfered with the smooth-running of the experiment"
do you reckon you were modded for being unpleasant? Or were you modded because your determination to get to the bottom of your question sucked all the oxygen out of the thread?
But then, how does trying to get a sensible answer from a sane question work on Cif? I notice that there's some backlash on this thread as well - which is alarming if the thread is set up as a protected area for the cif unwelcome. So, either you're the great misunderstood or ...what?
Your comments about uniformity work for me - but what are we conforming to if we keep within the rules? And this is interesting. On threads like this, maybe it's a club atmosphere - but on Cif, what's that about?
Well maybe in the GU towers it's entertainment.
Someone said recently that it'd be ok to allow strident voices if threads were a reality TV show otherwise they should shut up, but... and I stopped at the 'but'. *Lightbulb* moment - it IS reality thread time on Cif. It's been going long enough now for posters to have personalities. The readers (far out-numbering the posters) are locked into a soap opera of personalities. The earnestness of posters to reclaim their rights has nothing to do with the weight of their arguments but has everything to do with *personalities* disappearing from the site.
Cif knows this - there is, I'm sure, advertising revenue that responds to clicks on the site and most will be following the reality drama.
What do reckon? Were you modded for being unpleasant or for stopping the story-flow? Have we misunderstood that Cif debate is irrelevant and that anyone persistent enough to want a debate is frowned upon?
billp, good to see you've adopted a more easy going approach to speaking to people.
ReplyDelete"Do you consider yourself a twat, JayReilly?"
No not really, though i can certainly be a twat, and frequently am, particularly on cif.
Does my ramblings about the thule bore people? Certainly. Do other posters talk about things that bore me? Yes of course. Thats life.
"Do you recognise that you have serious control issues"
Because you say so? No. If a handful of posters here were to agree i would give it some serious thought, but your personaly opinion is near worthless to me, you are a glorified troll.
"I didn't pick fights with anybody."
You've picked fights with virtually everyone, you're just too lacking in awareness and social skills to understand it. You think if you dont call someone names you arent kicking off, but when your whole tone is simple aggression and hostility it amounts to the same thing.
"Meanwhile, you are STILL trying to restrict my freedom of expression, by whining and name-calling, with a view to marginalising my opinion as that of a "troublemaker"."
No, ive been ignoring you, i told kiz what happened with expanding and so you have gone off ranting at me again.
"Therefore, it's not he who doesn't like the status quo who must leave or adapt, but he who can't stand change."
I'll get my coat then...
"But if you want to go with the flow, have a bit of a crack, the occasional argument about the issues of the day without smearing others on here, then I'll withdraw the "piss off" request and invite you to stick around."
I feel the same as Hank in that regard. Having read your responses to Hank it seems to me you have some issues, the main one being you can come onto a blog and be rude to people but tell yourself it was the otherway around, that you were victimised. Since all the evidence is still here maybe we should have a poll. Your talk of victimhood and censorship is becoming extremely boring so i am going to have to try to revert to ignoring you again.
But since you're such a hero of free speech and dissent i think the idea of you setting up your own blog is a great one - why dont you give it a go? You're a really charismatic, charming beacon of intellect and im sure your blog will be the talk of the net within weeks, you are the superior of everyone here in intelligence and principles so why are you hanging around with us losers?
"Night night for now, big kisses and don't let the bed bugs, or the straitjacket, bite."
ReplyDeleteHank, leave it out mate. I've been "inside" four times, and I can promise you that they don't use straightjackets any more.
Can posters please lay off the "you're mental" jibes. I have been "mental" and it has to be diagnosed by a doctor.