I offer some polls for those who wish to express a view without having to post a comment in the Squawk Box thread. The first two are single-choice, the third is multiple choice. They are open to registered members. There is an option to add another answer.I wondered whether to leave comments open and will do so. Please just use it for technical suggestions, questions to add, wording to change to avoid loaded questions. Use Squawk Box for other comments.
First, what do you think of Lizzie’s original idea?
My motivation for starting the site has been the experience of trying to discuss religion, politics, evolution, the Mind/Brain problem, creationism, ethics, exit polls, probability, intelligent design, and many other topics in venues where positions are strongly held and feelings run high. In most venues, one view dominates, and there is a kind of “resident prior” about the integrity, intelligence and motivation of those who differ from the majority view.
[From here]
There are plenty of blogs and forums where people with like priors can hang out and scoff at those who do not share them. There’s nothing wrong with those sites, and I’ve learned a lot from them. But the idea here is to provide a venue where people with very different priors can come to discover what common ground we share; what misunderstandings of other views we hold; and, having cleared away the straw men, find out where our real differences lie. In my experience, when you reach that point, who is right becomes obvious to both parties 🙂
[From here][AF added in edit 08.18 am CET,18/08/2018]
[democracy id=”4″]
Second, do the rules support the aims?
[democracy id=”5″]
Third, does moderation policy and execution fit with the aims and rules? [ETA] This poll is multi-choice. You can pick more than one answer.
[democracy id=”6″]
There are around three hundred registered members currently but I suspect there are around forty to fifty currently active. I look forward to your input. And I’m sure Lizzie will find it informative.
[AF added in edit 09.00 am CET 18/08/2018]
As member, Patrick, has suggested some questions, here they are. This is multi-choice and you can add your own answer.
[democracy id=”7″]
J-Mac,
Thank you for your advice. Much of what you write isn’t wrong. I’ve learned a lot from TSZ, particularly about letting go of expectations and observing my own reactions without becoming attached to them (shout out to fifthmonarchyman for giving me the opportunity to work on that). Contrary to how I realize I might come across, I’m not actually angry about any of this. I am passionate about a few issues, though.
A close friend in my meditation circle once shared a thought that stuck with me. He said, “I don’t want to be enlightened, I just want to be a better person to the people I care about.” Enlightenment involves letting go of all attachments. I don’t want to do that. I do want to let go of those that don’t serve me.
Enlightenment values (as opposed to Buddhist enlightenment) do serve me. I am passionate about them. Primary among those values is freedom of expression because that is the only path to identifying and correcting error. We should jealously guard it against all encroachments.
The problem here is that the admins do not share that value. Even if one accepts the argument that censorship is necessary to achieve TSZ’s goals (which I do not), it should be seen as at best a necessary evil. The censors should have enough respect for Enlightenment values to regret every action they take that violates them. Unfortunately, they do not.
In the larger scheme of things, you’re right. TSZ is a small blog with a small number of participants and a very small impact. Still, the principle of freedom of expression is under attack from both the alt-right and the regressive left here in the US. Those of us who hold those Enlightenment values need to stand up for them where they are threatened, whether in big ways or small. Compromise is not acceptable.
TSZ used to be one of the small shining lights of free speech on the Internet. It could be in the future if Elizabeth so chooses. There is no need to give in to the fear-mongering of the authoritarians, which under the rhetoric is nothing more than a desire for control over other people.
So, thank you again for sharing your views. I understand where you’re coming from. Still, I consider this little spark of light to be worth defending. I hope to be able to continue to point people to TSZ as a place where free speech is valued for some time to come.
The following is a copy of a private email from keiths, posted with his permission. I am sharing it because I believe it is pertinent to this thread and nothing in the Rules prohibits doing so.
Your entire comment is nicely put.
This part in particular deserves emphasis:
i’m standing up for the moderators. Am i not a person? If so why so uick to forget me in the PERSON group after dismissing me?
I’m sure most of folks who post here, or visit etc, are happy with the moderation.
Need another vote!?
I don’t want you moderated for abusing me BECAUSE its trivial.
YEC folks would like this forum because its less oppresaive and censorious then others. Yes including ID sites like UD. Freedom is still the common mans fight to gain and keep.
The following is a copy of a private email from keiths, posted with his permission. I am sharing it because I believe it is pertinent to this thread and nothing in the Rules prohibits doing so.
Byers:
Yes, Robert, you are a person.
I am vigorously defending your right to stand up for the moderators, just as I am vigorously defending my right to criticize them — without censorship.
Censorship doesn’t belong here at TSZ, yet I am currently being censored. If it weren’t for Patrick’s efforts against the censors — Alan, Neil, and DNA_Jock — you would not be reading this comment.
We all know that it is the nature of internet forums to encourage people to interact in ways that they would think twice about if they were taking part in a live debate or discussion. That being the case I think that we should all take more care in the way we post comments. I pretty much agree with what faded_Glory and William J. Murray have written in the Squawk box thread. The moderators have a thankless task and all it takes for them to leave us alone is to state our disagreements in a civil manner and not to let our passions rule our behaviour. IMO bit of self reflection and control would not go amiss. If you don’t want to fall fowl of the moderators don’t give them the ammunition and if you do think that they have treated you unfairly, state your case, then accept their ruling and let it pass. It is no big deal so don’t make it into one.
i haven’t participated for a while because since I last posted here I have retired from work and been on a break. I really hope that TSZ can continue in a way that people can give their thoughts and opinions freely, expect them to be challenged and opposed,but without the insults that sometimes accompany the replies. The latter only discourage lurkers from participating all all we end up with is the noisy few trading insults among themselves. There are some interesting discussions to be had here, please let them be heard.