Lemming

I'm not convinced that Wylted actually 'caused any freedom of speech. 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Looking at the thread, you're right,

On the other hand though,

Many of those people merited bans,

Or were banned by request.

Maybe I don't agree with 'all the bans,

But many of them looked valid bans to me,

And did not have to do with freedom of speech.

Do you have a link to bans over time?

Or is this a rough estimate based on your perceptions/memory?

Not that I'm saying your memory or perception is wrong,

Just that I don't have access to either.

It's theoretical.

Let's say someone get's voted into office,

Then let's say they break the rules while in office,

Then let's say the mods remove said person as president,

The voters deserve an empty presidents seat until the next election,

For voting such a person in.

I didn't say 'nothing,

But they don't do 'that much.

Nice to have a voice for the users on the site,

But if a president was voted in that behaved in a way that got them banned,

Well,

Voters get what they deserve.

The president doesn't have 'no power,

Doesn't do 'nothing,

But they don't have that much power,

And they don't do that much.

I 'think.

My view is remove Wylted from the post of presidency, (For obvious reasons)

And Leave the post of president empty, until December.

I'm fine with the yearly presidency,

One doesn't need a change of the post all 'that frequently.

If true, that 'is a bit funny.

Though arguably it doesn't change the message, even if AI generated,

It 'would be human selected.

Though I suppose one might question if it is from the heart.

. . .

I can imagine the future,

Humans begin to turn away from well written prose,

Instead reading badly written, badly structured words,

The flaws in the writing showing it's 'human origin.

But of course then the AI would just be improved to write in the new style.

No,

But we are all active actors, participants, choice makers, 'some word or other that I forget.

. . . . . . .

I'm a nihilist, recall?

Both of morality and knowledge,

But,

Human, so must act, believe, it seems.

. .

'Encourage be hardly 'dictatorship anyhow.

Though I admit there are some 'normals,

I would go beyond encourage,

And move to enforce.

. .

Generally speaking, unlawful violence for example,

I prefer my normal where other's don't do it,

If I encountered it in life, I might act against it,

Certainly I support a number of 'laws against it.

That other's have 'their normal.

Does not mean I will not encourage they follow 'my normal.

I'm doubtful that Ted Kaczynski targets, 'deserved to be targeted,

In the 'conventional sense of deserved.

That the Unabomber caused collateral damage to people 'not his targets, seems even worse.

. .

Though arguably collateral damage comes about in many actions of people.

Not that I'm saying that you said the targets 'deserved it,

But you 'did use the word hero,

Maybe jokingly.

Huh, lot of Reddit's going private all of a sudden,

I hope their protests have some success.

Change words frequently,

Their definitions, meanings,

Over the period of years sure,

But eh, people get offended at this or that word,

Perfectly serviceable words,

Then they get offended at the new word,

Then they get offended at the new word,

Then-

Hm, or maybe I come off as disconnected to the arguments,

With my brothers, I mean.

@zedvictor4

I suppose,

But I prefer 'my normal.

@Theweakeredge

'Must be a large character flaw of mine,

If it comes out even in the written word,

My two brother's, as well tell me, I have an irritating way of speaking in arguments.

I forget how they described it though.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

For my brother's,

I think it's I get into some calming unintentionally condescending tone,

Which I think I get into because I'm angry, and I'm trying not to be angry,

So I try hard to be pleasant,

Ah, that was it,

People often hate it when another tries to be pleasant during an argument,

Comes off as condescending, smirking, sneering,

Though such isn't my intention with my brothers, times we've argued.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

People online though,

Aye, I'm biased,

'Usually,

I suppose I 'try to sound neutral,

As I don't want to insult the person,

I want to let them know I hear their argument,

That their reasons are not 'ignored be me,

Even if I disagree, or point out other views.

I don't want the person to feel bad that I don't like their choices, beliefs, or what they be.

Partly out of empathy,

Partly because I'm curious of their views,

I think.

Still,

Sounds that it might not be a very effective method,

The way I do it.

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Hm, no doubt if I was born X many years ago,

I'd-

Well, never mind that.

People and their words though,

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wouldn't it be 'worse if I was more honest or blunt about my opinions?

But perhaps I have difficulty telling the difference between being honest in my opinions,

And just blatantly insulting people. . .

Course one doesn't need to state what they're thinking negatively about people. .

Can speak of the positive and the neutral,

Hm,

Well, maybe I just won't include that disclaimer of mine where I state that I don't this or that.

I think I'm honest with people,

I think I'm fairly evenhanded, neutral, 'even if I have opinions, I don't have to come at people full tilting my views.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

In regards to norms though,

I intend to continue being an "asshat".

Sure, the people who want to be normalized appreciate being normalized,

Still,

I maintain my view that there's no inherent need to normalize 'everything,

Let alone views one disagree with.

@Best.Korea

As is often the case,

I can't tell if you're joking.

Maybe you would have,

It's 'basic propaganda,

And I shall continue to be myself, and state I mean propaganda in a neutral vein.

People are influenced by what they experience,

It's why some people became Nazi's,

Why Americans support this or that war,

Why we buy X whatever cereal.

@PREZ-HILTON

'Many words are going through my head,

Of which the meaning has changed over time,

Not quite 'repeatable,

I'm just musing on my dislike of how much people shift about.

While that is a fair argument to create certain norms,

It's also a fair argument to discourage certain norms.

I 'am glad that you've found parts of life that help you express yourself further,

Found shows that you like.

. . .

Hm,

Let me go with examples that you would find bad,

People who are racist,

People who use drugs,

People who are sexist,

These have and are norms in 'parts society as well,

Yet many people would consider them 'bad as norms.

I'm not saying that being homosexual or transexual is good or bad,

But the people who consider it bad,

Then they have no reason to encourage shows about it that normalize it,

Normalization is a neutral action, is what I mean.

To be fair to you,

That post they mention,

'Does seem more that you are doubtful about the claims at first, than insulting them or anyone lost,

You 'do say condolences, though arguably not very. . . diplomatically.

Regardless though,

I don't 'think, says anything about stating happiness over other's tragedies.

(I'm not saying that you stated happiness)

It mentions,

No "wishing or hoping that someone and/or their loved ones experiences physical harm."

and

Which I think 'can be gray,

But that's not the point, as I don't 'recall you stating any of these.

I say gray,

Because "You may not threaten or promote violence against any person or persons,"

Could apply to badger,

Not that I think it does, as I don't think badger was being 'serious, (Maybe).

And I don't take online comments about violence 'that serious,

Or in person either,

Some people use it more as expression of anger, rather than intention.

If it were more possible to verify an individual was the one doing the action,

Online dueling might not be so bad for disputes,

Not to the 'death of a person,

But eh, person who loses get's a week ban or something.

Again though,

Problem is how does one not know if the other individual is paying some super gamer to play the duel of choice 'for them?

Well, probably ways around that.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Supposing that the accused is able to select 2 or something peer judges,

While the Prosecutor picks 2 or something peer judges,

Debate as a trial sounds a bit fun,

But I imagine there is a reason they didn't catch on, on DDO.

Maybe they weren't official or something,

But my memory 'claims there were 'some there or other.

Does one not need do more, than be a jerk, to be banned?

Rather there is something 'specific, they need do,

I argue, to violate DART rules.

Personally I suspect 'many people in the world, are psychopaths and sociopaths,

What 'matters though,

Is whether they break the law.

Sure it also matters if they're a jerk,

Then less people associate with them,

But policies such as blocking or restraining orders exist on this site, (I think)

That people have the option to 'avoid people they don't like,

And if that person 'continues their harassment,

Well, 'then they've broken the law, and can get kicked.

If that "7-year-old transgender daughter" doesn't have some sort of physical birth defect,

Then I see this situation similar as parents naming their kid as Hitler and raising him as a Nazi.

Not that I'm saying 'I would step into 'either case,

But society 'does seem to have lines it doesn't like parents to cross.

They're not 'killing trans individuals directly,

Though I suppose one might argue they're tying to decrease a movement they disagree with,

Killing an idea,

But eh, if some people wanted to genocide the IDEA of a popular movement of pedophiles,

Who cares.

I am not saying that LGBT are pedophiles,

I am using an extreme example (Pedophiles),

To question the use of the word Genocidal.

. . .

I admit this post is clumsy of me,

But even if I am clumsy,

I still might want to improve my ability to discuss topics.

So long as his account wasn't hacked,

I expect Wylted will be banned.

'Possible he has some friendly reasons for this,

But regardless.

I'm not 'aware of the position of Vice President as official on DART,

Though it is mentioned in some threads, I assume that they are meant as jokes.

It would be fair to change the number of failed attempts to 10 or 20 per day,

But for most people, it's not a 'huge security hole, I 'think.

1. Don't 'most site use an email, then a password?

I don't see how this is compromised security.

The setting of one's password is on the user,

If they choose 123456 as their password, that's on them.

I imagine one can contact the mods through different means,

If their account is compromised.

2. Well, this isn't a huge business website with tons of money to pay for round the clock mods, I assume.

 I think your statement of disability is more an ad hominem, than an observation,

I understand however, that you are frustrated with other people's methods, views.

I don't think oromagi asking people's views is 'wrong,

Though others might prefer a different method.

It 'sounds that you're speaking your own bias on the topic of threat to violence,

And ignoring how other's might view the thread,

Not that I think it should not be discussed,

Not that I think it 'will cause violence,

But your post in  point 2, just comes off as closed minded, how dare anyone disagree with you, is what it speaks.

3. Just seems to be you insulting people.

4. This site 'does have some toxic members,

But so does society,

And 'much does the internet.

You yourself, I view as posting much toxicity, your post here, for example.

5. Simply appears to be you attempting to be offensive.

6. People may prefer a game or not,

Certainly the site 'could be more active,

But this is supposedly something you intended to do as president.

. .

If your personal life has come between what you intended,

So be it,

But the time of this sites members, is their own.

7.Simply appears to be you attempting to be offensive.

8. I am not party to discussions by the owner or mods,

So I can't speak on this issue, or what difficulties they might have of it.

9. You have a life,

I don't blame you for prioritizing it.

10. RationalMadman appears to have left for the moment,

But 19-21, I would call an even run at DART President,

I think RationalMadman has a great many positive traits, some negative ones as well,

I think he was a good influence upon this site, in many way.

I hope your personal life goes well,

That you, friends, family, all do well, find success, meaning, happiness.

I'd still vote for Trump over Biden,

Though more likely, like last election, I'll vote third party.

I'd argue those mights have more to do with my understanding,

Than what actually is or is known by professionals.

I 'have seen masks for exercise before,

That lower oxygen or something,

But those masks always looked fancy skin tight with valves or something.

'Might be bad for one's brain,

'Might be some people have different breathing requirements than me.

'Might be bad to have lower oxygen than one is used to.

I say 'might, because some people live in high altitudes,

Seem to do fine,

. .

But of course they 'live in high altitudes,

Don't shift sudden all the time,

Altitude sickness is bad.

'Might be some people have different breathing requirements than me.

I found the masks 'annoying, but did not effect my breathing much.

It's an old 'old idea,

Also modern idea,

Social distancing and masks.

Plague doctors,

Covering your mouth when you sneeze,

Masks in Japan,

Handwashing,

Exposing kids to chickenpox,

Quarantining ships or cities.

. . .

Then I shall say will,

But it didn't help politicians wanting to mandate masks and social distancing, when they ignored the rules themselves,

One 'also wondered for how 'long must 'everyone mask and social distance.

I understand that,

If de-escalation is not followed by a guard,

But instead escalation,

By the guard refusing to give respect, consideration,

By the guard demanding instant obedience,

Demanding the prisoners eyes down,

Treating them like a dog,

Not like a human.

. . .

Violence,

Physical pain,

Tossed in the hole,

Loss of control,

Tears,

Dehumanization.

'Torture, I would say.

If a guard is on a power trip,

Likes messing with prisoners,

Demanding little many examples of them,

Of their position,

Under the power of the guard,

Or the guard sneering, mocking, insulting.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

I do not say 'all guards act as above,

But I hold it as a common failing of human nature, and humans in positions of power over other humans.

And I think Humans are worthy of respect, consideration.

Merely for 'being people,

But additionally, for how that respect and consideration can change them for the better.

Whilst a lack of it, can change them for the worse.

I don't see anything wrong with your definitions of respect and courtesy.

Your definition of treating one with respect for instance,

. .

Yet,

Your own source states,

This is at odds with your statement in post #5

Your definition of courtesy,

Being interactions between people,

Prison includes 'social interactions, thus social conduct expectations.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

I agree, that inmates are not in prison for spa treatments and backrubs,

But that does not mean they are in prison to be tortured,

An act that would be counterproductive to the smooth running of the prison, the guards own souls, or the inmates rehabilitation.

If one is treated as an animal,

Less than human,

If their lack of autonomy is highlighted and sneered at,

Will they not hate?

Lash out?

Become muleheaded?

People desire respect, humanity, what autonomy they have.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

You 'do have experiences, I understand that,

But people can have different perceptions of a situation.

Or the same,

I 'agree that inmates can harm or kill guards,

And that there is no reason to avoid protocol or lower one's guard.

But this is not to say they cannot be treated with respect, courtesy.

I don't think any of the subjects in the society section, ought be unspeakable on this site.

What makes someone a fanatic?

I would prefer to hang out somewhere,

That puts a decent value on Free Speech.

Still,

Free Speech is important to some of us,

You don't have my vote.

Fair, it's your living room,

But then, I might not want to hang out in your living room.

Where do either of the articles, encourage 'coddling inmates?

The author of the first article, appears to have a long history of working in the system,

As well as having taught classes on corrections.

That 'sounds like more experience than you had.

The author of the second link, 'likewise appears to have worked in the system.

That 'sounds like more experience than you had.

Mentioning respect 4 times.

While your position 'may be true,

I have no convincing evidence to think so.

I worked in a short term inpatient psych ward, while I was in the military,

My 'own experience speaks to me,

That courtesy and respect were valuable tools in patient care.

Many individuals were there against their wishes,

Involuntary psych holds.

To treat other's with respect and courtesy,

I argue is 'not to ignore safety protocols,

But 'is to recognize others as 'people, to 'consider their situation, thoughts.

How do you reach the conclusion that there is no such thing as respect and/or courtesy on the part of correctional staff towards inmates?

The word respect is mentioned 14 times in this article,

Courtesy mentioned twice in this one,

But perhaps we are using the words in some slight difference of definition?

@badger

I would agree with limiting the number of topics a person could create in a given time span.

'Or moderation communicating with individuals who post spam topics of the same nature repeatedly.

But I'm not partial to removing users whose opinions I disagree with.

@NoOneInParticular

It's too bad it wouldn't have the effect I'd want,

But I might also enjoy requiring people to use Green Credits to create topics and make posts,

'Assuming one get's Green Credits for voting in debates,

I'm 'still not sure about that.

We're 'less a bubble,

The less people we ban.

Maybe.

. . .

When I asked

You said,

I'm unsure what you mean by 'measured 'conversation,

I know what the two words 'mean,

But different people use different measurement systems,

Or are looking to measure different amounts.

Probably other things I oppose, but I don't obsess over it.

I'd say it's annoying to have 'spam of any topic.

I'd say it 'might turn some people off,

If there are racists and transphobes,

But it might turn some people off,

If there are people advocating for destroying culture and grooming children towards trans surgery.

I prefer that everyone simply be able to speak their mind (To a point).

Something I 'greatly dislike about 'Reddit,

Is the bubbles,

Just everyone speaking the same view,

Same opinion on any subject,

Little disagreement, or 'checking of the evidence, logic of an event.

I'd rather be able to disagree with someone.

@NoOneInParticular

I suppose I prefer views that 'I like/tolerate,

. . .

I suppose even for this site,

I draw some lines,

Such as nude profile pictures,

So I suppose a 'bit hypocritical of me.

Fair point,

I don't have your point of view,

Am not able to consider everything you can.

I wouldn't say 'supposed to turn the other cheek,

But it 'is an option,

Something one 'could try,

But one can also go the option of giving equal what one get's,

Eye for an eye,

All just a matter of preference, perhaps, what one wants.

But as you said earlier,

Decades of history,

I don't know if you two have tried to get along before,

Or tried many times,

And it just doesn't work, so one or both quit trying,

Understandable.

. .

Though I don't know if it couldn't succeed one day.

Wouldn't it be better to have a polite conversation with badger,

Than one of insults?

I understand some people and times,

One can't expect any reconciliation,

Or,

One doesn't want to back down first.

But one 'can have reconciliation with some people, some times.

I don't think it's bad to make a friendly effort towards others.