It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Freedom Of Speech, ATS, and Ending The Eternal September

page: 10
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 11:08 AM
I think after reading the entire thread that i see both sides.
Not that i thought it did, but i now know ATS does not promote free speech.

I also see the reasons that some threads are removed, ie racial hatred but Here you can find examples of racial hatred.
Also drugs and criminal activity.
Again Here
is an example of just that.

I'm not saying I want these things on the blacklist and not discussed.
I personally would prefer a mature debate about ANY subject that anyone wished to discuss.
I think thats part of the problem here, people see a thread title they know they disagree with or do not like and intentionally go in for a fight.

You should use common sense and just not go and argue for the sake of it.
Obviously i'm not saying don't post in threads you have opposing views to, that would be counter-productive and pointless....but just don't go looking for a fight.

And the guy/girl who said the things about Snow had every right to, just as anyone has the right to express there opinions on any other subject.

I think that the moderation needs to be more consistent and really look at some of the crap thats' being posted here.
And not try and stifle decent intelligent debate.

[edit on 12/8/08 by blupblup]

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 11:09 AM
I think a lot of people have a distinct misunderstanding of "freedom of speech"

"freedom of speech" gives you a freedom to convey your thoughts and ideas.

It does not give you the freedom to use offensive words to do so.

A "bad" example is

I think coffee is "f-ing" disgusting!!! It sucks and i think people who drink it should die.

Offensive and vulgar, and *not* protected by freedom of speech. Because it can be conveyed like this

I think coffee is disgusting, and anyone who drinks it has problems.

you convey your opinion - protected by freedom of speech - without being cruel and abrasive.

In this sense, its about the context of the words you're using.

At least thats how i've always viewed the whole "freedom of speech" issue.

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 11:14 AM
Criticism of the official version of WW2/Holocaust and promotion of the decriminalisation of marihuana are two topics that seem to be censored on this site, even though Iran supports the first and Holland supports the latter. Anyway, both fall under the protection of free speech under US law and are just expressions of opinions

[edit on 12-8-2008 by OutoftheBoxthinker]

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 11:19 AM
reply to post by Spiramirabilis

Very true and still if there is something on ATS or in the world that I dont agree with then yea I will stand up and say I disagree.

But I had to look at both sides when I first posted I was only seeing my side. Yes I could talk about cannabis without being rude or advocating illegal activities but could everyone on ATS do the same?

No, chances are someone would have posted how they love to get stoned and party or some stupid thing.

I probably shouldnt have said a stupid fight, maybe a fight that couldnt be won.

The problem though is that you cant have freedom and restrictions they contradict each other. So really no place on earth is free because everywhere on earth has restrictions.

[edit on 12-8-2008 by caballero]

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 11:23 AM
reply to post by caballero

There is a solution to this issue, RATS. Thats the forum where you can talk about this issue without web crawlers like NetNanny or other filtering software won't pick it up.

Join up with Twitter, follow the ATS feed there, then U2U asala with your twittername and then you will get 5000 points, enough to buy access to RATS.

Then you can post your thread in that forum. It won't get censored. It can be discussed in a rational way and you can have your cake and eat it too.

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 11:33 AM
reply to post by whatukno

Gah im over that thread though, how many people are in rats any way is it even worth all that?

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 11:38 AM
reply to post by caballero

My opinion? No, but I am not the kind of person that likes to talk about drug use or legalization of that sort of thing.

But RATS does have another side to it that is fascinating. Some threads in that forum are really interesting and have a lot of great information. Without the interjection by trolls and the like, RATS can be a refreshing look at how ATS is ideally supposed to work.

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 11:52 AM
reply to post by whatukno

I didnt want to talk about drug use. History has shown us that prohibition doesnt work so keep trying to make it work? Prohibition only causes more problems than it fixes. It creates drug lords, It makes it so children are able to experiment with drugs, It doesnt work so why wouldnt I talk about legalizing drugs it would in the long run fix a lot of problems in the country.

Thats partly why I lost my head, because it can be a very legitimate debate.

But I also realize that there would be people that would talk about drug use.

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 11:59 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 12:03 PM
To quote Trace:

"The First Amendment? The First Amendment protects you from the government son, not from me. You can say whatever you want to out there, you come within reach of me I'll give you a good ol' country a$$ whoopin' is what I'll do."


By being a member (or posting anonymously) you come within reach of the TAC

And freedom of speech is the right to speak... not be heard.

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 12:11 PM
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 12:17 PM
Post removed and temporary posting-ban applied.

[edit on 12-8-2008 by SkepticOverlord]

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 12:23 PM

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
"freedom of speech" gives you a freedom to convey your thoughts and ideas.

It does not give you the freedom to use offensive words to do so.

Who decides what is offensive in this case?

I disagree that Freedom of Speech (in the Constitutional sense) means that you cannot be offensive in your expression. In fact, there are legal exceptions on Free Speech, but being offensive isn't one of them.

Legal Exceptions to Freedom of Expression

Defamation | Causing panic | Fighting words | Incitement to crime | Sedition | Obscenity

...among others like perjury, noise pollution, etc. But offensiveness isn't one.
Neither is vulgarity, disgust, cruelty or abrasiveness.

Here on ATS, I'd say yes. They have freedom to express one's opinion, within the confines of ATS's T&C, but it's slightly different than the Constitutional freedom we enjoy. ATS doesn't disallow opinions or favor one opinion over another, but there are restrictions in the expression here that don't exist outside in real life.

I can go to my neighbor and say, "You, sir, are an idiot. You're dumber than a post, uglier than my dog and you stink worse! I hate you and your wife and you should never have children and pass along your clearly defective genes. You're stupid and worthless..."

Very offensive. Protected under Constitutional free speech. Not permitted on ATS.

posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 12:47 PM

Originally posted by AGENT_T

Originally posted by TH3ON3
... I think you will find my post.

'nuff said..

If someone has to 'FIND' your post,then it couldn't really be taken as an offence if it is removed.

Spare a thought for us poor readers when quoting HUGE sections of a previous post.
By the time we find/if we find any additional opinion,before we can reply we have to dust the keys for cobwebs.

Maybe the page should be redesigned so that we can reply right below the debate line instead olf having to post way below or having to delete large parts of the reply.

posted on Aug, 13 2008 @ 07:10 AM
reply to post by TH3ON3

OR... You could use the 'reply to' button and achieve the post reply format as seen in this one.
Clicking on the 'reply to' section of this post will take you to the post in question..if not already guessed.

Using 'quote' is actually a little more 'difficult' as you have to remove the non-specific parts of the post.. ie ..KEEP ONLY the bit you are referring to.

Wears me out every time.

Apologies for the offtopicedness of this info.But it DOES explain in a nonconspirital fashion why your post would be disvisiblefied.

( Gawd I love inventing new words.)

posted on Aug, 13 2008 @ 04:42 PM
I am not sure where else to post this, but a member that was on here was having issues w/ the owners as to what was considered "free speech" and such according to this site. Now I am not hardcore on the first ammendment applying to this site as this site is not America and therefore information is subject to what the owners deem appropriate as laid out by their terms or even beyond.. since this is their site. I do not argue that.

However, I had a U2U from OutoftheBoxthinker that was to me. It is gone now. I did not delete or move it into the saved...... just disappeared.

I know that it couldn't just have been that he was banned bc there have been other members banned on here whose messages have remained in my inbox.

So, question is, what gives???

posted on Aug, 13 2008 @ 05:12 PM
reply to post by AGENT_T

Well why don't they have that in the dang instructions? Oh they did...guess i'm just too lazy to read it...Thanks for the reply homie....(the homie I refer to is your avatar!!! mods please don't take as an insult and delete)

[edit on 13-8-2008 by TH3ON3]

posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 06:47 AM
reply to post by caballero


Caballero said: "I stand by what I said no we dont have freespeech, nor free expression I dont appreciate the staff claiming we do but telling us we cant talk about this or that and we cant express our thoughts on this or that. "

I am with you and am just as upset as you and many others are about the incomplete concept of "Freedom of Speech" on this Board. There is no "Freedom of Speech" here. There is some freedom to say what you want, but when the T&C are violated, the censorship hammer comes crashing down to edit, delete or remove the violating post. This is what happens in a comminust country or website. Is this a healthy position to take? Depends on which side of the table you sit at. To ATS it is healthy. To us it is a restriction, which I can view as being unhealthy.

I think moderators should not moderate a thread they are posting in. Either you are the cop or the citizen. You can't be both at the exact same time. When a cop is off duty, only then can he revert back to a citizen. And for some cops, even that is a difficult challenge. Why would anyone want to give up "super-powers" by reverting to being a citizen when you are a cop?

I am glad this discussion is ongoing, but I fear that in the end, nothing will change other than possibly Moderators not being able to moderate a thread that they are participating in. That's it. Oh, and also the possiblility of this thread disappearing.

The T&C should be altered, but again, why would someone look to diminish their "powers" for nothing. Us complaining can be mistaken as being nothing. "Us" being the users that make ATS what it is. Without us ATS is nothing.

For example: Bush must think that the American people are nothing. Look at how often he breaks the rules, or makes them up as he goes. Blatant disregard is evident in a lot of Bush's actions. Look at Iraq, Iran, Afganistan... He does not stop!!!

The censorship on this site does not stop either.


[edit on 14-8-2008 by EyesII]

posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 06:57 AM
reply to post by EyesII

Freedom of speech is the ability to express your point of view.

Freedom of speech is generally not the ability to express your point of view while acting like a raving jackalope. If that's your idea of free speech, some time on one of the *chan sites should express the difference fairly quickly as well as illustrate why it's awful nice to have a poop-free playground.

Gosh, the anger and outrage from kids these days....!

posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 07:09 AM
reply to post by anachryon


Sorry, Freedom of Speech in this country (USA) covers me on ANYTHING I or anyone else wishes to say.

However, You are right in that if I say "I have a bomb!" or "This is a hold-up" that legal consequences will ensue. However you or I are still able to say those words. Consequence is another aspect to the ability to say what you want. The consequence(s) would be determined by whomever heard (or viewed) what was said.

In regard to your age comment... I am probably older than you so please stop. You are making me laugh too hard. (Oh, my side hurts now. Ouchy!)


new topics

top topics

<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in