It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Jakko banned form the Pit

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Due to continued abusive remarks, even after being warned, the member, Jakko no longer has access to this forum. Heated debate is welcome and encouraged. Abusive insults are not.




posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 04:13 PM
link   
I hope it's just temporary. I may not agree with Jakko on many issues but I still value his perspective. I didn't think he was really that abusive (he only called me a couple of mild names
). Some of it may even boil down to language barrier...



posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fry2
I hope it's just temporary. I may not agree with Jakko on many issues but I still value his perspective. I didn't think he was really that abusive (he only called me a couple of mild names
). Some of it may even boil down to language barrier...


I agree....

The mud pit is for heated debate, I understand completely, O'reilly and Cheney can can attack and insult people even if it satire or the f bomb and we can't??
Insulting people is ok in the mud pit, you gotta have "thick skin" to be in here, so why do we have to treat this area with "caution"??

Is this not a place to throw your mud?? Usually when you throw some mud an insult may be attached... why is that so bad??

If the people can't handle it then I don't think they should be here...

i personally don't care what people think of me and call me... If I can't handle the odd jackass comment or stupid idiot name, then I shouldn't be here.

We're all adults here, not chldren, please reconsider the name calling thing, it adds much more passion to the persons debate... And I enjoy the odd laugh...


Entertainment and education all in one... A good combination I must say...



posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 07:07 PM
link   
The rules in the mudpit are the same rules that apply to the rest of ATS.

It *is* possible to debate an issue in a heated fashion without calling people names or insulting them.

-B.



posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Banshee
The rules in the mudpit are the same rules that apply to the rest of ATS.

It *is* possible to debate an issue in a heated fashion without calling people names or insulting them.

-B.



Yes I know it "is" possible to do that, but I just enjoy it alot more when i read someone's thread with their comment thats "let's say" a little more passionate.
Maybe you should tell Cheney that... Oh wait, didn't he feel better after he dropped the f bomb?? Swearing as a means of therapy, c'est la vie.



posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 09:30 PM
link   
WTF does cheney have to do with this board? he isnt a member.


if you have a problem with cheney saying # then take it up with your representative to have something done about it.

how a politician conducts himself anywhere else is of no concern to us and has no influence in how this board is run.

and i really like the logic you seem to be using here...

"if cheney can say # why cant we?"

because cheney doesnt run this board. cheney isnt a member of this board and cheney didnt say it on this board.


great logic you have there. show us how immature and uncivilized other people are by reducing yourself to their level or wanting the ability to do so.

and if all you want is insulting vulgarities and flaming, there are other boards that cater to such behavior.

the rules have changed for this forum.

and re-read the title of the forum....it doesnt say mud pit any longer.

[edit on 28-6-2004 by ThePrankMonkey]



posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePrankMonkey

and re-read the title of the forum....it doesnt say mud pit any longer.


F**k me !!! (as Mr Cheney would probably say if he was a member of this forum) I didn't notice the name change !

Probably not enough



posted on Jun, 28 2004 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Actually the point is adults throw mud when they are debating, and insults sometimes pop up, it's just too bad people focus more on the insults then the debated issue. I still think it adds more entertainment, swearing and insults aren't the end all be all.

But oh well, I don't make the rules here so i'll just put up and shut up...

I also like how you guys jump on me like monkey's for having an opinion, not only is swearing not allowed, but neither is civilised discussion...

Way to get out of hand.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Before the MODS read this and slap me down....
I agree that because this is a voluntary, privatly run forum, the administrators reserve the right to both be inclusive/exclusive as well as to have whatever boundaries they see fit.

HOWEVER,
Silencing anyones speech, weather abusive or not, cannot serve to DENY IGNORANCE! How will I know an ignorant remark if I cannot read one?

Monkey says,
"WTF does cheney have to do with this board? he isnt a member. "
Are you so sure? How do you know that Im not him now? As if IP adresses cant be rerouted or faked. Heck he could be using a laptop sitting outside starbucks in a limo for all we'd know....

I think the point was that we see on TV "news" programs, anchors constantly using derragatory discriptive terms about someone they dont agree with. These remarks would pass the FCC test but not the Mud pit rules....???? This section of the board is bascially an opinion page, and people dont always have nice opinions....why should they? This smacks of politically coerrect BS. "You cant say not nice things"

Will dissenting opinions be censured next?
Being in a leadership capasity means that you better be ready to take criticism from the ranks...without having to constantly react to every one.

I know i know, "these remarks do not further intelligent discussion on topics." Yes thats why were here, but not everyone is as intelligent or capable of having these discussions, let alone in a "approved" manner.
They may simple not have ever tried to express themselves in this fashion before...indeed some may be intimidated not only by some name calling, but the fact that they feel they cant "speak" in a way that they are comfortable with. Are we to go to use of correct grammer and spelling now to? What about a language barrier, where choice of words might not be the best, but all that is known to use?

I was participating in the thread where i believe Jakko was censured for calling someone "Retarted". (leading up to his expulsion i believe) I think that the post in question was REMOVED from the thread, or at least edited...LET US SEE THE TRANSGRESSION so that we may learn what NOT to do...as well as so that we the people that have helped make this site great will have some way to guage transgressions and see that MODS are indeed MODERATE in their moderating.

Take it from someone that watches the TV ratings on a daily if not hourly increments and is well familiar with audience responce....(i work in mass media broadcasting)
ATS success is given and taken away by its membership...reguardless of what/how management thinks/wants.

The mud pit was sorely needed in the world...people needed a place where playing nice wasnt a requirment, but where others could judge their words for what they are.....

If you dont like it, dont spend the points to enter....
If you do enter...be aware that this COULD occur....
If you enter...JUST USE THE IGNORE FUNCTION PROVIDED if you cant handle someone, or heaven forbid...just DONT ACKNOWLEDGE this type of responce....look at f-911 for example...that dog of a flick would NEVER had taken in so much $$$ if it wasnt for the exposure it got....
why expose some idiot remarks anymore than they are worth? just let them spew and dont bother to even reply.....

people hate being ignored more than they hate being called a bad name!!!
If noone fights back with you and in fact dont even acknowledge you....your little rant will be long forgotten by those that continue the debate around you.

OK back to the MODS points....
I agree that little purpose is served by ranting....and trying to keep a decorum within the discussion indeed helps structure it twords a more "productive" end. (productive meaning that someone is actually going to change their minds based off any discussion...which ive seen as unlikley but possible)

I can also see that we (mudpit users) are NOT all adults...some minors indeed use this forum and those of us that are adults should lead with a better example.

All id ask for is MODERATION in the moderation of this forum...and along the linesof what Howard Stern says about what constitutes obcenity....can the rules for "abusive language" be more defined? what is censurable, with no CLEAR guidlines is the question i ask.

PS....I laughed at the name change......without the mudpit, i would only have a passing interest in this site....remember this as members no longer return and the #'s start to slide for being such a great site. Ever hear of 15 minutes of fame? This could be ATS. Rember, management here IS in charge, but membership makes this site. If you cant meet the viewers (users in this case) demands...your not long to live in the public eye.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 12:35 AM
link   
This is just another step down the long flight of stairs ATS is heading down towards the pits (and no not the mud-pit). The Mud Pit used to be a fun place to come and debate, to vent, and yes be abused by some ignorant # halfway around the world. Since the 'crackdown' the pit has gone down hill, the debates are boring and monotonous with no life or passion, or alternatively the debates have been about the new rules in the pit. I know the mods dont really care, but i for one have lost interest in the pit, which in my humble opinion was the greatest asset ATS had... These new 'babysitter' rules (as i like to refer to them as) have destroyed a once great place for political debate, now ATS/BTS is only good for general chit-chat...

All because some crybabies couldnt stand to take an insult or see others insulted... welcome to the real world people... you no longer have to experience anything that may make you slightly uncomfortable because big brother is there to censor you from it.

[Edited on 29-6-2004 by specialasianX]



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 02:03 AM
link   
Urgh.

I too was against the change to the mud pit rules - and if the discussion thread hadn't been trashed, I'd be on record.

But, after time to relfect, I'm one hundred percent happy with the new arrangement. You don't need to swear and bluster and insult to make your point - well, most of us don't - and I think the changes have improved the pit no end.

I withdraw my opposition, SO, you were absolutely right.

Meanwhile, I hope jakko's let back in soon. I disagreed with him on just about everything except the gun thing, but he was a passionate voice, and we need more of those.

My 0.02.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 05:13 PM
link   
I in no way intended my post to cause some kind of bash the (former) Mud pit forum. I agree with the change in the rules 90%.
The only 10% that I don't really agree with is the lack of that ......emotion I guess is the word I'm looking for. Colonel had a bad habit of pushing things over the edge on a personal level ( Nazi, Baby killer ect.), however, I valued his thoughts as well (just not as a mod.
).
My concern is that Jakko may have been banned for statements in the "Guns and Good Stuff" thread. There may have been (and probably were) another set of issues involved that I'm unaware of. If not, I think he at least deserves a second chance in here.

My .02



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 05:25 PM
link   
I think we can probably blame Colonel for the mud-pit change. I could be wrong, but that is my opinion. He consistently went WAY overboard with insults and name calling.

I however, do agree with you Strangelands, that you shouldn't have to resort to name calling and personal attacks to get your point across.

Does it still cost 500 point to get into the pit now? Or whatever it is called. The low fat, carb free, pink and fluffy politically correct board.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by CazMedia
Silencing anyones speech, weather abusive or not, cannot serve to DENY IGNORANCE! How will I know an ignorant remark if I cannot read one?
Nobody is silencing speech. Oh the drama...



I think the point was that we see on TV "news" programs, anchors constantly using derragatory discriptive terms about someone they dont agree with. These remarks would pass the FCC test but not the Mud pit rules....???? This section of the board is bascially an opinion page, and people dont always have nice opinions....why should they? This smacks of politically coerrect BS. "You cant say not nice things"

I believe I could say Bush is a fool, Clinton a sex-freak, or just about anything along those lines. I just can't refer to YOU in a derogatory manner, get it?


Will dissenting opinions be censured next?
Being in a leadership capasity means that you better be ready to take criticism from the ranks...without having to constantly react to every one.
Ummm...no, since your posting this, it proves it.


They may simple not have ever tried to express themselves in this fashion before...indeed some may be intimidated not only by some name calling, but the fact that they feel they cant "speak" in a way that they are comfortable with.

Well, we cannot call it "common sense", because if it was common...everyone would have it. Let's call it practical sense. The choice of words would be non-derogatory and non-abusive. If your not comfortable "speaking" that way, then I would suggest some practice. Go to the local biker hangout and try and discuss a topic without using any practical sense. I certainly bet you will learn real fast.


As for the rest of your post, well...



posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 03:19 AM
link   
ZZZ says,


Nobody is silencing speech. Oh the drama...


Care to comment Jakko? Jakko? Someone take the gag off of Jakko!

drama

\Dra"ma\ (?; 277), n. [L. drama, Gr. ?, fr. ? to do, act; cf. Lith. daryti.] 1. A composition, in prose or poetry, accommodated to action, and intended to exhibit a picture of human life, or to depict a series of grave or humorous actions of more than ordinary interest, tending toward some striking result.

Isnt this what ATS is about? Suck out the drama in peoples discussions and what are you left with? Would that dry, bland, vulcan like reading continue to draw large #'s of people over a widespread demographic?

ZZZ reprimandingly states,



I just can't refer to YOU in a derogatory manner, get it?


Perhaps something could be clarified....
Lets say i say "I think your whole argument is stupid."
is that the same as saying "you are stupid"
In other words....can statements from people be attacked, or is that also considered a personal attack? Lets use a word we've already determined was inapropriate for this example.
"what you just said sounds retarded."
"i think you are a retard for saying those things."
Same? Different?

ZZZ fails to state anything with,
"As for the rest of your post, well... "
WELL? WELL WHAT!
I adopted the "party line" of compliance to private controls.
I acknowledge that Jakko "self-censured" himself by non compliance.

Rehtorical questions (NOT challenging MODS authority, mearly seeking information)

Are the only ones that can deny ignorance not verbally or emotively challenged? Only those "practiced" in expression in the manner we've chosen will be allowed to deny ignorance. (true as Ive only rephrased current policy for DRAMATIC effect!)

if as in this thread...
www.atsnn.com...
the government cant bar/censor this type of speech from the internet

then why do we as a people allow this from those that "own/control" the media outlets in question? (i know, because participation here is voluntary, but how voluntary is it really when the only avenue for this type of discussion says, "speak the way we tell you to or you dont get to speak." mearly because they OWN the medium of communication used?)

In its basic form, how does owning the transmission medium (some of which are on the "public" airwaves) give private entities MORE censureship powers than the government has over citizens speech, its content, context, style, theme ect?

Can ATS and its members find the fulcrum for free speech/denial of ignorance vrs private control of media?

How does where this point is determined to be, affect the commercial viabillity of the site? It seems that the MudPit was a very attractive portion of the reason visitors were comming to the site.

I only ask because my first step in denying ignorance is to question everything.



posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 07:34 AM
link   

from CazMedia
I think the point was that we see on TV "news" programs, anchors constantly using derragatory discriptive terms about someone they dont agree with. These remarks would pass the FCC test but not the Mud pit rules....????

ATS is in a higher class than the FCC, so tis should be no surprise.

As for anchors constantly using derogatory terms, there are certain stations which are much more professional than others. For example, flip between Imus and FOX in the 6 to 9AM slot; you'll see the difference.

I honestly don't see why personal attacks and name calling should need to be a part of someone's comunications portfolio. It's just mental laziness, IMO.




posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 07:40 AM
link   
The Mudpit is NOT a right. If you abuse your priviledge, you lose it. It was said the he was warned, not as if it was an arbitrary thing. I think it's better to have a Pit like this than not to have one at all.



posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 08:05 AM
link   
The mudpit should be renamed the mosh pit
i should come in here more often, i miss all the good stuff



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 12:53 AM
link   
Hey why not start a new forum. Put the mud pit back the way it was and make a debate forum for toddlers. Wouldn't we all be happy and mudslining again?



posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Why do people defend name calling? Just because Cheney says it doesn't mean we should. Aren't we suppose to be above the others? I don't need name calling to prove a point, I need facts. I had facts, Jakko went nuts with the name calling, and now he banned. If I was to go around doing the same thing I should expect to be banned also.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join