Comments 1 - 13 of 13 Search these comments
If you can't handle the truth click " ad hominem".
That's the first step in taking away free speech,because your feelings are hurt.
Fuck snowflakes!
It went away when ignore was eliminated. Hopefully Patrick will see the wisdom of just re-instituting ignore and simplifying the site.
Ban and ad hominem has added nothing to this site and has made some aspects worse IMO
"Congress shall make no law.." ".. abridging the freedom of speech,"
Patnetters are greater than that old rag piece if parchment.
When a patnetter bans another the one that bans should not be able to read or comment on any threads or comments from the one that is banned.
You have the user list you know who to boycott ,any of the asshole banners.
Or FUCK YOU BANNERS!
When a patnetter bans another the one that bans should not be able to read or comment on any threads or comments from the one that is banned.
That's how "ignore" feature worked before it was abolished and replaced with "ban" and "ad hom".
Set 'em up HEY YOU.
Straw Man loves his free speech but not others.
"HEY YOU is banned by: Straw Man"
What can be said about other snowflake banners?
Straw Man loves his free speech but not others.
"HEY YOU is banned by: Straw Man"
Yep, don't like your annoying and repetitive speech. You haven't said anything remotely fresh for several years now.
Trump to become lifetime member of patnet,joining our other banners.
Tender sensibility snowflakes give me the shits as in SHIT on them.
As I have said before, I support free speech in combination with an ignore function (or more generally some other form of voluntary and programmable display filter).
Thanks Patnetters for eliminating Free Speech by allowing Banning
Explain, exactly, how one user, user A, banning another user, B, from A's thread in any way, shape, or form infringes or limits user's B free speech.
Also explain in detail why banning a person does NOT limit that person's speech when person A bans person B from
1. Sending him email by blocking his address or domain.
2. Posting on his Facebook page.
3. Or Twitter feed.
4. Or any other social media.
5. Calling A's phone by blocking his phone number or not answering his calls.
6. Contacting person A in any way by getting a restraining order.
7. Shouting in unison with others to drown out A's speech.
8. Talking in a courtroom when the judge has ordered B to stop talking.
9. Getting in the face of the police and demanding their attention when the police said to back off and not interfere with their jobs.
10. Entering a church during mass and shouting obscenities and lewd descriptions of sexual acts.
Or are you against any person being allowed to do any of the above?
PatNet is the most free forum on the Internet. If Patrick relaxed the few rules, PatNet would not be more free, but less. If Patrick has any flaws as a forum administer, it's that he's too tolerant of trolls.
As long as there is no noisome harassment after being told to go away I don't see the need for the ban / ignore. I think the tools were a step in the wrong direction but to be fair I am not fully aware of all that led to it and have not experienced harassment myself.
Thanks Patnetters for eliminating Free Speech by allowing Banning
https://patrick.net/users