« prev   random   next »

36
18

Patnet and censorship: Performance Art?

By justme following x   2017 Nov 14, 11:22am 14,151 views   161 comments   watch   sfw   quote     share    


I wonder if @Patrick has just staged a piece of censorship Performance Art by instituting omnipotent censorship, under the guise of "moderation", and crowd-sourced mass-silencing (encouraging the use of the "uncivil" button) on patrick.net. The aforementioned scheme of blog control is so far removed from Patrick's former free-speech self that I am starting to wonder. Perhaps this is just an exercise in showing what happens when you give absolute power over some domain of life to ONE semi-random person, even one that otherwise professes to love liberty and freedom?

It is more than a little ironic (but should not be surprising to any serious student of human nature) that right-wingers appear to be every bit as eager to censor their opponents as they have recently been accusing the left-wingers of being. And by that I mean the last several years of talk about liberals and their desire for "safe spaces" on and off university campuses, calling them "special snowflakes", and so on.

Well, the right-wing has in recent days been out in force on Patnet, trying to enforce a "safe space" , free of "uncivility" and "NSFW" material, and acting like special snowflakes themselves. And boy, are these right-wing special snowflakes melting down Patnet in a volcanic eruption of censorship actions.

The famous 1960s psychological experiment known as the Stanford Prisoner Project comes to mind as an analogy of sorts. That experiment showed what happens when you give authority for random people to control other random people. What soon happened was not pretty. Read up on it if you want.

Finally, I will revisit and highlight a suggestion I have made several times this year:

What I would like to see is to have free speech, and at the same time avoid massive storms of low-quality comments. For a blog, I think that means to make threads and comments a limited commodity for all posters. Specifically, to limit the number of threads that a user can post on any given day to 1 or 2, and to limit how many comments every user can post on every thread to 10, or 10% of the total number of comments on the thread, whichever is larger.

The purpose of moderation should not be to censor certain forms of expression, but rather to make everyone's time (or space) on the proverbial soapbox a valuable commodity. That way, users are more likely to spend their posting currency wisely. Users who wastes their currency by posting low-quality drivel will lose esteem, or at the very least not be able to dominate the discussion based on volume posted only.

Think of it as rules of order, a very lightweight and blog-adapted version of Robert's rules of order. (By the way, a quite well-known now former pat-netter just mentioned Robert's rules just days ago, and is hereby recognized.)

PS: I very well understand the meta-question as to whether the impact of a blog, as measured by commercial value or informative value, or even political/propaganda value(!), is reduced when the number of threads or comments are somewhat limited. I think many people may think so, perhaps even Patrick himself. Personally, I will take quality over quantity any day.

#misc

« First    « Previous    Comments 122 - 161 of 161    Last »

122   Onvacation   ignore (4)   2017 Nov 20, 9:01am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Sniper says

How many more months you going to continue to cry about a poster that's not here anymore. Is that mature adult behavior?

Yes! Let it go. Argue about facts and opinions, not personalities.
123   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 20, 9:02am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Sniper says
errc says
Mature adults don’t make posts calling Obama “nigger boy”, and then get banned, and then return to disrespect @Patrick and harass the thinking posters


How many more months you going to continue to cry about a poster that's not here anymore. Is that mature adult behavior?


How many months did you spend hours on hours of every day, being uncivil to disrupt the forum, while incessantly harassing anyone who wasn’t willing to bend over and be abused by Republicans?
124   Onvacation   ignore (4)   2017 Nov 20, 9:04am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

anon_61c8a says
Sniper says
Why don't you stop acting like a little girl, hiding behind anon

Does this qualify as an insult?

Can you actually insult anonymous? Or is it more like saying "SOME people need to get a life."
125   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 20, 9:09am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Fucking White Male says
So essentially you want it to be free speech, as long as its the speech you deem free.


What a gigantic straw man you've built! So proud!

Right now it's only speeched deemed free by goron as intended.
126   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 20, 9:16am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Sniper says
anon_7e3cc says
Sniper says
What for, things are going perfect, just as planned!!

Why can't you be honest? You don't want people posting under anons because it spoils your fun.


Spoils what fun?

Why don't you stop acting like a little girl, hiding behind anon, and post under a real screen name, like the mature adults do here?

You’re anon. The only difference is that we all know your posting history. Like I said, you don’t like it, not because it hinders discussion but because it limits your trolling.
127   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 20, 9:18am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

anon_25c83 says
Patrick I want you to take note of how nearly everything Goran writes is trolling.


This is so obviously true and it's crazy patrick doesn't care and won't even comment.
128   CovfefeButDeadly   ignore (4)   2017 Nov 20, 9:18am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

anon_25c83 says
Fucking White Male says
So essentially you want it to be free speech, as long as its the speech you deem free.


What a gigantic straw man you've built! So proud!

Right now it's only speeched deemed free by goron as intended.


There is no strawman.

The words of the post I was referring to:

anon_7e3cc says
It used to be pretty free. The freedom was misdirected into accepting any and all nonsense. Insulting users isn't an issue per se - it can be a perfectly reasonable part of discussing points. The problem is when that's pretty much the only reason someone is on here (yes, I'm looking at you CiC). Seriously, what's the problem in saying 'you're fucking stupid if you believe that', 'thats a moronic point' etc. etc? I presume Goran would be all over those types of posts these days. You can have constructive arguments and you can vent. The two are not incompatible. Deliberate and prolonged trolling is a different matter. It's just destructive over the long term even if it may be amusing from time to time.
This site is losing spirit as well as posters.
129   CovfefeButDeadly   ignore (4)   2017 Nov 20, 9:19am   ↑ like (6)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

anon_1d65f says
Sniper says
anon_7e3cc says
Sniper says
What for, things are going perfect, just as planned!!

Why can't you be honest? You don't want people posting under anons because it spoils your fun.


Spoils what fun?

Why don't you stop acting like a little girl, hiding behind anon, and post under a real screen name, like the mature adults do here?

You’re anon. The only difference is that we all know your posting history. Like I said, you don’t like it, not because it hinders discussion but because it limits your trolling.


Thats not why LOL!

Anon is only so you can spitefully post against Patrick and Goran. The one and only reason.
130   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 20, 9:22am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Fucking White Male says
Thats not why LOL!


Has Goran participated in a single thread without trying to ID the anons? No? Then I guess he's right and you're wrong.
131   CovfefeButDeadly   ignore (4)   2017 Nov 20, 9:28am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

anon_25c83 says
Fucking White Male says
Thats not why LOL!


Has Goran participated in a single thread without trying to ID the anons? No? Then I guess he's right and you're wrong.


I'm not even sure what sense that makes.
132   BlueSardine   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 20, 10:25am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Well, that and SCOTUS...,

anon_25c83 says
So yeah pretty much the reason you guys hate anons so much is because attacking the person is all the right ever had.


133   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 20, 10:44am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Just FYI, the reason this thread has 29 upvotes is because anons can vote up or down. So the anons are voting repeatedly.
134   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2017 Nov 20, 10:45am   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

I wrote the above comment, as an Anon, to try it out. The counter should be reset and Anons prohibited from voting.
135   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 20, 10:54am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Yeah, Anons need to be suspended for a while. It's pretty clear there is an attempt to mess up the site by a coterie of frustrated TDS users dropping their usernames and messing around on the site.

I'm going to ignore Anonymous Cowards, even if it's not ad hom or uncivil or whatever.
136   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 20, 11:04am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

All the right wingers are going to ignore all the anons in the end. Attacking the person instead of the argument is all they ever stood for. Are you watching and learning Patrick?
137   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2017 Nov 20, 11:04am   ↑ like (5)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

anon_57cc2 says
It's pretty clear there is an attempt to mess up the site by a coterie of frustrated TDS users dropping their usernames and messing around on the site.


Ya think?
138   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 20, 11:05am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsMcGee says
I wrote the above comment, as an Anon, to try it out. The counter should be reset and Anons prohibited from voting.


Why?
139   HEY YOU   ignore (7)   2017 Nov 20, 11:20am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I want to moderate #STFU.
140   justme   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 20, 12:12pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

It might be helpful if Patrick posted one or more examples of particular collections of comments, from the same thread, from the pre-moderation era, which he found, as a whole, to be uncivil and wanted to place in uncivil jail, and then delete after 30 days,

The same goes for collections of comments, grouped together, that he deems to be "attacks on other registered users" (*) , that Patrick thinks a moderator should delete altogether.

(*) for lack of a better term to describe what has also been called "personal attacks".
141   CovfefeButDeadly   ignore (4)   2017 Nov 20, 2:27pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

anon_57cc2 says
Just FYI, the reason this thread has 29 upvotes is because anons can vote up or down. So the anons are voting repeatedly.


Absolutely hilarious. Rin, get those hookers stat!
142   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 20, 5:56pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

anon_7c0c9 says
All the right wingers are going to ignore all the anons in the end. Attacking the person instead of the argument is all they ever stood for. Are you watching and learning Patrick?


I don't think so
143   Onvacation   ignore (4)   2017 Nov 21, 7:31am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

anon_25c83 says

Has Goran participated in a single thread without trying to ID the anons? No? Then I guess he's right and you're wrong.

We are all anon. Some more so.
144   justme   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 21, 10:02pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

Remember how Elizabeth Warren got censured and censored in the US Senate for speaking the truth about Jeff Sessions?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/02/07/republicans-vote-to-rebuke-elizabeth-warren-for-impugning-sessionss-character/

No free speech even in the US Senate. Not an example to emulate, if you ask me.
145   mell   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 21, 10:15pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

justme says
Remember how Elizabeth Warren got censured and censored in the US Senate for speaking the truth about Jeff Sessions?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/02/07/republicans-vote-to-rebuke-elizabeth-warren-for-impugning-sessionss-character/

No free speech even in the US Senate. Not an example to emulate, if you ask me.


She didn't get censored, her lengthy speech got cut shorter. She still can (and does) voice her opinions all over the media and anywhere else, just not in that hearing due to that rule. Probably an old rule that may or may not be necessary, but in that case it was likely useful as all she repeats is "rayscyst!" like a parrot. Not a fan of Sessions, but not a fan of Warren either.
146   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 22, 7:23am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Have the anons been silenced or delayed.
147   Patrick   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 22, 7:24am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Anonymous comments now have to be approved by me. Soon a moderator can approve them as well.
148   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 22, 7:25am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

mell says
She didn't get censored, her lengthy speech got cut shorter.


Not sure what distinction you are trying to make here. She wasn't allowed to speak because the powers that be didn't like what she was going to say--that's pretty much the heart of the free speech issue.


mell says
Probably an old rule that may or may not be necessary, but in that case it was likely useful as all she repeats is "rayscyst!" like a parrot


Ah--so censoring is OK as long as it's speech you don't agree with. Awesome. Just don't ever pretend you are a free speech advocate when a Trump fan gets silenced.
149   justme   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 22, 8:29am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

mell says
She didn't get censored, her lengthy speech got cut shorter.


I'll nominate this one for the Orwell award in DoubleSpeak. It is a new award I plan to give out at irregular intervals on Patnet.
150   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 22, 6:25pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

None of the remaining members seem to care about net neutrality. Will patrick.net be throttled when the current administration undoes Obama era policy on that, or will it still only be the anon anonymous p.net posts that are throttled?
151   Patrick   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 22, 7:07pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Anon comments are still welcome, as long as they are not deliberately insulting other users.
152   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 28, 5:44am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

@patrick where are the rest of the threads?

At the bottom of page it says 1 of 1
153   Patrick   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 28, 7:13am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

errc says
At the bottom of page it says 1 of 1


Dammit, amazing how easy it is to break things, even after simplifying the code quite a lot.

Will fix that.
154   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 28, 7:23am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

Patrick says
errc says
At the bottom of page it says 1 of 1


Dammit, amazing how easy it is to break things, even after simplifying the code quite a lot.

Will fix that.


It could be worse. You could appoint a hyper partisan liar as a moderator and chase away people who helped make Patnet great!
155   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 28, 12:41pm   ↑ like (5)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

@Patrick i see you reinstated my uncivil button.

I will mark all posts that i deem as uncivil as such.

Do you give the moderators special treatment?
I view people lying on other posters as very uncivil, so i will mark those posts as such.
156   Ceffer   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 28, 12:46pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I found that I can only retrieve my old comments from one page of 2012. At first I thought: "Who is this ASSHOLE. Then, I realized it was me!"
157   Patrick   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 28, 9:26pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

errc says
I view people lying on other posters as very uncivil, so i will mark those posts as such.


Please don't mark anything uncivil just because you don't like it.

It has to be a literal personal attack on another user, on the order of "Listen, asshole..."
158   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 29, 9:03am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Patrick says
errc says
I view people lying on other posters as very uncivil, so i will mark those posts as such.


Please don't mark anything uncivil just because you don't like it.

It has to be a literal personal attack on another user, on the order of "Listen, asshole..."


@patrick so you think it's ok for your moderator to call someone a lair as long as they do it nicely? Also it's ok for your moderator to spin out of thin air something nobody said(a lie)?
159   Patrick   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 29, 9:06am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Ideally, we would not be talking about each other and instead talking about real topics. But yes, if you're civil about it, then it's pretty much OK, as long as you're not getting obsessed with another user.

"What you said is just not true." -- fine.

"You dumbfuck liar!" -- not fine.
160   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 29, 9:18am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

@Patrick my bad, i thought you said to keep it civil by talking about the message, rather than being uncivil by attacking and defaming the messenger

As an honest person that has nothing to gain by being less than honest, i find it uncivil for posters/mods to lie on me and falsely accuse me of lying. I can see how dishonest people don’t find lying to be uncivil though
161   BlueSardine   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 29, 9:26am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

How about a "Rin-onian" response like "You DumbF*ck Li*r!"

Patrick says
Ideally, we would not be talking about each other and instead talking about real topics. But yes, if you're civil about it, then it's pretty much OK, as long as you're not getting obsessed with another user.

"What you said is just not true." -- fine.

"You dumbfuck liar!" -- not fine.

« First    « Previous    Comments 122 - 161 of 161    Last »





The Housing Trap
You're being set up to spend your life paying off a debt you don't need to take on, for a house that costs far more than it should. The conspirators are all around you, smiling to lure you in, carefully choosing their words and watching your reactions as they push your buttons, anxiously waiting for the moment when you sign the papers that will trap you and guarantee their payoff. Don't be just another victim of the housing market. Use this book to defend your freedom and defeat their schemes. You can win the game, but first you have to learn how to play it.
115 pages, $12.50

Kindle version available


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions