patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,197,330 comments by 14,108 users - Al_Sharpton_for_President, B.A.C.A.H., ForcedTQ, just_passing_through, richwicks online now
Patnet and censorship: Performance Art?
invite response
2017 Nov 14, 11:22am 37,005 views 160 comments
« First « Previous Comments 109 - 148 of 160 Next » Last » Search these comments
109
mell
2017 Nov 19, 7:04pm
anon_12c93 says
Because the anons keep talking about it. Otherwise not.
anon_6fcd7 says
Why not discuss with the people one wants to answer to? Otherwise don't respond, problem solved.
Piggy dominates the website now. That's the post-mortem. Literally nothing else needs to be said.
Because the anons keep talking about it. Otherwise not.
anon_6fcd7 says
Don’t disagree, but the tone was most definitely set by letting CiC back in. A lot of the decline in discussion here can be traced back to the flame wars that he enjoyed/enjoys instigating. Of all the mistakes Patrick has made, letting him pollute the well for so many years has been one of the biggest.
Why not discuss with the people one wants to answer to? Otherwise don't respond, problem solved.
110
anonymous
2017 Nov 19, 7:10pm
mell says
That’s simply because his past targets are gone or only occasionally posting under anon. If they were here, he’d be doing what he has always done. As soon as he finds someone new to direct his attentions at, he’ll be up to his old tricks. Introducing civility doesn’t change what he’s about otherwise he would have been civil before. He clearly doesn’t come on here to be civil. He comes on here to wind others up.
Because the anons keep talking about it. Otherwise not.
That’s simply because his past targets are gone or only occasionally posting under anon. If they were here, he’d be doing what he has always done. As soon as he finds someone new to direct his attentions at, he’ll be up to his old tricks. Introducing civility doesn’t change what he’s about otherwise he would have been civil before. He clearly doesn’t come on here to be civil. He comes on here to wind others up.
111
anonymous
2017 Nov 19, 7:12pm
mell says
Fine, except we all know that isn’t what actually happens.
Why not discuss with the people one wants to answer to? Otherwise don't respond, problem solved.
Fine, except we all know that isn’t what actually happens.
112
anonymous
2017 Nov 19, 8:37pm
What I'd like to know is who keeps putting the posts about Ironman in jail. The guy isn't even here. Is this not a free speech forum?
113
anonymous
2017 Nov 19, 9:42pm
114
anonymous
2017 Nov 19, 11:56pm
anon_eecc4 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.
anon_3b28c saysIs this not a free speech forum?
Where does it say that it is a free speech forum?
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.
115
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 12:01am
Sniper says
Why can't you be honest? You don't want people posting under anons because it spoils your fun.
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.
116
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 8:40am
anon_6fcd7 says
Exactly. For whatever reason @Patrick is unwilling to address this fact
I’ll give him some credit, he did chime in when Goron and Ironman/Sniper were posting blatant lies, to show that they were wrong, but he doesn’t seem to give a shit otherwise
anon_25c83 saysanon_6fcd7 saysWell, everyone is anon. It just seems that some on here are annoyed at not having the ability to attack the messenger.
That was always the plan. Horrible quality people from the right kept on being challenged to prove their points, to stop lying, to basically believe in something other than nonsense. So they created a cult of us vs. them. Anons killed that cult so now Patrick is being driven to let anons in, but let king goron decide who gets in and who doesn't. Total vomit.
Don’t disagree, but the tone was most definitely set by letting CiC back in. A lot of the decline in discussion here can be traced back to the flame wars that he enjoyed/enjoys instigating. Of all the mistakes Patrick has made, letting him pollute the well for so many years has been one of the biggest.
Exactly. For whatever reason @Patrick is unwilling to address this fact
I’ll give him some credit, he did chime in when Goron and Ironman/Sniper were posting blatant lies, to show that they were wrong, but he doesn’t seem to give a shit otherwise
117
Onvacation
2017 Nov 20, 8:44am
Onvacation
2017 Nov 20, 8:44am
anon_7e3cc says
Because you are making a personal attack instead of countering a point.
If you really think someone is stupid what does that say about you for engaging instead of ignoring?
Seriously, what's the problem in saying 'you're fucking stupid if you believe that', 'thats a moronic point' etc. etc?
Because you are making a personal attack instead of countering a point.
If you really think someone is stupid what does that say about you for engaging instead of ignoring?
118
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 8:49am
Sniper 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
anon_7e3cc saysSniper saysWhat 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?
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
119
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2017 Nov 20, 8:49am
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2017 Nov 20, 8:49am
anon_7e3cc says
So essentially you want it to be free speech, as long as its the speech you deem free.
anon_eecc4 saysanon_3b28c saysIs this not a free speech forum?
Where does it say that it is a free speech forum?
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 amusi...
So essentially you want it to be free speech, as long as its the speech you deem free.
120
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 8:58am
Sniper says
Does this qualify as an insult? Pretty sure it's intended to be one. Sniper you are doing a good job of impersonating Ironman.
IMO, the anon posting by regular users is being done in protest. Your presence (you are clearly CIC/ironman) is one of the things being protested.
Why don't you stop acting like a little girl, hiding behind anon
Does this qualify as an insult? Pretty sure it's intended to be one. Sniper you are doing a good job of impersonating Ironman.
IMO, the anon posting by regular users is being done in protest. Your presence (you are clearly CIC/ironman) is one of the things being protested.
121
Onvacation
2017 Nov 20, 9:01am
Onvacation
2017 Nov 20, 9:01am
Sniper says
Yes! Let it go. Argue about facts and opinions, not personalities.
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.
122
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 9:02am
Sniper says
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?
errc saysMature 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?
123
Onvacation
2017 Nov 20, 9:04am
Onvacation
2017 Nov 20, 9:04am
anon_61c8a says
Can you actually insult anonymous? Or is it more like saying "SOME people need to get a life."
Sniper saysWhy 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."
124
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 9:09am
Fucking White Male says
What a gigantic straw man you've built! So proud!
Right now it's only speeched deemed free by goron as intended.
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.
125
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 9:16am
Sniper says
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.
anon_7e3cc saysSniper saysWhat 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.
126
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 9:18am
anon_25c83 says
This is so obviously true and it's crazy patrick doesn't care and won't even comment.
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.
127
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2017 Nov 20, 9:18am
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2017 Nov 20, 9:18am
anon_25c83 says
There is no strawman.
The words of the post I was referring to:
anon_7e3cc says
Fucking White Male saysSo 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.
128
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2017 Nov 20, 9:19am
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2017 Nov 20, 9:19am
anon_1d65f says
Thats not why LOL!
Anon is only so you can spitefully post against Patrick and Goran. The one and only reason.
Sniper saysanon_7e3cc saysSniper saysWhat 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.
129
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 9:22am
Fucking White Male 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.
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.
130
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2017 Nov 20, 9:28am
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2017 Nov 20, 9:28am
anon_25c83 says
I'm not even sure what sense that makes.
Fucking White Male saysThats 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.
131
Y
2017 Nov 20, 10:25am
Y
2017 Nov 20, 10:25am
Well, that and SCOTUS...,
anon_25c83 says
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.
132
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 10:44am
Just FYI, the reason this thread has 29 upvotes is because anons can vote up or down. So the anons are voting repeatedly.
133
MisdemeanorRebel
2017 Nov 20, 10:45am
MisdemeanorRebel
2017 Nov 20, 10:45am
I wrote the above comment, as an Anon, to try it out. The counter should be reset and Anons prohibited from voting.
134
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 10:54am
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.
I'm going to ignore Anonymous Cowards, even if it's not ad hom or uncivil or whatever.
135
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 11:04am
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?
136
MrMagic
2017 Nov 20, 11:04am
MrMagic
2017 Nov 20, 11:04am
anon_57cc2 says
Ya think?
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?
137
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 11:05am
TwoScoopsMcGee says
Why?
I wrote the above comment, as an Anon, to try it out. The counter should be reset and Anons prohibited from voting.
Why?
139
justme
2017 Nov 20, 12:12pm
justme
2017 Nov 20, 12:12pm
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".
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".
140
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2017 Nov 20, 2:27pm
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2017 Nov 20, 2:27pm
anon_57cc2 says
Absolutely hilarious. Rin, get those hookers stat!
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!
141
anonymous
2017 Nov 20, 5:56pm
anon_7c0c9 says
I don't think so
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
142
Onvacation
2017 Nov 21, 7:31am
Onvacation
2017 Nov 21, 7:31am
anon_25c83 says
We are all anon. Some more so.
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.
143
justme
2017 Nov 21, 10:02pm
justme
2017 Nov 21, 10:02pm
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.
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.
144
mell
2017 Nov 21, 10:15pm
justme says
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.
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
Patrick
2017 Nov 22, 7:24am
Patrick
2017 Nov 22, 7:24am
Anonymous comments now have to be approved by me. Soon a moderator can approve them as well.
147
anonymous
2017 Nov 22, 7:25am
mell says
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
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.
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.
148
justme
2017 Nov 22, 8:29am
justme
2017 Nov 22, 8:29am
mell says
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.
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.
« First « Previous Comments 109 - 148 of 160 Next » Last » Search these comments
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