So I was thinking we might want to put together some kind of disclaimer for the forums. Just having the mission statement is kind of thin imo, so what about some basic guidelines regarding what people are allowed to say. The reason I suggest it is because some members have left because they thought the mods weren't doing their job and because the members didn't "say no" to certain views presented. It's probably best if we inform everyone that, as long as no one breaks international/national laws (like posting child pornography for example) or breaks the rules of the site host (read their EULA for further details) anything goes. Just to spare them the grief.

I don't know, but I read your remarks above about National Law, but there are so many laws, "2 billion" in North Anerica alone, how can we not break the law?

Also, there can be retroactive laws.

Under what circumstances could a series of words ever be illegal? Imagine you receive letters, only letters, never calls or meetings, and the letters tell you to go through a The Bourne Identity series of discoveries and adventures. Assume that you are charged with some crime as consistent to the line of the film, and assume that the mysterious letter writer can be identified. Should the letter writer ever be held responsible for your actions? (Assuming the legal system were justified.) And what if it isn't a letter, but a telephone caller? And what if those commands are coming from someone right up in yo face trying to put you in a barbed-wire cage?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bourne_Identity_(2002_film)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strip_search_prank_call_scam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

What I meant was that national laws apply to the internet as well.

knowing the type of forums run in germany (usually by media-press companies), the big subjects, topics and themes for public debate are pre-selected and posts edited by professionals.

the freedom allowed on these forums is phenomenal, yet a responsible behavior from participants and readers seems precarious at times. anyone can become the object of hate; and would there be enough sensibility by "owners" to clearly discern what "goes" and: cui bono!

what does that have to do with anything?

My suggestion is that we make it clear to everyone that we don't moderate these forums further than the minimum, that is to prevent the site from being shut down. Some people have become pissed off at this, and there is no point in keeping this from them. That's why we should make it clear either as an addition to the mission post or in a new post.

In any case, the laws that govern these forums ban child pornography, terrorism and harrassment. What fucked up "philosopher" would call stuff like that "investigating reality"?

Those of us that have been here since launch are all of the same mind set regarding censorship, otherwise we wouldn't be here. Most who came here early on did so because they were pissed with the constant moderator editing and warnings on other philosophy sites. It only logical that we make the reasons this site exists clear to newcommers.

Another reason to make a disclaimer is to avoid the constant discussions about what's allowed and what isn't. If we make this offical we can just refer to it so we don't need the tiring explanations in the other threads.

this forum is widely self-monitoring, then? that's what should be expected.
but i am one who learned the hard way, and still have not fully recovered from the shock yet.

still,

Well this topic turned much more relevant than I would imagine when I published it.

This would of course have to be put on hold until we have rooted out those who believe the community needs to be moderated.

I don't see any help in making a new disclaimer. It only makes it look like more rules when it appears your goal is more towards no rules. The more you talk about "rules" the more people are going to talk about that rather than on the actual forum topics.

I am not a big believer in forcing rules on others myself, and "rules" could actually be a pretty good new topic of discussion. It ties in with desire for power and control, no?

It wouldn't be a rule - it would be a disclaimer, hence the title. A rule is designed to force people, a disclaimer is meant to inform.

What are we going to inform them of? Freedom of speech here? I have been banned once already and LO maybe about 4 times. Maybe some others I don't know of. To call this a freedom of speech forum would not be true.

If everyone knew what this forum is supposed to be there would be no need for a disclaimer would there?

I enjoy politeness as well, but not when people try to force it on others or ban or allow them to be banned "just for fun" That is no longer considered "polite" to me. It's just more like "oooh, that was icky..."

Someone has edited my post again. This:

lol.
if everyone who knew had the decency of letting others know what's been there to know.

we are kind of late and can only be merciful in passing on some grace.

imho.

Was not written by me.

your honesty is appreciated, sir.

haha. can i bring my irrelevant postings in line with the unlimited possibilities of unknown publishing interests?

question still serious enough? or only amusing?

If the question you are referring to is my proposed disclaimer then yes, I'm serious. I think it is a sound idea to explain why this forum was founded and what ideals brings together it's members. If someone who does not share these ideals wish to contribute despite of this then they will still be free to do so, and no rules will be enforced on them. Furthermore this disclaimer would not be static. It would be changed in accordance with the wishes of the community.

People here should expect to get their ass kicked if they post some shit... easy enough disclaimer?

Mayflow, this forum is so free that some members are free to ban other members, irregardless of the implications of freedom!
The paradox of freedom comes round yet fresher still in each its most free manifestations!

I seriously doubt that any member will be banned again soon, due to the unethical nature of the last 'round of banning' that went on (regarding LO, and her 'unusual' writing style, which I believe was the cause of her banning)... embarrassment for the admin, no?

If a moderator must moderate, then a full accountability must be established - I will PM or post in thread that I am moving thread if necessary. AndIi have unfortunately edited a post rather than quote it before (in my youthful days... a few months ago), apologised and moved on...

We should just reiterate that people can post here, whatever they want, so long as it does not break any laws or host rules. Basically, post anything other than outright porn or terrorism inciting hate-speech...

Seriously who the fuck keeps editing in their responses inside my posts?

LO - your dissidence is misplaced, no? (I suspect LO may be having 'fun' at your expense Valk)

Certainly Valk, it seems that some newer members do not quite understand what it is you are saying, so a disclaimed would be beneficial to all.
Admin must surely agree.

Oh, i understand perfectly, MONO.

I agree with the general sentiment. Besides I gave up on banning anyone a long time ago. I've only done it twice and both times the person was re-instated the next day.

Only the puppetmaster can truly ban.
All hail the puppetmaster.