Black Widow Void
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2010
- Messages
- 2,176
- Reaction score
- 3,841
Since my first computer that was capable of going on line, I've always had a love/hate relation with the internet.
The one positive is that this allows those of us in search of broader thoughts, perspectives etc... to go beyond our local 'real-life neighborhood' circle (this includes perspectives on women, politics, music, philosophy etc..) .
Because commercial networks and those of "underwriter status" can be questionable when reporting facts, I personally enjoy reading perspectives from different (and contrasting) view points from people (such as those on so suave). To my knowledge, these members aren't 'bought and sold.' And... may I assume it's the same case with all the mods?
And since my days of newsgroups and then forums (and the observations of many mods) I've really been impressed with Atom Smasher's diplomacy. Normally, mods tend to play “it’s my way or the highway” and I’ve enjoyed the absence of such attitudes.
and by the way, it still feels weird to talk about someone in the 3rd party when they can read this as well.
As a forum member, I realize that I'm not 'entitled' to any explanation, but I'm sure that I'm not alone when I say that this adamant intolerance of political opinions seems incongruent - considering the tolerance given to forum members and other subject matters.
If the past political discussions had resulted into the drivel of name calling back and forth, it's easy to understand such mod-intolerance, but the overall tone has contained more civil discourse. Therefore, this political rule seems a bit contradictory in view of mod-tolerance practices elsewhere.
Again, as a member, I realize that I'm not entitled to an explanation, but this 'heavy-handiness' seems so contradictory to the otherwise positive behavioral image presented elsewhere by mods on sosuave,
With the above paragraph being expressed (and considering that explanations have been provided when closing a topic or banning a member) might we better understand the reasoning behind this barring of political discussion?
The one positive is that this allows those of us in search of broader thoughts, perspectives etc... to go beyond our local 'real-life neighborhood' circle (this includes perspectives on women, politics, music, philosophy etc..) .
Because commercial networks and those of "underwriter status" can be questionable when reporting facts, I personally enjoy reading perspectives from different (and contrasting) view points from people (such as those on so suave). To my knowledge, these members aren't 'bought and sold.' And... may I assume it's the same case with all the mods?
And since my days of newsgroups and then forums (and the observations of many mods) I've really been impressed with Atom Smasher's diplomacy. Normally, mods tend to play “it’s my way or the highway” and I’ve enjoyed the absence of such attitudes.
and by the way, it still feels weird to talk about someone in the 3rd party when they can read this as well.
As a forum member, I realize that I'm not 'entitled' to any explanation, but I'm sure that I'm not alone when I say that this adamant intolerance of political opinions seems incongruent - considering the tolerance given to forum members and other subject matters.
If the past political discussions had resulted into the drivel of name calling back and forth, it's easy to understand such mod-intolerance, but the overall tone has contained more civil discourse. Therefore, this political rule seems a bit contradictory in view of mod-tolerance practices elsewhere.
Again, as a member, I realize that I'm not entitled to an explanation, but this 'heavy-handiness' seems so contradictory to the otherwise positive behavioral image presented elsewhere by mods on sosuave,
With the above paragraph being expressed (and considering that explanations have been provided when closing a topic or banning a member) might we better understand the reasoning behind this barring of political discussion?