Freedom of Speech vs Censorship

Author: Sir.Lancelot

Posts

Total: 24
Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 182
Posts: 807
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
There are many complaints that DART is a former shell of itself and nothing like DDO. Calls to action have been made to return DART to its glory days by banning the following individuals: YouFound_Lxam, Kaitlyn, Best.Korea, Greyparrot, TWS1405_2, and IWantRooseveltAgain. 

The latter two are the most controversial for several reasons. TWS because of his beef with the mods and fights with the community in general, IWantRoosevelt because of his constant baiting of right-wingers/republicans/conservatives and as one of the former president’s nemeses.

Difference between the two is that TWS sometimes comes across as a triggered reactionary for the right, whereas IWantRoosevelt is just a wannabe troll for the left.
Neither of these two rise to the level of being ban-worthy.

Firstly, let go of the delusion that DART should be like DDO. That ship has long sailed. 
But that doesn’t mean it’s completely a lost cause, it’s just Damaged Goods with Wasted Potential. 
Your first mistake is in assuming that these individuals are responsible for driving away new blood and scaring away potential people. (Which is stupid because of big platforms like Twitter, Reddit, and Quora.)

Common denominator is the transparent lack of firm leadership, vision, and purpose. 
The actual reality is few people know that DART even exists. 
Mike could very easily turn this around if he actively led his community instead of letting his community make the choices. Wylted could have very easily been the man for the job and he’s right that DART is a shithole, but he assumed the title of responsibility for fixing it and he gave up. So that failure is partly his too. 

Bootlicker could be what’s needed for the site to change, but I’ve seen no convincing evidence that he is even capable of such, aside from his perpetual ranting and raving. He should return to lurking in the shadows where he’s the most useful.
Instead of confusing the position of President to think he has anything remotely insightful to say. 

But I want to touch on something more important about the current state of DART where there is a clear, simple solution.

We have one side demanding Absolute Freedom of Speech and the other demanding Total Censorship. 
The solution to this problem is to separate the two by allowing certain categories to have more unregulated discussion and then to enforce more rules in other categories about what kind of subjects/topics are taboo, so people have a place of acceptance.

Instead of allowing such dialogue to cross interfere in one channel. Let the white nationalists/binary people have their channel outlets to freely criticize anything they want, (nobody has to visit their category, engage them or read their posts if they don’t want to.), and then let the leftists/progressives have their channel to have civil discussion so they have a medium for acceptance. There’s no reason both sides cannot co-exist, regardless of the hatred between the two. That is if only, the mutual goal is to move DART forward.

Here are our current leaders who have done a great job for DART.
  • whiteflame. Whiteflame has done many great things that people don't really appreciate. He is a consistent voter on debates and has competently enforced the rules without needing to publicly shame or scrutinize people. He is active in Tournaments and has encouraged innovation through fascinating topics. You can't really deny whiteflame is probably one of the least biased people on the site. Whiteflame is what your ideal mod is like. Definitely one of the most interesting and least boring people on the site.
  • Barney. Barney was actually the first person that actually got me interested in debating in the first place, and he's regularly provided feedback or criticism. Another thing is Barney was who actually taught me how debates should be structured.
  • oromagi. I'm actually a fan of oromagi's brash criticism and strong beliefs. His contributions to the site have mainly been through his insightful commentary and debates. I think the current state of DART would grow even more dull and tedious, if it weren't for people like oromagi challenging people's opinions and holding them accountable. It was oromagi who made me want to be better at debating.
People seem to forget that the mods are unpaid volunteers who participate in the site because they actually care about the community. I think this goes overlooked way too often. If it weren't for either of these three, DART would be fucked.

Other leaders include: Savant, WeaverofFate, and AustinL.
Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 182
Posts: 807
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
-->
@AustinL0926
@WeaverofFate
@Savant
Savant, WeaverofFate, and AustinL are also included on the list of leaders.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,051
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Your first mistake is in assuming that these individuals are responsible for driving away new blood and scaring away potential people.
I dont see how any serious debater can be scared of someone's opinion to the point that he leaves the site. 

The people who leave the site because they cant handle other people's opinions are probably people who wouldnt stick on the debate site permanently anyway.

While I do agree that total free speech is bad when it allows too much insults, I must also say that insults are what drives most of online conversations and debates. Plenty of people cant debate without using insults, so limiting insults would actually drive such people away.

For those who want for this site to be like Debate.org, I say that we should not try to copy a failed site that doesnt exist anymore.

The only thing that this site has to offer is freedom of speech. Thats what makes it better than YouTube, Quora...
Take that away, and you literally have nothing to attract people with.

I can debate on any site, but I choose this site because it allows freedom of speech and sensitive topics.
Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 182
Posts: 807
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
-->
@Best.Korea
@TWS1405_2
@Kaitlyn
I also think the site needs people like TWS and Kaitlyn to challenge the status quo.
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 2,104
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
I like this solution. But instead of having different channels, maybe have an optional tag to put on a post for "moderated discussion," if someone wants to create a thread with more strictly regulated comments.
Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 182
Posts: 807
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
-->
@Savant
Agree.

That's probably more appropriate.
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Maybe Kaitlyn but why TWS, he doesn't say anything I don't hear every time I am at Thanksgiving dinner with a redneck relative 
Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 182
Posts: 807
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Despite their bold views and tendency to start forum arguments, TWS and Kaitlyn are very intelligent people with a lot to contribute. 

If they started debates with topics of their choice. No doubt it would be controversial. 
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
If TWS was intelligent he'd be able to handle counter arguments and rebuttals. The fact he never concedes a point when defeated and just tries to redefine what he said (moving goalposts) is also a red flag. He is basically just the conservative version of Roose
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
Oh, no one calls for the banning of my account here? That must be because I am not posting often enough.

sigh.
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
I think censorship should be limited to trolling, possibly by report volumes, and on its face offensiveness, again by report volumes.  There is a reason why a 9-0 Supreme Court ruling is hard to get, because everyone interprets things differently.  That gives me great pause to censor, because something offensive to me, may be comedic, or politically important to another.
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
If TWS was intelligent he'd be able to handle counter arguments and rebuttals. The fact he never concedes a point when defeated and just tries to redefine what he said (moving goalposts) is also a red flag. He is basically just the conservative version of Roose
I can handle any counter argument, it's to you and badger et al who cannot. JFC!! You clowns and your psychological projection knows no bounds.
When someone actually changes my mind with a sound and well-grounded rebuttal, I will conceded. 
I do not move goalposts, that is all on your and your clownish cohorts.
You're just phishing for excuses here, and they're all degenerate ones at that.
You're pathetic, both you and your bootlicker, brownnosing badger. 
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Instead of allowing such dialogue to cross interfere in one channel. Let the white nationalists/binary people have their channel outlets to freely criticize anything they want, (nobody has to visit their category, engage them or read their posts if they don’t want to.), and then let the leftists/progressives have their channel to have civil discussion so they have a medium for acceptance. There’s no reason both sides cannot co-exist, regardless of the hatred between the two. That is if only, the mutual goal is to move DART forward.

I think this really defeats the purpose of this site.  If we just agree with others that are like minded, then we don't learn or grow or . . . debate.  I have learned a lot just the few months being here and posts from Roosevelt, and the such like are still great banter, even though it is not professional debate material.  I think the forum for a lesser form of debate and then the official 1 on 1 debates is a good setup to do.  

Can we really stop everything that we don't like?  Don't we have a code of conduct to abide by?

I agree with slainte, that a person should be banned if there are egregious violations and it should be agreed upon by a certain council.

What is the reason that this site is "failing"? 
Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 182
Posts: 807
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
-->
@DavidAZ
Disagreements/Debates will still happen because the leftists will still infiltrate the threads by the right. And vice-versa. 

This rule would just stop the derailing of healthy discussion into full-on extremism and allow for more meaningful conversations to take place. 
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 2,104
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@DavidAZ
 If we just agree with others that are like minded, then we don't learn or grow or . . . debate.
I definitely agree, which is why I think this compromise may be necessary. Anyone who wants to be challenged and discuss more controversial topics could still do so in unmoderated threads or start one of their own. (And I think most people would.) I'd rather lose the participation of some people in those threads than have those topics banned entirely if the censorship crowd gets their way.
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
This rule would just stop the derailing of healthy discussion into full-on extremism and allow for more meaningful conversations to take place. 
Hmmm . . .Just getting through with fodder with Roosevelt, I see what you mean.

Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 182
Posts: 807
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
He is basically just the conservative version of Roose
That's not a very accurate comparison.

TWS is just a Karen who sometimes uses artificially-inflated vocab.
Roosevelt is someone who tries to troll, but can't seem to generate words more complex than 'retard' or 'dummy.'
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
TWS is just a Karen who sometimes uses artificially-inflated vocab. 
That’s not at all fair SL, and you know it. 

PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
The vocabulary might be an attempt at a red herring to distract from the low IQ. 

He thinks every analogy is a false equivalence fallacy he admitted yesterday. For example he stated yesterday only a mental health expert can spot sociopathic behavior and then was confused when I asked if somebody had to be a doctor to notice when another person has an arm cut off! Like he legit did not understand the analogy. 

Later on yesterday I pointed out his behavior and he accused me of strawmanning, which tells me he doesn't understand what a strawman is either. 
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,075
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
All is a question of balance. ..."Moderation/modification of angle and frequency"...B Fuller

Governor regulates RPM to prevent overheating and meltdown.

Freedom channel that monitored for that which is unlawful speech in accordance with USA law, ergo censored/limited by federal law.

Self censorship channel according to President, mods and memmbership vote.

Who has the time and money to monitor the general public?




PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
Anyone stupid and sckitzo enough to quote Buckminster fuller should be banned
Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 182
Posts: 807
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
-->
@oromagi
@PREZ-HILTON
How do we feel about oromagi as President?

He's great as a mod, but there's so much more he could do as President.

The problem is.:
  • Mods are Enforcers, with no actual ability to bring meaningful change because they are limited only to what the CoC/Rules allows them to do. There are too many restrictions which prevent them from allowing their personal feelings getting in the way. Which is a mistake, because people like Barney and whiteflame have great vision.
  • The President exists as a mediator to guide the site in the direction that works best for the community and is the balance that stops the mods from abusing their authority, or hold them accountable if they are not doing their job properly.
  • Oromagi is a visionary with great ideas. oromagi sees there is a problem with the unrestrained bigotry/extremism that is flooding the site and knows exactly how to stop it.
  • Oromagi has the brashness that's required for the position. He has criticized the mods in the past. Oromagi has openly created threads where he critiqued the mods for not valuing democracy and for failing to abide by decisions they've made for Elections.
Oromagi was offered the position of moderator in the past, but he turned it down. He only accepted the role when supadudz stepped down.
If he wants to continue being a mod, he should be, but the Presidency would give him more power to enact this change.

PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
No the presidency would not give him more authority