The other plan

[Veronica Parra]

In order to form a more perfect Fedora -- and ensure domestic tranquillity -- I offer a modest proposal:


1) Permit no expression of political views in the Lounge
(especially when they agree with your own)

2) Permit no expression of religious views in the Lounge
(especially when they agree with your own)


Doing so would spare us the imprecise (and tiresome) ordeal of trying to second-guess just what might incite a Topic Moderator to move or close a subtopic. It would sensibly stop the wresting away of a forumite's freedom of choice to read (or not read) a particular thread ... since that freedom wouldn't exist in the first place. A win-win solution, since freedom is so much easier when others exercise it for us.

 

[Veronica Parra]

Look, MK's rules appear to me to be perfectly sensible and just. It's not my board, and I'm thankful to those who work hard to maintain it. If I disagree with someone, I can try to persuade him/her of the reasonableness of my view; at the very least, I can present that view for others to see. (Some, perhaps, for the first time.) More than that, none of us can do.

But ... if there is no name-calling ... if the Presidency is not maligned ... if the thread is not meandering all over the place ... then what is the problem? If folks don't like what they read in the thread, they have (for now, at least) the freedom to stop reading and move on to other subtopics. That freedom disappears the moment that someone wipes a subtopic off our screens, especially before MK has had a chance to weigh its adherence to his rules.

Guilty until proven innocent? That's the Napoleonic Code in practice. Is the Lounge more French than we care to admit?

 

[jamespowers]

Perhaps this is not clear enough so lets post it again and see where we have disagreements:

READS THIS BEFORE POSTING POLITICAL TOPICS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A few rules about political posts:

1) Members that are conservative or liberal will be respected here and will not be subject to insults for what they believe. If you disagree with an idea or concept, do so while respecting the other member.

2) The President of The United States of America will always be respected here. You might not respect the man but we WILL respect the office here.

3) Avoid kitchen sink arguments when it comes to politics. If you have a topic, stick to it.

If anyone has a problem with the above, I will be happy to refund their dues and they can find a Wild West political board where they can shoot it out. This board has great reputation for being civil. I will do whatever is needed to keep it that way. We will conduct ourselves as ladies and gentlemen.

The Fedora Lounge is not for everone. If someone feels that they don't fit in....I am OK with that and let them move on with my blessing.

......and now back to our regularly scheduled program......

 

[Biltmore Bob]

It would appear...

That there has been no violation.

But I do need a clarification on the 'kitchen sink' thing. Just what does that mean in 600 words or less?

 

[Sefton]

Not to mention...

the other 'other' plan....

 

[jamespowers]

But I do need a clarification on the 'kitchen sink' thing. Just what does that mean in 600 words or less?

The kitchen sink argument is where you bring in just about anything to buttress an argument with every possible conceivable point included or when someone does not want to let go of an argument. Everything but the "kitchen sink" is thrown it to get a point across. This makes arguments run all over the place and get off track of the original point.
Such a case existed between the Hatfields and McCoys. After tens of years of fighting and losing relatives from both sides, the remaining survivors didn't even remember what started it all but they just kept fighting anyway.
I think we also need to add that four letter words and some longer expletives need not be included in an argument as well. It is possible for kids to see such arguments and I think the intention is to keep the debate at a level where children can view it without parents worrying about them seeing such expletives. I think we all can agree on that.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Nathan Flowers]

this is how I see it.

The politics discussions in the Observation Bar are all about tone. If the content of your posts are respectful, then they will stay. Posts that are abusive in tone will be taken out. There are no concrete rules on what constitutes a post that will be taken out; this will be decided by MK, JamesPowers, and myself on a case by case basis. If you don't think it should have been taken out, then you have the right to ask us about it. We're not perfect, and when dealing with topics like politics/religion/values, there will always be shades of grey.

As it stands right now politics may still be discussed in the Observation Bar, just as they were in the gentlemanly/gentlewomanly parlors of yesteryear. That said, if your posts are in the shape or manner of an angry, drunken, misguided, malicious, or baiting lout, the posts (and possibly you) will be thrown out.

If you don't agree with the way we have to run things in order to keep a semblance of peace, then ask for your dues back, and and hit the road. If you are willing to discuss things as adults, without the offensive "tone", then by all means, please continue to stay.

 

[Biltmore Bob]

The problem as I see it, Zohar, is offensive tone is subjective. What offends one may not offend another. I proffer that direct insults and profanity should be considered offensive. However, some take every little comment or joke to heart and find offense.

I know that I play fast and loose with the rules sometimes, and I thank the moderators and MK for putting up with me. But some members need to loosen up.

 

[Nathan Flowers]

That's exactly right. It's subjective, and it'll have to be applied subjectively until we have a robot bartender to do our jobs for us. James may lock something down that I would have let go on, and vice versa. While you may want some members to "loosen up", there are many others that would like some on the board to "tone it down". I would venture to say that we will tend to err on the side of keeping things calm most of the time. I think most of the folks here can understand that, and will abide by it.

 

[Biltmore Bob]

Fair enough...but...

As I see it, you can't please everybody and I would go crazy trying, so you have my respect. Some don't like me, some do, some do but don't tell. I'm a Right Wing Conservative Evangelical Radical. I offend some just by writing that. I wrote something about Jesus one time and someone was offended. But, I don't think I have ever outright insulted a member or called names. The only profanity I think I ever used was 'ass' and 'damn'. maybe h e double hockey sticks.

Tone...the only tone lately has been from other members, not me....I think, well maybe a little from me.

Man, I love this place. Ever since I quit drinking about 10 years ago I've been missing something...

 

[Nathan Flowers]

It's not just you.

As I see it, you can't please everybody and I would go crazy trying. Some don't like me, some do, some do but don't tell. I'm a Right Wing Conservative Evangelical Radical. I offend some just by writing that. I wrote something about Jesus one time and someone was offended. But, I don't think I have ever outright insulted a member or called names. The only profanity I think I ever used was 'ass' and 'damn'. maybe h e double hockey sticks.

Tone...the only tone lately has been from other members, not me.
__________________

My initial post in this thread did not refer to a single person. It applies for everybody. If the words that make up a post are offensive in tone, they'll be locked down and/or deleted. That way it also applies to something that may not be the initial poster's actual words. The post belongs to the poster, whether they thought it up, or copy/paste'd it. Offensive tone does not always mean profanity or name-calling. We all should be capable of talking about most any topic like gentlemen. If one of us realizes that we're incapable of doing so, then we should just refrain from posting about that topic, period. It's simple. We should be gentlemanly in our postings, just as we would be in person.

 

[Veronica Parra]

We should be gentlemanly in our postings...

And so far, we've been so, have we not?

 

[Nathan Flowers]

In this particular thread, yes. In numerous others, no.

 

[Veronica Parra]

True.

 

[ITG]

The problem as I see it, Zohar, is offensive tone is subjective. What offends one may not offend another.

I know that I play fast and loose with the rules sometimes, and I thank the moderators and MK for putting up with me. But some members need to loosen up.

Bob, the following is directed to a select few but I used your quote as a springboard: Yes, it's subjective, but the way I see it is MK has set up rules and enlisted the help of bartenders. Sometimes we have to make hard decisions. I can testify that I have been on other forums where I'm just a member and I may not always agree with the action taken on certain threads, but I also respect a site's moderators for making the decision they do. Coming from the perspective of being a classroom teacher also, there are times when I have to make a decision for the class and some of the students don't like it. There are always a select few who don't respect the decision and want to make an issue out of it. When they do this, it shows a lack of authority and reflects on their character. I've seen several situations on this board where members want to challenge bartender's decision, whether it's privately or publicly. It really shows a lack of respect. Please note, this is my view based on my experience and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of other bartenders.