Photos
Blog
NewslettersThe tactic of entering nonsense to alter blog response is KRAP.
Submitted by enginuity on Wed, 2008-02-13 07:22.
Introducing this asinine method to the blog will allow censorship by those least capable of a coherent thought. This forum is for a broad base of opinions. This type of juvenile censorship violates the very core of the constitution and the rights of other bloggers opinions. I don’t consistently agree with anyone on the blog, BUT respect his or her right to opine.
A different point of view allows the light of truth shine from every direction.
This nonsense is worse than the schoolyard attack tactics so often prevalent in differing blog opinions
- enginuity's blog
- Login to post comments
- 305 reads
As stated I just want to hear what everyone has to say.
Dear enginuity,
My blog post from last night, "America has become a Sissy Nation" had numerous comments as of 7am this morning. I just went back at 8:05 am to check for more comments and guess what? All of the comments are GONE! What's going on?!
Most of mbirmingham's comments from the last 24 hours have been deleted. When that happens, any comments that were responses to his comments automatically are deleted, too. I wish that weren't the case, but that's how our software works.
Most of mbirmingham's comments from the last 24 hours have been deleted. When that happens, any comments that were responses to his comments automatically are deleted, too. I wish that weren't the case, but that's how our software works.
Dear Mr. Blust,
Thank you for the prompt response! I assure you that the blog I entered last night was not intended to make people believe that it is okay to use profanity on your site. I could have edited that excerpt further, but I believe that it would have changed the connotation of the author's point.
For the record, using asterisks to replace some of the letters that spell profane words is okay, right? At least when quoting a literature?
Yes, that's an acceptable way to handle it. mwbirmingham chose not to censor himself in his posts, using profanity twice without disguising it. That - not the directionless posts - is why he was banned.
Mr. Blust - what is profane here? Is the seven words you can not say on television [down to two or three now it seems]? Or, it is Potter Stewart's definition of knowing it when I see [read] it?
Are there certain words which are not allowed? Is it categorical? Can I use a racial slur to make a point? Is it simply your arbitrary judgment? Is it early 20th Century New York Times style as to words they would not put in print? This is a serious issue, simply because what was profanity in the 1930s is not profanity today to a large extent. Further, the press uses a different language than is spoken in the community.
Certainly there are words which have a universal understanding to be profane from either a scatological or similar perspective. But there are marginal words which, depending how much abuse you have to take that day, can set one off as profane which, on another day, would be passed off as acceptable.
I did not read any of the recently banned poster's work, or saw if I agreed with your determination of profane. I can only assume that the punishment fits the crime.
Perhaps a workable definition would be words you would not want to use in a sentence with your grandmother. Certainly, after Kanye West's performance at the Grammy's the other night, he has no such compunction when it comes to his mother, thus the next generational leap. We all shall be cognizant of the need for civil discourse on the use of language, if not the topics and responses referred to. . . . anyway -thanks to the Gazette and Packet for making the forums available.
Well, Mr. Farrell, rest assured that if posters do as mwbirmingham did and write a certain four-letter word that begins with "s" and ends "t," they're out of here.
And the racial slurs you referenced are another certain way for someone to find themselves banned. That's a clear violation of the user agreement that applies to everyone who registered for this site.
Standards change. Some words that were considered unacceptable in the 1970s, for example, might be tolerated today. I'm not going to compile a list of banned words here, but good advice to everyone is, "Keep it clean." If you don't have to use a word that you think might be considered objectionable, don't.
There are plenty of sites that accept and even encourage stronger language. We've chosen not to take that route.
Joe, I usually agree with you. But the lawyer in you is coming out.
Throw all written laws away and I guarantee you that the huge majority of people with common sense can tell you the difference between right and wrong, even to a very, very tiny degree.
If you have been practicing law so long that you canot distinguish the difference, I strongly recommend a long vacation. Mr. Blust has done nothing wrong in his censoring.
Good call, sblust. Press on, my friend.
Don't need a definition. You know it then you see it or hear it. Community standards differ and Beaufort's is pretty strict. Welcome to the Bible Belt. If yo' momma wouldn't like it, it ain't right. Thanks to BG for keeping its blogs in keeping with community standards.
:-)
:-0
:-(
I get it guys - I was just wondering if there was an 'official' list!