The following reply whim to WarT is in response to the SOQ/EOQ whim I just received delivering the reality (hey, we ALL know where this is going and what the outcome will be) that my participation in the ILCF thread is about to be permanently prevented.
Dear WarT has been The Mod who has inflicted prolly 99% of the "blats" (message deletions) that have been preserved to the public record in this blog instead. That kind of attention from a single Mod to one user should surely be cause for concern by the whirlpool owners and the rest of the Mod team, so I can't help but wonder if WarT is nearing the end of duties and responsibilities in that regard.
Anyway, here is The Whim. :)
SOQ
You've come to our attention as requiring some more moderation than the average user in Broadband, just to let you know that further moderation of your posts in there will result in a Forum Ban. You'll be able to contribute in other parts of Whirlpool; just not Broadband.
EOQ
Sure, whatever and thanks for the heads up, but you and I are prolly just never going to get on are we, WarT. Obviously this puts me at a disadvantage in terms of postings, but on the higher ground when it comes to moral behaviour so I guess this must be a case of a win for us both ... so it ain't all bad. :)
Anyway, that is quite a list of personal attention you've delivered my way in this particular topic so there is no point either of us pretending that no bias is involved here, nor in any way any kind of balanced and fair moderation.
Tis plain to see which side you are on when it comes to the future of the internut, but quite amusing to see just what you are prepared to do in order to protect that which is precious to you.
Tis also always nice to meet another pragmatist willing to make the ends justify the means even if we are batting for different teams.
Your method and mode of moderation will remain a matter of public record anyway (including this message), and it will be interesting to one day learn how you are viewed by your your fellow moderating team and those who have entrusted you to the task at whirlpool.
Until then,
regarDS
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24
By the way, the term "those of us" insinuates that there is more than one person using the term, when I would be stunned to find out there were more than just yourself, and floored if I found out there were enough to overflow a Hyundai Excel.
Settle, petal.
(various links proving a wide and varied use of the term "internut" deleted just in case the content changes) ;)
Etc.
Time to pick yourself up and upgrade to a People Mover from that Hyundai ...
regarDS
Settle, petal.
(various links proving a wide and varied use of the term "internut" deleted just in case the content changes) ;)
Etc.
Time to pick yourself up and upgrade to a People Mover from that Hyundai ...
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24
No doubt in the long run I won't care what pro-censorship people think of me because we'll have defeated the plan for another decade and can move onto other parts of the EFA agenda.
10 years is such a short time span in the scheme of things from my perspective, but do pass on a "Sparrow says hello" to The Heitman from me when next you confer ... then even more illumination is sure to follow.
In the meantime, I think we both know that the censorship of the web is destined to continue and increase – and for most of us it is never going to be a problem either.
But hey, whatever pays your salary, eh ?
regarDS
10 years is such a short time span in the scheme of things from my perspective, but do pass on a "Sparrow says hello" to The Heitman from me when next you confer ... then even more illumination is sure to follow.
In the meantime, I think we both know that the censorship of the web is destined to continue and increase – and for most of us it is never going to be a problem either.
But hey, whatever pays your salary, eh ?
regarDS
Posted @ forum.behindbigbrother.com
I'm including the following post of mine from a different forum area to save certain whirlpoolers the trouble of searching it out. :)
SOQ
Obviously my views come from the position that "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth", and carry on from there to include the obvious logical conclusion that since God created, then there was a reason for doing so and an interest (and even a vested one at that) in it. My views come from the position that our bodies are merely temporary vehicles to be driven by something that has been designed to out-live the flesh in its current corruptible form.
From there I move on to Objective Morality ... that being a code/key to the best life possible, for our flesh and that which drives it as provided by the one who designed it.
In contrast to that, in these disturbing so called "modern" times, we have generations of humanity who have been brought up on the nonsense of there being no Creator or point to life but rather we are the accidental product of non-living sludge that somehow became life in the billions of different forms it takes now.
We are taught that not only is the no point, craft, nor design to life, but also nothing we do during our time alive actually means anything anyway and we are only fooling ourselves if we think it does for when we die we become nothing but a memory soon to be forgotten and there is nothing beyond the flesh and the materialistic and sensations it can experience.
Similarly we are taught that because there is no God, no Creator behind creation, that Objective Morality is nothing but a lie made up by certain humans in order to control others; a lie that should be abandoned in favour of Subjective Morality ... that everyone is both right and free to make up whatever rules and ways of being they choose because there is no such thing as right or wrong and even if there was it just doesn't matter because there is no point to life anyway and everything finishes with the grave.
Out of the foundationless mire of Subjective Morality you get the kind of tripe that is the dualistic (Kinsey) scaled pendulum named "sexuality" that seeks to divide people up along a two dimensional grading ranging from "hetero" to "homo".
And what a load of misery that kind of thinking brings ... but hey, once folk have abandoned knowledge of the Creator and the Objective Morality/Code for the Best Life possible and instead start believing that there is no point to life and near everything they are is because of the genetic makeup of their flesh, then it is no great surprise that they should start to claim they have no choice when it comes to a whole bunch of stuff, when the fact is they have every choice available under the sun but merely don't want to be held accountable for the poor choices they do decide upon.
Pardon me if I prefer the truth of the matter and choose to share it with my son ... anyway, who are you to judge if your lives and views are built upon subjectivity rather than objectivity ?
Subjectivity simply has no fixed foundation to measure from nor absolutes to deliver !
So, just like I tell numba1son, I'll tell you; Choose whatever you like, but "own your own shit" !
As for "offensive". Well as a wise guy once said: "There is nothing more offensive than the brutal truth delivered brutally to those who don't want to hear it".
Oh wait, that was me: http://forum.behindbigbrother.com/sh...1&postcount=37 :)
But Of Course, according to those embracing Subjective Morality over Objective Morality, I'm neither right nor wrong with any of this anyway.
So what's the problem ?EOQ
regarDS
SOQ
Obviously my views come from the position that "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth", and carry on from there to include the obvious logical conclusion that since God created, then there was a reason for doing so and an interest (and even a vested one at that) in it. My views come from the position that our bodies are merely temporary vehicles to be driven by something that has been designed to out-live the flesh in its current corruptible form.
From there I move on to Objective Morality ... that being a code/key to the best life possible, for our flesh and that which drives it as provided by the one who designed it.
In contrast to that, in these disturbing so called "modern" times, we have generations of humanity who have been brought up on the nonsense of there being no Creator or point to life but rather we are the accidental product of non-living sludge that somehow became life in the billions of different forms it takes now.
We are taught that not only is the no point, craft, nor design to life, but also nothing we do during our time alive actually means anything anyway and we are only fooling ourselves if we think it does for when we die we become nothing but a memory soon to be forgotten and there is nothing beyond the flesh and the materialistic and sensations it can experience.
Similarly we are taught that because there is no God, no Creator behind creation, that Objective Morality is nothing but a lie made up by certain humans in order to control others; a lie that should be abandoned in favour of Subjective Morality ... that everyone is both right and free to make up whatever rules and ways of being they choose because there is no such thing as right or wrong and even if there was it just doesn't matter because there is no point to life anyway and everything finishes with the grave.
Out of the foundationless mire of Subjective Morality you get the kind of tripe that is the dualistic (Kinsey) scaled pendulum named "sexuality" that seeks to divide people up along a two dimensional grading ranging from "hetero" to "homo".
And what a load of misery that kind of thinking brings ... but hey, once folk have abandoned knowledge of the Creator and the Objective Morality/Code for the Best Life possible and instead start believing that there is no point to life and near everything they are is because of the genetic makeup of their flesh, then it is no great surprise that they should start to claim they have no choice when it comes to a whole bunch of stuff, when the fact is they have every choice available under the sun but merely don't want to be held accountable for the poor choices they do decide upon.
Pardon me if I prefer the truth of the matter and choose to share it with my son ... anyway, who are you to judge if your lives and views are built upon subjectivity rather than objectivity ?
Subjectivity simply has no fixed foundation to measure from nor absolutes to deliver !
So, just like I tell numba1son, I'll tell you; Choose whatever you like, but "own your own shit" !
As for "offensive". Well as a wise guy once said: "There is nothing more offensive than the brutal truth delivered brutally to those who don't want to hear it".
Oh wait, that was me: http://forum.behindbigbrother.com/sh...1&postcount=37 :)
But Of Course, according to those embracing Subjective Morality over Objective Morality, I'm neither right nor wrong with any of this anyway.
So what's the problem ?EOQ
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24
The New York Times quotes me, you quote yourself.
Well, at least we can see by this how seriously you want to be taken and how important the opinions of your peers are to you, but no need for you to make this mistake that everyone else wants to be measured in such ways – or that it actually counts for all that much in the long run.
You also don't need to make the mistake that my use of the apt descriptor "internut" has much to do with the framework and technology. Obviously I'm virtually always making reference to what it has largely become in terms of it's users.
Still a bit of a LOL that you are asking me to censor myself so that you don't have to get offended yet at the same time you are objecting to those of us who are calling for the same sort of thing for the internut re: a "clean feed" and ILCF.
Perhaps the New York Times and those who think lofty thoughts about you might be able to bring enlightenment and illumination as to how most people see that kind of thinking ?
regarDS
Well, at least we can see by this how seriously you want to be taken and how important the opinions of your peers are to you, but no need for you to make this mistake that everyone else wants to be measured in such ways – or that it actually counts for all that much in the long run.
You also don't need to make the mistake that my use of the apt descriptor "internut" has much to do with the framework and technology. Obviously I'm virtually always making reference to what it has largely become in terms of it's users.
Still a bit of a LOL that you are asking me to censor myself so that you don't have to get offended yet at the same time you are objecting to those of us who are calling for the same sort of thing for the internut re: a "clean feed" and ILCF.
Perhaps the New York Times and those who think lofty thoughts about you might be able to bring enlightenment and illumination as to how most people see that kind of thinking ?
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24
I've tried to explain to you before just how nauseatingly condescending your use of the neologism "internut" is" ... I'm going to just outright ask you to stop being so derisive and objectionable.
So let me get this straight. In a forum topic on the subject of "clean feed"ing the internut via an ILCF you want me to stop using a word that has been in my online and offline vocabulary from long before I even knew you existed let, alone the topic of ILCF ?
Kinda hypocritical of ya if not ironic, isn't it ?
If the truth behind the word "internut" is so offensive to you perhaps you should first question how seriously you are taking this ever evolving communications media, and how much in denial you are about how "nutty" so much of it is, and even how you yourself fit the description due to your lack of humour in relation to the obvious reality of this communications media. Then you should either build a bridge and get over it, or do what I get told in here to do on a regular basis – ie, switch off the TV, install a filter, or just don't go there.
The world and the internut is full of all sort of nuts (and sure, I don't care about being judged by the same filter) and I doubt if you are in any way exception, so perhaps the sooner you learn to recognise and laugh at that, the better it will be for all of us, hmmm ?
Here, perhaps this may help bring about that better understanding.
http://derspatz.blogspot.com/2008/11/internut-by-any-other-name.html
regarDS
So let me get this straight. In a forum topic on the subject of "clean feed"ing the internut via an ILCF you want me to stop using a word that has been in my online and offline vocabulary from long before I even knew you existed let, alone the topic of ILCF ?
Kinda hypocritical of ya if not ironic, isn't it ?
If the truth behind the word "internut" is so offensive to you perhaps you should first question how seriously you are taking this ever evolving communications media, and how much in denial you are about how "nutty" so much of it is, and even how you yourself fit the description due to your lack of humour in relation to the obvious reality of this communications media. Then you should either build a bridge and get over it, or do what I get told in here to do on a regular basis – ie, switch off the TV, install a filter, or just don't go there.
The world and the internut is full of all sort of nuts (and sure, I don't care about being judged by the same filter) and I doubt if you are in any way exception, so perhaps the sooner you learn to recognise and laugh at that, the better it will be for all of us, hmmm ?
Here, perhaps this may help bring about that better understanding.
http://derspatz.blogspot.com/2008/11/internut-by-any-other-name.html
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24
Big brother filter plan insults parents:
Underlying the Rudd Government's plan to screen the internet is an offensive message: that parents cannot be trusted to mind their children online.
Truth hurts, but better parents in denial be offended and the population delivered up a reasonable proximity of a "clean feed" (by ILCF or any other means proved necessary), AFAIC.
Oh, and speaking of truth hurting, here is a quote for ya ...
"There is nothing more offensive than the brutal truth delivered brutally to those who don't want to hear it ... except for willfully ignorant brutes who prefer and promote a lie."
regarDS
Underlying the Rudd Government's plan to screen the internet is an offensive message: that parents cannot be trusted to mind their children online.
Truth hurts, but better parents in denial be offended and the population delivered up a reasonable proximity of a "clean feed" (by ILCF or any other means proved necessary), AFAIC.
Oh, and speaking of truth hurting, here is a quote for ya ...
"There is nothing more offensive than the brutal truth delivered brutally to those who don't want to hear it ... except for willfully ignorant brutes who prefer and promote a lie."
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt24
I'm totally alarmist. I picked up a pair of tongs on the weekend that had been resting partially on the barbie plate, my alarmism was audiable for about a block
LOL. Future policy direction. Social event filter.
Evidence and example of carelessness and a lack of self control.
Justification for the implementation of measures not relient upon such short comings and slip-ups regardless of provocations and circumstantial stimuli, so that no one need suffer the unwelcome outcomes in such a way.
In other words, another reason why the world needs a "clean feed" when it comes to the internut and why it should at least begin with ILCF.
regarDS
LOL. Future policy direction. Social event filter.
Evidence and example of carelessness and a lack of self control.
Justification for the implementation of measures not relient upon such short comings and slip-ups regardless of provocations and circumstantial stimuli, so that no one need suffer the unwelcome outcomes in such a way.
In other words, another reason why the world needs a "clean feed" when it comes to the internut and why it should at least begin with ILCF.
regarDS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
