General Discussion of Forum Banning (continued)

If your topic lands here, you either put it here yourself or one of the moderators thought it likely too polarizing a subject to stay in the General Discussion area
Post Reply
User avatar
Bob Kuczewski
Posts: 600
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:39 am
Location: San Diego
Contact:

General Discussion of Forum Banning (continued)

Post by Bob Kuczewski » Fri Sep 07, 2018 10:23 am

To Moderator: I began a post in "General Discussion of Forum Banning" to reply to Marshal and then didn't make the post. I think that "confused" the forum software and now it won't allow me to post in that topic (it might think I'm in the middle of another post). The following post was intended for that topic.. Please feel free to merge these topics at the moderators convenience.

mrobin604 wrote:"You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed)."
Bob Kuczewski wrote:Can you cite the post and my actual words that you feel violated any part of that rule? I'm asking so that it's clear what can and cannot be said on this forum.

Thanks in advance.
mrobin604 wrote:This information was already sent to you in the letter regarding your suspension.

I know you are capable of being civil. Please do that.
Bob Kuczewski wrote:Let me ask again. Can you cite the post and my actual words that you feel violated any part of that rule? I'm again asking so that it's clear what can and cannot be said on this forum.

It's a simple question. Thanks in advance.
mrobin604 wrote:I’m telling you again. Go read the mail outlining your suspension. It’s all right there. If you don’t have it, we can provide you with another copy.
Hi Marshal,

I've asked you cite "the post and my actual words" that you feel violated rules.

You've replied "It’s all right there". I say it's not.

Since you're claiming it's there, then please post any parts of the letter that cite "the post and my actual words" that violated the rules. It's a simple enough request.

Thanks again.
Join a National Hang Gliding Organization: US Hawks at ushawks.org
View my rating at: USHGRS

User avatar
mrobin604
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 11:26 am

Post by mrobin604 » Fri Sep 07, 2018 10:35 am

You have my reply.

User avatar
Bob Kuczewski
Posts: 600
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:39 am
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Post by Bob Kuczewski » Fri Sep 07, 2018 11:30 am

mrobin604 wrote:It’s all right there. If you don’t have it, we can provide you with another copy.
O.K. Please provide it right here and we'll see if it cites any of my actual words that were found to be in violation.

Justice requires a number of things including:

1. Objective rules.
2. Citation of specific conduct violating those rules.
3. A chance to face one's accusers.
4. A determination by an impartial authority.

I am currently asking for step 2.

Now the ban has passed, and nothing will change that, but I've started this discussion for folks to think clearly about how to treat others fairly in situations where people disagree.

Thanks in advance.
Join a National Hang Gliding Organization: US Hawks at ushawks.org
View my rating at: USHGRS

User avatar
mrobin604
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 11:26 am

Post by mrobin604 » Fri Sep 07, 2018 1:11 pm

Bob Kuczewski wrote:
mrobin604 wrote:It’s all right there. If you don’t have it, we can provide you with another copy.
O.K. Please provide it right here and we'll see if it cites any of my actual words that were found to be in violation.

Justice requires a number of things including:

1. Objective rules.
2. Citation of specific conduct violating those rules.
3. A chance to face one's accusers.
4. A determination by an impartial authority.

I am currently asking for step 2.

Now the ban has passed, and nothing will change that, but I've started this discussion for folks to think clearly about how to treat others fairly in situations where people disagree.

Thanks in advance.
In case you haven't noticed, this is not a court of law. This is a privately run message board with some pretty simple rules that you seem to find it difficult to follow. So let me lay this out for you.

This message board has a clear set of rules that you need to sign off on to create an account. The rules are enforced at the discretion of the people who administrate the site and the board of directors for the club, because it is a message board for that club. If you find that unfair, or a violation of your definition of justice, that is fine, you are welcome to not participate. Just let a board administrator know that you want your account removed, and they should be able to take care of that for you. If you decide you want to be civil, and follow these rules, you are welcome to stay and participate.

User avatar
Bob Kuczewski
Posts: 600
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:39 am
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Post by Bob Kuczewski » Fri Sep 07, 2018 3:59 pm

mrobin604 wrote:This is a privately run message board with some pretty simple rules that you seem to find it difficult to follow.
You've quoted the rules, but you haven't quoted any of my actual writings that have violated those rules. You said that "It’s all right there. If you don’t have it, we can provide you with another copy." but then you haven't provided that either. I suspect you've read it and found that I was right. Otherwise I'm sure you'd have posted it.

As I said earlier, what's done is done. I barely missed the 30 days because I've got a lot of other things going on. But the important thing for the club as a whole (members and officers) is to think about the standards that you use to make decisions. Are they standards that help the club find the best solutions in a sea of options, or are they standards that confine the club to a narrow set of suboptimal choices?

Free speech,after all, isn't about the speech or even the speaker. It's about the effect of the speech in making better and more informed decisions for everyone in a group. That's what makes it valuable and highly protected in most advanced societies and organizations. That's generally been true of the SHGA, and I'm only writing because the recent ban stands in stark contrast to the long history of unfettered speech on this forum.

Thanks for your time. I'm satisfied with this topic as it stands, and I don't feel the need to continue tbe debate unless you do.
Join a National Hang Gliding Organization: US Hawks at ushawks.org
View my rating at: USHGRS

User avatar
Jim
Posts: 288
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 5:08 pm

Post by Jim » Fri Sep 07, 2018 9:53 pm

Bob Kuczewski wrote:I suspect you've read it and found that I was right. Otherwise I'm sure you'd have posted it.
I suspect Marshall found he was wasting his time here.
Bob Kuczewski wrote:I've got a lot of other things going on.
Really?
Bob Kuczewski wrote: But the important thing for the club as a whole (members and officers) is to think about the standards that you use to make decisions. Are they standards that help the club find the best solutions in a sea of options...
In our case, YES.
Bob Kuczewski wrote:Free speech,after all, isn't about the speech or even the speaker. It's about the effect of the speech in making better and more informed decisions for everyone in a group. That's what makes it valuable and highly protected in most advanced societies and organizations.


Not true, unless you consider much of Europe, Russia and China as backward.
Bob Kuczewski wrote:That's generally been true of the SHGA, and I'm only writing because the recent ban stands in stark contrast to the long history of unfettered speech on this forum.
Not entirely true. The Board once considered banning me during our debate on your directorship in the USHPA. I stopped and you got recalled anyway. But it's OK to blame me, as you have in the past. I'm happy to take the credit.
Bob Kuczewski wrote:Thanks for your time. I'm satisfied with this topic as it stands, and I don't feel the need to continue tbe debate unless you do.
This wasn't a debate. It was a quest for gratification.

See you tomorrow, newly, unexpired member. Bringing cash, I hope.
There are two kinds of people in the world: the quick and the dead.

User avatar
dhmartens
Posts: 859
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:36 am
Location: Reseda

Post by dhmartens » Mon Sep 10, 2018 1:56 pm

I read somewhere these types of posts(in general topics area) causes search engines(google, facebook, youtube, twitter) to sort lower in search rankings and that hurts the sport. Maybe that's why so few have heard of Jordan Peterson, the most dangerous man in Canada. When they make those comparisons we rank lower in searches.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtI8RKe6HwE[/youtube]

Post Reply