America Only Loc: From the right hand of God

bggamers Loc: georgia

wussification

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

My initial reaction to this notice of a compartmentalized ¨By invitation 0nly,¨ was to snarl.

It reeks of (1) Censorship and (2) Elitist Snobbery.

If I choose to comment on a thread, I do. If I choose not to, I don´t. Itś immaterial to me whether or not other commentors have sworn, or to what degree they have sworn!!! That´s on them.

Censorship is the suppression of the principle of free speech, - a principle on which this nation was founded.

Forcibly censoring public or private communication or expression deemed to be objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect, inconvenient or just plain undesirable, by government officials, government departments, media outlets, business authorities, civic groups, private institutions or private individuals, for wh**ever reason, is still censorship, and should be open to challenge.

Surely, it is purely by coincidence that this notice aligns closely with the internet having just been turned over to the United Nations, which within itself, shrieks of future censorship...

Are the little ducks all being subtly organized into a row of conformity?

Elitist Snobbery, my second objection, is, or should be, self-explanatory.

It has been the openness of One Political Plaza to all opinions, however eloquently or crudely expressed, that has brought me back every few weeks, or sometimes months, since April, 2013.

I won´t comment in a forum section that arbitrarily shuts out the unworthy or undesirable, i.e., the untouchables, for at any future time, that could include me.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

Agreed.

But now I'm confused. I thought the Invite only section was controlled by the administrator, not the folks who are actually posting in that section. When I post a thread there I don't have any control over who responds, do I? Since I won't use the ignore button, I am assuming that if someone can't post there it is because of trollish behavior or cursing, etc, as determined by admin., not because I don't want them to.

Is that mistaken.

Coos Bay Tom Loc: coos bay oregon

Wolf counselor Loc: Heart of Texas

Thank you Zemirah.

I was hoping for a strong ally to join me in my determined effort to shine a beacon on this subliminal attempt to condition the minds of some of our unwary pilgrims.

You have chisled my sentiments in stone with your response.

I am honored and forever grateful to you.

Coos Bay Tom Loc: coos bay oregon

You are always a gentleman. I have found that in the past even in dissagrement you still hold no ill will toward any body.

JW

The individual poster determines whether he or she can continue posting in that venue by his or her posting behavior. If a response to your thread violates decorum, you won't be excluded.

No one is forcing anyone to post there. If a subject is better served by attentive responses, we now have a place to post. For wild west posting, the main is still open.

JW

You must be very young. I'm not. When I was young, we had no difficulty broaching any subject without the need to splash in the gutter. Sticking to the subject and executing an argument with polite and courteous wording was the standard in my youth. It is not limiting in any way.

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

Elitism is a choice.

Being threatened by those whose standards are unlike your own is a choice.

An advantage of my years on this earth has been the ability to meet and relate to people of other cultures, other countries, other religions and other socioeconomic circumstances as equals.

My grandchildren are too wise to label those whose debate style and self expression differs from their own as gutter dwellers. They are kind, they are courteous and they are tolerant.

As times change and customs change, avoiding communication with those whose family, community, life experiences, and mode of expression differ from one´s own results in a mothball mentality.

IMHO, isolating oneself with those worthy individuals one considers one´s equals would be a boring and futile endeavor, enlightening neither them or you.

Strength of character is not threatened by the words of others, nor by their ideas or opinions, however they are expressed.

JW

Well, aren't you just the little politically correct prince. You presume too much. If I felt threatened by diversity, I would never have come to this country. Holding yourself out as the beneficiary of worldly experience-borne wisdom is not a blow to elitism. In fact, it is the epitome of elitism. Extending courtesy is not a crime nor is it an undesirable social facet nor is it anything to fear.

BTW, splashing in the gutter means playing there, not living there.

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

You are arguing against yourself. If not a crime, extend courtesy to your fellow debaters, rather than judging them undesirable and closeting yourself in exclusion from them.



You originated the gutter reference...

Personally, I have neither splashed nor played nor lived there.

JW

I get the impression you live there but wear really dressy clothes.

Zemirah Loc: Sojourner En Route...

Your impressions are your own. Your intimate knowledge of and fascination with gutter living speaks volumes.

I have no interest in your impressions, your clothing, your gutters or your closeted cocoon of safety.

Your lack of civility is evident. Slinging impotent insults while retreating backwards belies the courteous behavior you claim.

You are wasting the time of those who actually discuss political issues openly without fear of encountering opposing opinions.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Have I been uninvited yet:-)