How about timeouts for constantly disruptive folks?

[Stoneymonster]

Great cartoon and quite appropriate. The first frame is wrong though. The government can, in fact, arrest you for what you say. The classic example is you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theatre (unless there is, in fact, a fire). I guess the point I'm trying to make is that even free speech has its limits, as do all rights. Hopefully before posting here, people will think about what they post and if it is offensive or rude not post it (said by the person who more than once has been moved to snippiness - but hey, you can smoke and still tell people smoking is bad -- it doesn't make the message any less correct.)

I wish people would stop using the "Fire in a theater" trope. Its history is disgusting and it is quite often used as an excuse to restrict speech of all kinds.

Three Generations of a Hackneyed Apologia for Censorship Are Enough | Popehat

But yes, the cartoon is appropriate for private fora.

 

[scottf200]

**I** don't consider it disruptive.

OK. Thanks for the judgement.

If you don't want them to post because you think you have a high ground about what they're talking about being interesting or useful, I think you overvalue your opinion.

Wow. Where did that come from? I'm looking for a friendly and useful forum that is not frustrating to follow new threads and post. Your post seemed a little over the top.

 

[brianman]

Wow. Where did that come from? I'm looking for a friendly and useful forum that is not frustrating to follow new threads and post. Your post seemed a little over the top.

I'm not a fan of the periodic calls for "I think your comments aren't valuable so they should be moderated." This forum is moderated enough IMO (not a complaint).

- - - Updated - - -

How about timeouts for constantly disruptive folks?

There are a few people that are constantly being making personal attacks, negatively disrupting and sidetracking threads.

Here's my confusion. Do you think after 60 pages in the example thread they (2-4 people) are talking about something new?

If you're putting this concern in the category of "disruption", I think we use the word disruption differently.

Same thread same people discussing the same thing for days on end. Showing up at the top part of the "What's New" search.
Again, Do you think after 60 pages in the example thread they (2-4 people) are talking about something new?

Doesn't matter if they are or aren't. I don't consider it disruptive.

OK. Thanks for the judgement.

The pattern from the first quotes above is collating multiple behaviors and calling them "distruptive". I pointed out that I think you're using that word differently than I do. You gave an example and asked for an opinion. I gave an opinion. And then you got snarky. That's what I would call disruptive.

 

[bonnie]

Where's that 'Unsubscribe' button? I misplaced it.

Seriously. Guys. You're squabbling. I know it's midweek and all, but there must be something better to do.

 

[brianman]

Where's that 'Unsubscribe' button? I misplaced it.

Seriously. Guys. You're squabbling. I know it's midweek and all, but there must be something better to do.

I'd love to read more of wk's research on battery packs but I can't. Too soon?

 

[scottf200]

I'm not a fan of the periodic calls for "I think your comments aren't valuable so they should be moderated."

But my point was ad nauseam ... as "I think your comments [repeated for the 50th time ad nauseam] aren't valuable <snip>" disrupting "What's New".
Hope that helps explain.

- - - Updated - - -

Where's that 'Unsubscribe' button? I misplaced it.
Seriously. Guys. You're squabbling. I know it's midweek and all, but there must be something better to do.

Point taken. Thanks for your level head. I'll move on.

 

[brianman]

Bcomments repeated for the 50th time ad nauseam aren't valuable

On this we agree. Where we don't seem to agree on is whether moderation/policing/timeouts/etc. are necessary or warranted.

It's easy to ignore a thread, and avoid replying on a topic where there's nothing new to contribute. Do that with the threads you find pointless. Let the echo chamber folks (on both sides) of any spinning debate keep doing so with each other. Eventually they'll lose interest or say something ridiculously out of line and get banned for being socially challenged. No need to busy the moderators until/unless such happens.

 

[Andyw2100]

I'd love to read more of wk's research on battery packs but I can't. Too soon?

Heh!

Actually he's back, so you can! (Meaning your comment wasn't too soon, but actually too late!)

 

[Canuck]

I wish people would stop using the "Fire in a theater" trope. Its history is disgusting and it is quite often used as an excuse to restrict speech of all kinds.

Three Generations of a Hackneyed Apologia for Censorship Are Enough | Popehat

Just because you don't agree with the decision in the case, doesn't make the axiom wrong or even offensive. The axiom is used in first year law school to dispel a common misunderstanding. It is also correct. Many correct principles of law come from bad decisions. More importantly, an axiom can't restrict free speech, as the author of your opinion article implies (and you state above). He also claims "First, they trot out the Holmes quote for the proposition that not all speech is protected by the First Amendment. But this is not in dispute". Ummm... yes it is when I trotted it out: The cartoon reads "The government can't arrest you for what you say." I simply pointed out that they can, and gave the classic example that remains true to this day. Many people believe that the government can't arrest you for what you say. Many people in first year law believe that until the professor trots out the axiom. So to say "that is not in dispute" is not true when I used it. Plus, there's many other exceptions to "free" speech:

United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Where's that 'Unsubscribe' button? I misplaced it.

Seriously. Guys. You're squabbling. I know it's midweek and all, but there must be something better to do.

I'll take one helping of the mid-week excuse, please.

 

[wk057]

I'd love to read more of wk's research on battery packs but I can't. Too soon?

Eminem - Without Me - YouTube

Guess whos back, back again
Shadys back, tell a friend
Guess who's back, guess who's back, guess who's back
Guess who's back


...

Now this looks like a job for me
So everybody just follow me
'Cause we need a little controversy
'Cause it feels so empty without me