[ Show ]
[ Shrink ]
Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor
of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users'
privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your
privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket
to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we
also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.
Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 22:06:40 12/23/13 Mon
Author: Joe Rizoli (Freedom not)
Author Host/IP: 22.214.171.124
Subject: Frambors list, the fish bowl
The Frambors list is basically a lit confined to rules of civility that makes an opinion worthless.
This list uses the word democracy but in reality is a closed system where Miss Dunbrack has become the gatekeeper to hell. It is really a shame these people, in particular women, take over these list and ruin free speach by their stupid rules they call civility. The Frambors list is an embarrassment.Here is apost from that list about a situation that happened at a town Selectmens meeting. Miss Dunbrack plays the rules enforcer and does a pretty good job at nonsense. This post would have got me kicked off that list from hell. That is why I'm posting it here.
From: Linda Dunbrack Date: 9:57pm, Dec 22
Link to this by copy/pasting the URL below into an email:
The rationale for incivility by anyone is almost always that they fervently
believe they are correct, being factually accurate, descriptive or have a
reasonable basis for drawing a conclusion. That is why the rules are pretty
concrete, and also why I don't make exceptions. I'm not going to try to judge
when people are "right."
I assume that two people can look at the same set of circumstances and draw
vastly different conclusions about what someone's motives are. Hence, the rule
is: no speculation about other people's motives.
Some people have asked about the specific application of civility rules on this
this thread. There are some great examples that I think will offer some
transparency into how I look at this things.
Speculation about the unstated motivations or character of another person is
prohibited on FramGov. Here are some examples of
1. Ms Butler with regard to Mr. Giombetti's motives in her first post.
2. Ms Bernstein, by implying that it was Ms Butler's intent to mislead the
3. Mr. Lewis, by implying that Ms Stern was attempting to "spout lies in order
to attack a Selectmen candidate."
Personal insults are prohibited and can include insulting characterizations.
1. Mr. Estes, by characterizing the original post as "naked political
2. Ms Butler, by characterizing Ms Stern's opinion as "not the American way."
If you are talking about another human being in a negative way, then that is
almost always a sign that you are heading in the wrong direction with regard to
list civility rules. If you are using a pejorative term or phrase about another
person's opinion, then it is probably a personal insult, and again, it is
probably against the rules.
Re-read your post and think before you hit send.
When I see civility issues, I typically issue general warnings to the list as a
first intervention. When that doesn't change the tone, I issue warnings to
offenders. I try to avoid that when possible, but when people fail to listen to
the first warning, I have little choice.
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
[ Contact Forum Admin ]
Forum timezone: GMT-8|
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.