Infractions displayed publicly?

[countryboy]

I just noticed some posters have publicly displayed infractions. Is this something new, or has this always been the case?

[truthmatters]

if you are given an infraction are you told why and directed to the offending post?

[countryboy]

if you are given an infraction are you told why and directed to the offending post?

I have no idea.

Not sure I like the idea of a public display of how many infractions one has received.

[Chris]

New, cf http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/6236-The-Political-Forums-Revised-Rules-and-Regulations, post #2.

[truthmatters]

I have had mods in other places refuse to tell me which post I was infracted for

[countryboy]

New, cf http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/6236-The-Political-Forums-Revised-Rules-and-Regulations, post #2.

Evidently, number of infractions received isn't considered "personal information".

[Chris]

Evidently, number of infractions received isn't considered "personal information".

Discussion of it would be. Say you got one, or thought it unfair another got one, send admin or a mod a PM to discuss.

[Trinnity]

I just noticed some posters have publicly displayed infractions. Is this something new, or has this always been the case?They're displayed so that people can get a feel for what gets people in trouble - to help them learn by example what is over the line. I hope that helps explain.

[Trinnity]

if you are given an infraction are you told why and directed to the offending post?Yes.

[Trinnity]

I have had mods in other places refuse to tell me which post I was infracted forDayum! We'd never do that.

[Trinnity]

Evidently, number of infractions received isn't considered "personal information".Infractions are never given lightly. People who get them have been asked nicely in PMs not to do whatever they're doing. They get warnings. By the time they get an infraction, they've earned it. There are also in-thread warnings when a thread is getting hijacked by insults etc.

Countryboy, you've never posted anything you had to even be talked to about, much less warned about, or infracted.

Most people here haven't either.

[truthmatters]

that is totally cool.

I was so very tired of being mistreated because I argued too well

[countryboy]

They're displayed so that people can get a feel for what gets people in trouble - to help them learn by example what is over the line. I hope that helps explain.
I guess that helps to explain why, but I still think it's a bit much. Seems akin to public humiliation. I realize some of the trolls around here could probably use a little public humiliation, but still.....

[Trinnity]

Well, there's always the possibility we might might stop doing that in the future. I also think it's good as a deterrent, and assuages the frustration of people who always think the trolls "get away with it".

For now, the reason is for the "teachable moment". Eeeeww....such a liberal meme. I feel dirty for writing it. Ick~

[roadmaster]

I don't have an ego:grin: If I do something wrong post away.

[IGetItAlready]

Infractions are nor given lightly. People who get them have been asked nicely in PMs not to do whatever they're doing. They get warnings. By the time they get an infraction, they've earned it. There are also in-thread warnings when a thread is getting hijacked by insults etc.

Countryboy, you've never posted anything you had to even be talked to about, much less warned about, or infracted.

Most people here haven't either.

With all due respect that's not entirely true, not in my case anyway. And though I'll not go into detail here, my infraction was "earned" for responding with a word that is no more disrespectful or repulsive than the insult leveled at me.

[Trinnity]

Could you PM me and we'll talk about it.

[IMPress Polly]

roadmaster wrote:
I don't have an ego:grin: If I do something wrong post away.

I'm with you on that, RM!

[roadmaster]

I'm with you on that, RM!

Everyone is not going to agree with each person. I believe you have a right to voice your opinion. Heck, I even disagree with some cons but I do believe in sticking with the topic. If everyone did agree, this place would be boring. If I step over the line then I expect a mod to say so. It won't hurt my feelings.

[truthmatters]

Infractions are nor given lightly. People who get them have been asked nicely in PMs not to do whatever they're doing. They get warnings. By the time they get an infraction, they've earned it. There are also in-thread warnings when a thread is getting hijacked by insults etc.

Countryboy, you've never posted anything you had to even be talked to about, much less warned about, or infracted.

Most people here haven't either.

that would be helpful if you actually explained what you see as an infraction when asked.

You seemed very unwilling to outline them to me.

can I ask you again what words here are banned for use.

please dont tell me none this time unless there really are none.

[truthmatters]

I would like to request that every PM I ingauge in is posted for all to see.

it would make things much clearer to all here.

[truthmatters]

I have NOTHING to hide from anyone.

the only thing I want secret is my private info

[Chris]

that would be helpful if you actually explained what you see as an infraction when asked.

You seemed very unwilling to outline them to me.

can I ask you again what words here are banned for use.

please dont tell me none this time unless there really are none.

TM, you have been repeatedly asked if not warned to take personal issues with moderation offline. Do so, I will be happy to take your questions, but not online.

[Chris]

I would like to request that every PM I ingauge in is posted for all to see.

it would make things much clearer to all here.

PM, Private Messages, are private by definition. Posting PMs is highly frowned upon on any forum.

[Carygrant]

I would like to request that every PM I ingauge in is posted for all to see.

it would make things much clearer to all here.


With inguaging creeping in , the one thing that is happening is that matters are becoming more mysterious .

[URF8]

I have NOTHING to hide from anyone.

the only thing I want secret is my private info

If that were true you wouldn't have exposed your psychological baggage for everyone to examine.

[URF8]

With inguaging creeping in , the one thing that is happening is that matters are becoming more mysterious .

Are you pissed yet?

[coolwalker]

I have no idea.

Not sure I like the idea of a public display of how many infractions one has received.

Do nothing wrong and you will not get one. Pretty simple.

[coolwalker]

With all due respect that's not entirely true, not in my case anyway. And though I'll not go into detail here, my infraction was "earned" for responding with a word that is no more disrespectful or repulsive than the insult leveled at me.

Trinnity is very cool about what she does. I know personally because she PM'd me right away when I was heading toward an infraction and pointed out how to avoid it then and in the future. She isn't some mean old witch with a wart on her nose and a broom; she is a very kind person. There are people here that get under my skin and being Irish, I get bent easily...but Trinnity will help you at every turn. We do have some bad asses in here that IMO are being paid by someone to rattle us. You're cool ott and I know you are thick skinned...

[Chris]

With inguaging creeping in , the one thing that is happening is that matters are becoming more mysterious .

Indeed, everyone hates inguage creep.

[Chris]

With all due respect that's not entirely true, not in my case anyway. And though I'll not go into detail here, my infraction was "earned" for responding with a word that is no more disrespectful or repulsive than the insult leveled at me.
Trinnity is very cool about what she does. I know personally because she PM'd me right away when I was heading toward an infraction and pointed out how to avoid it then and in the future. She isn't some mean old witch with a wart on her nose and a broom; she is a very kind person. There are people here that get under my skin and being Irish, I get bent easily...but Trinnity will help you at every turn. We do have some bad asses in here that IMO are being paid by someone to rattle us. You're cool ott and I know you are thick skinned...

Appreciate what you're both saying and how you're saying it.

In general, with regard to moderation, I will say this: We're doing the best we can, we're not perfect, and will make mistakes. We're arguing rescinding a recent infraction today. So if you or anyone else thinks we're in error, please contact one or more mods and present your case civilly, rationally, and we will review it.

[countryboy]

Do nothing wrong and you will not get one. Pretty simple.

Yes, I understand that. But that wasn't the point of my thread.

[Calypso Jones]

Bring back the Stocks. Or better yet...FLOGGING.

[Peter1469]

Infractions should be publicly displayed so members see that the rules are enforced.

[Conley]

Bring back the Stocks. Or better yet...FLOGGING.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKzyhA-lrqM

[Deadwood]

Trinnity is very cool about what she does. I know personally because she PM'd me right away when I was heading toward an infraction and pointed out how to avoid it then and in the future. She isn't some mean old witch with a wart on her nose and a broom; she is a very kind person. There are people here that get under my skin and being Irish, I get bent easily...but Trinnity will help you at every turn. We do have some bad asses in here that IMO are being paid by someone to rattle us. You're cool ott and I know you are thick skinned...


You have my vote there brother!

Go, Trin, go!

[Deadwood]

Indeed, everyone hates inguage creep.

Can someone explain to me what is "inguage"?

[URF8]

Actually, as it turns out, I'm the one who is leaving. Adios.

[oceanloverOH]

"Inguage"? Is that like an inney in belly-button-speak?

There is sure a lot of flouncing going around in here.

[Chris]

Can someone explain to me what is "inguage"?

I haven't the foggiest.

[Chris]

Bring back the Stocks. Or better yet...FLOGGING.

I was thinking more along the lines of Hawthorne, a scarlet T.

[Peter1469]

Actually, as it turns out, I'm the one who is leaving. Adios.

Safe travels.

[Deadwood]

I haven't the foggiest.


Well.....


If you don't know, we're all screwed...

either than or it isn't anything, which would not be a first in this case.

[Deadwood]

OK....serious question.

And this is no laughing matter.

What about farts?


Is that considered harassment?

I mean I'm on these powerful meds which make me pass gas that peels the paint in my living room.

If I fart at the member, am I guilty of harassment?

[roadmaster]

OK....serious question.

And this is no laughing matter.

What about farts?


Is that considered harassment?

I mean I'm on these powerful meds which make me pass gas that peels the paint in my living room.

If I fart at the member, am I guilty of harassment?

You would be guilty if you lived with me.:grin:

[roadmaster]

Actually, as it turns out, I'm the one who is leaving. Adios.

For one infraction. You have thicker skin than that. I got many at the other site.

[Calypso Jones]

WEAR ( i can't believe i mispelled that!) them as a badge of honor.

[Captain Obvious]

Where them as a badge of honor.

Right.

I like most members post on other forums and I get infracted somewhat frequently.

Banned even at some sites. I've been banned on one site maybe 4 or 5 times.

Hard to believe, eh?

:wink:

[roadmaster]

Right.

I like most members post on other forums and I get infracted somewhat frequently.

Banned even at some sites. I've been banned on one site maybe 4 or 5 times.

Hard to believe, eh?

:wink:

Nope:grin:

[Calypso Jones]

Right.

I like most members post on other forums and I get infracted somewhat frequently.

Banned even at some sites. I've been banned on one site maybe 4 or 5 times.

Hard to believe, eh?

:wink:

you seem like a real pussy cat to me.

[Conley]

You know how factories have those signs saying it's been xxx days since an accident? We should have a sign here for how many days it's been since Captain posted a photo involving feces :grin:

[Captain Obvious]

Conley with punchline in 3... 2...

[Captain Obvious]

Damn, not fast enough.

:afro:

[Deadwood]

For one infraction. You have thicker skin than that. I got many at the other site.

And you deserved every one of them.

[Deadwood]

Right.

I like most members post on other forums and I get infracted somewhat frequently.

Banned even at some sites. I've been banned on one site maybe 4 or 5 times.

Hard to believe, eh?

:wink:

You?


Say it isn't so?

Not you coach...


I have been infrated a few times and warned a lot. I have never been banned. I got a mod fired though.

Short story...it was a multi-topic forum and I was invited by admin to join - admin being a committee of people. So, in the "Essay"s section I posted an essay - what a fucking coincidence -- about whether to compare the then Senator Obama to JFK, which some people were doing, or to Jimmy Carter. I go with Carter, opening with the JFK qiuote about himself being “I am an idealist without illusions”. and closing, quite cleverly if I do say so, Obama being "an illusionist with no ideals"

I get a warning from a mod, that I did not attribute the work. I tell her it is an original work, and notice I signed it. She gives me a second warning for questioning her.

I go to the guiy who invites me and say "No fucking wonder you don't have any participation...bye, bye."

All hell breaks loose as the whole forum is onto the essay repping me and I reply I'm leaving and here's why.

Two days leter I get an email from the head admin apologizing and offering me a mod job.

I reply "only if I can say 'fuck'".....never heard back.

[roadmaster]

And you deserved every one of them.

Actually one yes, I was playing with a friend. The others no.

[Deadwood]

Actually one yes, I was playing with a friend. The others no.

I was kidding RM...I'm surprise you've ever been infracted. You're very polite from what I've seen.

At least compared to the one who shall not be named,,,

No seriously....

And I was kidding about the farts too.

[Captain Obvious]

I was kidding RM...I'm surprise you've ever been infracted. You're very polite from what I've seen.

At least compared to the one who shall not be named,,,

No seriously....

And I was kidding about the farts too.

It's always the tame, polite ones that sneak up you and kick you in the nutsack when you're not expecting it.

[Deadwood]

It's always the tame, polite ones that sneak up you and kick you in the nutsack when you're not expecting it.

Yeah....get your jock on...she has it in for you....and with good reason

[Captain Obvious]

I make it a habit to wear a cup when logging in here.

:afro:

[Calypso Jones]

yes but you're wearing it in the wrong place.

[Carygrant]

OK....serious question.

And this is no laughing matter.

What about farts?


Is that considered harassment?

I mean I'm on these powerful meds which make me pass gas that peels the paint in my living room.

If I fart at the member, am I guilty of harassment?


Save the medication , you stink anyhow .


Is that a personal insult or sarcasm / light hearted humour ?
Moderate that one , if you can .
Only rule required --- Moderator must not be American .
Which actually provides the answer .

[oceanloverOH]

"Moderator must not be American ."

What the hell is that supposed to mean??? American-bashing, are you?

[IMPress Polly]

coolwalker wrote:
Do nothing wrong and you will not get one. Pretty simple.

I don't know if I'd go THAT far. Abuse of power is entirely possible. Though I don't really see any on these forums, I've seen plenty of it on various other boards over the years. It is a legitimate concern in general. (Which isn't to suggest that I distrust the current mod team or anything.)

The main observation I have concerning how the rules are enforced is that you can actually get away with quite a bit here. More so than on a lot of other web forums. For example, as some of you know, I have been a member of the Rev Left (short-hand for Revolutionary Left) web forums for a number of years now. They also have rules against things like personal attacks and discrimination...but, culturally speaking, those things are defined much more broadly there than here. Here the definitions the mods apply seem very narrow. On Rev Left, you couldn't get away with calling whole races of people "stupid" like you can here by virtue of their absence on this board. Neither could you get away with calling women "bitches" and "bimbos" and so forth like you can here. Indeed, you'd probably be strongly questioned if you so much as stated opposition to affirmative action programs or opposed abortion rights. Though insults are common everywhere, people here are given an especially long leash when it comes to issues of discrimination.

[truthmatters]

I just wish they were defined precisely so a person can avoid breaching the rules.

If rules exsist they can not be contained ONLY in the head of the people inforcing them.

EVERYONE need to know what the perameters of the rules that will be inforced

[Chris]

Save the medication , you stink anyhow .


Is that a personal insult or sarcasm / light hearted humour ?
Moderate that one , if you can .
Only rule required --- Moderator must not be American .
Which actually provides the answer .

God, you like to babble.

[Chris]

I just wish they were defined precisely so a person can avoid breaching the rules.

If rules exsist they can not be contained ONLY in the head of the people inforcing them.

EVERYONE need to know what the perameters of the rules that will be inforced

My experience--and I've admined and modded for over a decade--is this: It doesn't matter what the rules are, how clear and precise they are, you could have just a single rule, and there will be those who will push it, play with it, use it, and break it all with a but but but. It's a game people play. And it's phoney.

Use commonsense. Use a little discourse ethics: you come hear wanting others to respect you enough to be heard, reciprocate.

If you have a serious and general question about the rules, ASK online, if it's a personal issue, ask offline. Simple.

[truthmatters]

where have I kept anyone from speaking their mind?

[IMPress Polly]

Trinnity wrote:
For now, the reason is for the "teachable moment". Eeeeww....such a liberal meme. I feel dirty for writing it. Ick~

Oh come now, if Mitt Romney can get away with shamelessly using the term "trickle down" (a negative spin on supply-side economics), I'm sure you can get away with lefty-type memes like that, comrade. :wink:

[truthmatters]

maybe in a stroke of proof the right honors people in the lefts rights they couldbegin to pronounce and spell the name of my party correctly?

[IMPress Polly]

truthmatters wrote:
maybe in a stroke of proof the right honors people in the lefts rights they couldbegin to pronounce and spell the name of my party correctly?

I take it you belong to President Hussein Ubama's Democrat Party then, huh? :wink:

[truthmatters]

I belong to the Democratic party.

republicans hate half of the American people so they seek to insult them all by mispronouncing their party name.


More proof of their distain for half the country

[IMPress Polly]

truthmatters wrote:
I belong to the Democratic party.

republicans hate half of the American people so they seek to insult them all by mispronouncing their party name.

More proof of their distain for half the country

I was kidding of course. :grin: I'm a socialist-minded independent* myself. I am distinctly to your left.

Seriously though, there's plenty of name-calling to go around. Nearly all my friends, for example, commonly refer to Republicans as "Repugs" and "Rethugs" and stuff like that. It stems from an unwillingness to engage the other side. It happens when one is simply trying to bolster their image with those already in their political camp.

* Well...independent when it comes to national politics anyway. I do belong to the Vermont Progressive Party.

[truthmatters]

Im not allowed to insult

[Captain Obvious]

Polly is somewhere left of Stalin.

:grin:

[IMPress Polly]

I'm more like in the Hugo Chavez democratic socialist ballpark. I'm rooting for him to win re-election tomorrow (which is pretty likely because his policies overall are pretty popular)!

[truthmatters]

Im a capitalist who realises caplitalism must have good restraints on it so that the beliefs of democracy can be upheld.

I believe in the things caplitalism can bring if tempered by the voice of the people in a strong democracy

[Chris]

Oh come now, if Mitt Romney can get away with shamelessly using the term "trickle down" (a negative spin on supply-side economics), I'm sure you can get away with lefty-type memes like that, comrade. :wink:

It is a lousy adaptation of a metaphor, government doesn't trickle, it pours down.

[Chris]

I belong to the Democratic party.

republicans hate half of the American people so they seek to insult them all by mispronouncing their party name.


More proof of their distain for half the country

Bulloney.

[Captain Obvious]

It is a lousy adaptation of a metaphor, government doesn't trickle, it pours down.

And sucks back.

[Chris]

Im a capitalist who realises caplitalism must have good restraints on it so that the beliefs of democracy can be upheld.

I believe in the things caplitalism can bring if tempered by the voice of the people in a strong democracy

In short, a social democrat like Obama, Krugman, Robert Reich, the most insidiously parasitic form of socialism.

[truthmatters]

please dont spread lies about me becasue you hate me

[Peter1469]

Oh come now, if Mitt Romney can get away with shamelessly using the term "trickle down" (a negative spin on supply-side economics), I'm sure you can get away with lefty-type memes like that, comrade. :wink:

Come on Polly- that was a brilliant move. Trickle down government is exactly what Obama wants- it certainly more accurately portrays central planning than trickle down economics portrays supply side economics.

[Peter1469]

Im a capitalist who realises caplitalism must have good restraints on it so that the beliefs of democracy can be upheld.

I believe in the things caplitalism can bring if tempered by the voice of the people in a strong democracy

I agree with that statement.

[Chris]

please dont spread lies about me becasue you hate me

Please don't make things up. I stated an opinion about social democracy, not you.

[truthmatters]

In short, a social democrat like Obama, Krugman, Robert Reich, the most insidiously parasitic form of socialism.


I am NOT a socialist.

I told you what I am.

I dont lie about you do I?

[truthmatters]

Your hate is palpable

[Chris]

I am NOT a socialist.

I told you what I am.

I dont lie about you do I?

What you described you favor is the same sort of socialism Obama, Krugman, Reich and others favor. That's true. Just because you disagree doesn't make it not so or a lie. Words mean things, even Alice in Wonderland knew that.

[Chris]

Your hate is palpable

Enough with the phoney emotional dsplays already. I thought you wanted fact-based, logical discussion. If not, say so, I don't want to bore you.

[IMPress Polly]

truthmatters wrote:
I am NOT a socialist.

I told you what I am.

I dont lie about you do I?

It's okay, Chris tells me I'm NOT a socialist. I guess he just sees whatever people tell him and applies the rule that the opposite must therefore be true. If you say you're a socialist, it means you're not. If you say you aren't, it means you are. Evidently it would be unconscionable to take anyone at their word. :wink:

(i.e. You'll be fine to ignore him. He's a little confused.)

[Chris]

It's okay, Chris tells me I'm NOT a socialist. I guess he just sees whatever people tell him and applies the rule that the opposite must therefore be true. If you say you're a socialist, it means you're not. If you say you aren't, it means you are. Evidently it would be unconscionable to take anyone at their word. :wink:

(i.e. You'll be fine to ignore him.)

For a fairly logical person, polly, you stoop to ad hom?

No, I don't think your political position socialist for what you describe as favoring is social cooperation, which is not socialism but in fact the basis of market capitalism.

Social democracy is the last refuge of neosocialists who lost debate over the economic calculation problem (Mises) and the problem of knowledge in society (Hayek), and who now substitute ownership of capitalism for management of it through the same elitist central planning, taxation and regulation.

Matters said she favors that, same as Obama, Krugman, Reich, etc. Do you?

[IMPress Polly]

Chris wrote:
For a fairly logical person, polly, you stoop to ad hom?


EVERYTHING to you is an attack. You've been trying to get me banned with those claims right from the outset. I was simply suggesting that you don't know what you're talking about as much as you think.

Anyhow, you confirmed my point so your complaint has zero merit as you've demonstrated it (my point) to be factually correct.


Matters said she favors that, same as Obama, Krugman, Reich, etc. Do you?

I thought I explained my views in a pretty clear and extensive way in various posts on this thread (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/6519-Can-Marxism-Be-Separated-From-Communism). To answer this particular question though, yes, with varying degrees of criticism, as a stepping stone in the general direction of a broadly socialist economy characterized by worker ownership and perhaps a form of democratic economic planning.

[Chris]

EVERYTHING to you is an attack. You've been trying to get me banned with those claims right from the outset. I was simply suggesting that you don't know what you're talking about as much as you think.

Anyhow, you confirmed my point so your complaint has zero merit as you've demonstrated it (my point) to be factually correct.

Uh, polly, I did not accuse you of attacking me, I accused you of engaging in a logical fallacy. You do know the difference don't you?

So nice attempt at misrepresenting what I said, again--for I didn't merely say you're not a socialist, I explained, as I did just above, in precisely what sense you're not.

Apparently you have no counter and prefer dodge ball like TM.

[IMPress Polly]

Sorry, edited my post while you were writing! Just thought I'd give you the heads up.

EDIT ONE:


Anyhow...


Uh, polly, I did not accuse you of attacking me

Here's your quote:

"For a fairly logical person, polly, you stoop to ad hom?"

Ad hominem means personal attack.

EDIT TWO:


So nice attempt at misrepresenting what I said, again--for I didn't merely say you're not a socialist...

Here's your latest quote on that:

"No, I don't think your political position socialist for what you describe as favoring is social cooperation, which is not socialism but in fact the basis of market capitalism."

I swear to god you're just like Mitt Romney personality-wise. Whenever you're confronted with your own position, you simply deny having ever taken it up.

[Chris]

Sorry, edited my post while you were writing! Just thought I'd give you the heads up.

Anyhow...



Here's your quote:

"For a fairly logical person, polly, you stoop to ad hom?"

Ad hominem means personal attack.

Ad hom is a logical fallacy--"For a fairly logical person" set up the context. I assure you I don't take fallacies personally or seriously for that matter. So again, you're misrepresenting what I said rather than addressing its substance. Advocating for social cooperation does not a socialist make. Advocating for central planning does.

[IMPress Polly]

Sorry, edited my new post while you were writing. We seem to be having that problem repeatedly today. :laugh:

[IMPress Polly]

Chris wrote:
Ad hom is a logical fallacy

Here's how Dictionary.com defines it:


ad ho·mi·nem
   [ad hom-uh-nuhm ‐nem, ahd-] Show IPA

adjective

1. appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/reason).


2. attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

I can see our source of confusion now. I was thinking of the second definition while you were actually meaning the first. I hadn't realized there was another definition.

[Chris]

"No, I don't think your political position socialist for what you describe as favoring is social cooperation, which is not socialism but in fact the basis of market capitalism."

I swear to god you're just like Mitt Romney personality-wise. Whenever you're confronted with your own position, you simply deny having ever taken it up.

What I stated is my position, I do not deny it.


I thought I explained my views in a pretty clear and extensive way in various posts on this thread. To answer this particular question though, yes, with varying degrees of criticism, as a stepping stone in the general direction of a broadly socialist economy characterized by worker ownership and perhaps a form of democratic economic planning.

Socialism isn't about worker ownership--if you mean private ownership, and cooperation, then you're talking capitalism.

But you're probably not, you're probably talking about central planning, and that is socialism. If that's what you favor, then you are a socialist.

So explain, socialist, how do workers own what central planner plan? And how do these central planners solve the economic calculation problem, where do they get their knowledge?

[Chris]

Here's how Dictionary.com defines it:



I can see our source of confusion now. I was thinking of the second definition while you were actually meaning the first. I hadn't realized there was another definition.

Right, no problem. I was surprised a logical person could be so illogical. Oh, wait! Did you intend to attack me?!?! Oh my!

[IMPress Polly]

Chris wrote:
Socialism isn't about worker ownership--if you mean private ownership, and cooperation, then you're talking capitalism.

Socialism is about collectivism. Cooperative ownership is a form of collectivism. This isn't hard to understand.


But you're probably not, you're probably talking about central planning, and that is socialism. If that's what you favor, then you are a socialist. '

I favor a mixture/combination of both at present. My position is still evolving.


So explain, socialist, how do workers own what central planner plan? And how do these central planners solve the economic calculation problem, where do they get their knowledge?

By having a participatory role in the said planning, not just relying on technocrats to plan everything out in a top-down fashion.

[Captain Obvious]

You two would make a great couple.

[Chris]

Socialism is about collectivism. Cooperative ownership is a form of collectivism. This isn't hard to understand.

'

I favor a mixture/combination of both at present. My position is still evolving.

Collectivism through central planning.

Collective ownership, how? Through voluntary contract? Again, that's capitalism. Or by central planning, socialism.


I favor a mixture/combination of both.

Then a social democrat. Circles.

[Chris]

You two would make a great couple.

Couple of what?

[IMPress Polly]

Thanks Cap. I can see it all now... :wink:

[Calypso Jones]

I don't want to own anything with anyone. I want to own my own stuff. Be my own boss. Make my own decisions. We have a little cooperative diner in town. The place is a pigsty. It is dirty and messy and falling down and it attracts people that i would under no circumstances invite to my neighborhood even.

[Carygrant]

I don't want to own anything with anyone. I want to own my own stuff. Be my own boss. Make my own decisions. We have a little cooperative diner in town. The place is a pigsty. It is dirty and messy and falling down and it attracts people that i would under no circumstances invite to my neighborhood even.


A very personal description , but do you have a point to make , apart from cliche and generalising from one instance ?

[Cigar]

These Infractions are not so bad ... you should have seen the ones I got when I was a Free-Safety in high school. :)

[Trinnity]

I belong to the Democratic party.

republicans hate half of the American people so they seek to insult them all by mispronouncing their party name.


More proof of their distain for half the countryDo you realize how stupid that sounds? That chip on your shoulder is crushing your intellect.

[truthmatters]

then why does the right refuse to say the name of the democratic party correctly?

[Trinnity]

then why does the right refuse to say the name of the democratic party correctly?The left does it, the right does it, but not all people on the left or right do it. I don't. I use the following words:
Dems
dems
Democrats
democrats
liberals
progressives
collectivists
Marxists
socialists

Those are pretty standard words. People are individuals and they'll use the words they want to use. The left champions free speech, so what's the problem?

[truthmatters]

When was the last time you heard any Republican on TV say the democratic party?

[coolwalker]

then why does the right refuse to say the name of the democratic party correctly?

Since they became the socialist party in deeds but remain the democrat party in name (only).

[truthmatters]

So you get to change the name of someone elses party because you have insane ideas?

[Chris]

So you get to change the name of someone elses party because you have insane ideas?

No, because Dumbocrats have insane ideas.

[coolwalker]

So you get to change the name of someone elses party because you have insane ideas?

I can call it anything I like. Dumbshitocrats suits me at the moment.

[Trinnity]

When was the last time you heard any Republican on TV say the democratic party?That's a dumb question. Am I supposed to be keeping notes on that?

[truthmatters]

If you say may claim is untrue then you need to prove that by going and getting republicans on TV pronouncing the word correctly

[truthmatters]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(phrase)


Jump to: navigation (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#mw-head), search (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#p-search)





"Democrat Party" is a political epithet (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Epithet) used in the United States (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/United_States) for the Democratic Party (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)).[1] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-0) The term has been used in negative or hostile fashion by conservative (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/American_conservatism) commentators and members of the Republican Party (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)) in party platforms, partisan speeches and press releases since 1940.[2] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-safire1993-1)

[Chris]

If you say may claim is untrue then you need to prove that by going and getting republicans [sic] on TV pronouncing the word correctly

No one has to do anything.

Republicans should be capitalized, no? Why don't you practice what you preach.

[coolwalker]

If you say may claim is untrue then you need to prove that by going and getting republicans on TV pronouncing the word correctly

We'll let Obama do that since he knows how to alter his accent to suit the crowd.

[truthmatters]

why dont you admitt if in a debate you claim something you need to prove it or lose the debate?

[garyo]

Have another bon bon

[Chris]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(phrase)


Jump to: navigation (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#mw-head), search (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#p-search)






"Democrat Party" is a political epithet (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Epithet) used in the United States (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/United_States) for the Democratic Party (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)).[1] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-0) The term has been used in negative or hostile fashion by conservative (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/American_conservatism) commentators and members of the Republican Party (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)) in party platforms, partisan speeches and press releases since 1940.[2] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-safire1993-1)

Progressives made the term an epithet. Just like they did progressive, then liberal.

[truthmatters]

so now your going to insult me for being a housewife?

Jeeze dude what happened to the family first stuff all you right wingers talk about?

[Chris]

so now your going to insult me for being a housewife?

Jeeze dude what happened to the family first stuff all you right wingers talk about?

What on earth are you babbling about now?

[Cigar]

So you get to change the name of someone elses party because you have insane ideas?

It makes them feel better about their party and their candidate ... :)

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b137/chasc5/HoldNose.jpg

[truthmatters]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(phrase)


Jump to: navigation (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#mw-head), search (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#p-search)





"Democrat Party" is a political epithet (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Epithet) used in the United States (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/United_States) for the Democratic Party (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)).[1] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-0) The term has been used in negative or hostile fashion by conservative (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/American_conservatism) commentators and members of the Republican Party (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)) in party platforms, partisan speeches and press releases since 1940.[2] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-safire1993-1)

I trust wiki over you chris

[truthmatters]

It makes them feel better about their party and their candidate ... :)

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b137/chasc5/HoldNose.jpg

It is indicative of their desire to NOT EVER act in a bipartisan way

[coolwalker]

why dont you admitt if in a debate you claim something you need to prove it or lose the debate?

Go bark up another tree. You and other Lefties are always using the word "admit", and yet you never admit to anything. Do all ya'll have some kind of handbook that you download?

[Chris]

It is indicative of their desire to NOT EVER act in a bipartisan way

"Et tu, Brute?"

[Chris]

It makes them feel better about their party and their candidate ... :)

[IMG]

That seems to have fallen on deaf ears.