+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 18 1 11 18 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 346

Thread: The 'censorship' discussion

  1. Link to Post #1
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    21,236
    Thanks
    73,181
    Thanked 267,587 times in 19,721 posts

    Default The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Star Mariner (here)
    I personally believe that when the few declare what everyone else can and cannot see it's censorship. It's the loss of liberty. You could even call it authoritarianism.
    Here's a question. It'd be interesting to hear everyone's thoughts and answers.

    Richard Dolan now puts a lot of his material (and half of his video interviews) behind his RichardDolanMembers.com paywall. You sign up, and pay a small amount, and then it's all there. (I'm not a member, btw.)

    When he decided to do this, was this censorship?

    Please reply.

    (Note: Avalon may be significantly preferable: there's no paywall for members to join.)

  2. The Following 28 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    Ally S. (11th July 2019), Aragorn (11th July 2019), avid (11th July 2019), Axman (11th July 2019), Constance (11th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (11th July 2019), drneglector (12th July 2019), East Sun (11th July 2019), edina (10th July 2019), Elen (12th July 2019), Ernie Nemeth (11th July 2019), Gracy May (11th July 2019), Kryztian (11th July 2019), Nasu (11th July 2019), petra (12th July 2019), Rahkyt (17th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), Sophocles (11th July 2019), Star Mariner (11th July 2019), Star Tsar (11th July 2019), T Smith (11th July 2019), thepainterdoug (12th July 2019), Tintin (11th July 2019), toppy (11th July 2019), Valerie Villars (11th July 2019), viking (11th July 2019), Yoda (11th July 2019)

  3. Link to Post #2
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th January 2011
    Location
    Outback in the Four Corners
    Posts
    1,327
    Thanks
    11,300
    Thanked 9,010 times in 1,218 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    Quote Posted by Star Mariner (here)
    I personally believe that when the few declare what everyone else can and cannot see it's censorship. It's the loss of liberty. You could even call it authoritarianism.
    Here's a question. It'd be interesting to hear everyone's thoughts and answers.

    Richard Dolan now puts a lot of his material (and half of his video interviews) behind his RichardDolanMembers.com paywall. You sign up, and pay a small amount, and then it's all there. (I'm not a member, btw.)

    When he decided to do this, was this censorship?

    Please reply.

    (Note: Avalon may be significantly preferable: there's no paywall for members to join.)
    The criteria for having exclusive information behind the paywall is a bit different than removing a particular thread(s) from public view because it's problematic for some.

    Lots of forums do what you've described. Usually having sample blogs or general information available for non-members, and often informing people of what is available for members only.

    I may add, they are also usually producers of original content.

    In the case of Richard Dolan, it's his content and he can decide how he wants to manage it. That's not censorship. That's ownership rights of the content creator.

    However, people do often complain of lack of access to knowledge that tax payers pay for that lays hidden behind pay/membership walls. Understandably so.

    It's getting harder and harder to access information these days. Maybe it's always been difficult?
    Last edited by edina; 11th July 2019 at 00:27.

  4. The Following 21 Users Say Thank You to edina For This Post:

    Axman (11th July 2019), Bill Ryan (11th July 2019), Buzzie (11th July 2019), ceetee9 (16th July 2019), Deux Corbeaux (12th July 2019), Fellow Aspirant (11th July 2019), KiwiElf (11th July 2019), Lost N Found (11th July 2019), mischief (30th July 2019), mojo (11th July 2019), peterpam (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), rgray222 (13th July 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), Savannah (11th July 2019), silvanelf (18th July 2019), Star Mariner (11th July 2019), T Smith (11th July 2019), toppy (11th July 2019), Valerie Villars (11th July 2019), yelik (11th July 2019)

  5. Link to Post #3
    United States Avalon Member Bluegreen's Avatar
    Join Date
    18th July 2014
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,295
    Thanks
    26,559
    Thanked 19,800 times in 3,221 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    (Note: Avalon may be significantly preferable: there's no paywall for members to join.)
    I would suggest this sends the question into the "Apples & Oranges" category



  6. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Bluegreen For This Post:

    Axman (11th July 2019), Bill Ryan (11th July 2019), edina (11th July 2019), frankstien (12th July 2019), Lost N Found (11th July 2019), peterpam (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), Savannah (11th July 2019), toppy (11th July 2019), Valerie Villars (11th July 2019)

  7. Link to Post #4
    Avalon Member T Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th January 2011
    Posts
    1,108
    Thanks
    5,977
    Thanked 4,649 times in 999 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    I believe there is a discernible difference between censorship and membership.

    Censorship is the deliberate manipulation, witholding, or control of information in the public domaine, usually coupled with an aim to manufacture a desired perception of reality in accordance with the wishes, objectives, and agenda of the censors.

    Membership is the manipulation, withholding, or control of information in a private domaine, whereby access is granted in accordance with the wishes, objectives, and agenda of the censors, i.e., those who maintain legal rights to control the information.

  8. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to T Smith For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (11th July 2019), ceetee9 (16th July 2019), DaveToo (16th July 2019), Deux Corbeaux (12th July 2019), edina (11th July 2019), Lost N Found (11th July 2019), Mayacaman (13th July 2019), mojo (11th July 2019), peterpam (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), Ron Mauer Sr (11th July 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), Savannah (11th July 2019), toppy (11th July 2019), Wind (11th July 2019), yelik (11th July 2019)

  9. Link to Post #5
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    21st July 2010
    Age
    33
    Posts
    592
    Thanks
    282
    Thanked 2,674 times in 499 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    How many of the people on the forum that are complaining about censorship have actually been censored? Have your posts been removed? Deleted?

    How many of you have been muted in a thread and blocked from being able to defend yourself as you get attacked?

    Once you get muted for expressing an opinion you have evidence for, then talk about censorship.

  10. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Praxis For This Post:

    AutumnW (11th July 2019), Bill Ryan (11th July 2019), Chris Gilbert (11th July 2019), Constance (11th July 2019), DeDukshyn (11th July 2019), frankstien (12th July 2019), Michi (11th July 2019), Nasu (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), toppy (11th July 2019), Wind (11th July 2019), wondering (11th July 2019)

  11. Link to Post #6
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    21,236
    Thanks
    73,181
    Thanked 267,587 times in 19,721 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    If I write a book, I might place it for sale as opposed to giving it away for free.

    That means that anyone who wants access to the content, needs to meet a certain criterion. It's within my right to do that. (And it would be yours, too, if you wrote a book. Some Avalon members have.)

    That's not censorship. It's saying:
    You're welcome to read this, but please meet this condition first.

  12. The Following 28 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    Aragorn (11th July 2019), AutumnW (11th July 2019), ceetee9 (16th July 2019), Constance (11th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (11th July 2019), Deux Corbeaux (12th July 2019), drneglector (12th July 2019), East Sun (8th September 2019), edina (11th July 2019), Elen (12th July 2019), graciousb (23rd July 2019), James (11th July 2019), Kryztian (11th July 2019), Mayacaman (13th July 2019), mojo (11th July 2019), Nasu (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), rgray222 (13th July 2019), Rhogar (11th July 2019), Ron Mauer Sr (11th July 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), Star Tsar (11th July 2019), T Smith (11th July 2019), toppy (11th July 2019), Wind (11th July 2019), wondering (11th July 2019), yelik (11th July 2019), Yoda (11th July 2019)

  13. Link to Post #7
    Avalon Member ClearWater's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th March 2010
    Posts
    34
    Thanks
    1,399
    Thanked 262 times in 32 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    I don't think I can answer that question without a clearly defined definition of 'censorship'.

    Does the video shown in this thread depict censorship? http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...-in-full-swing

    It's not removing access to anything, it's just making it more difficult to access, based upon a decision made by the companies leadership, with that decision being made in accordance with their beliefs of what information is most credible.
    "Be a Light to Yourself" ~ J. Krishnamurti

  14. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to ClearWater For This Post:

    AutumnW (11th July 2019), Bill Ryan (11th July 2019), Constance (11th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), edina (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), toppy (11th July 2019)

  15. Link to Post #8
    UK Avalon Founder Bill Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th February 2010
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    21,236
    Thanks
    73,181
    Thanked 267,587 times in 19,721 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    There's another version of the book analogy, that goes wider.

    If I hold a conference, and lots of people speak (not just me, as if I were writing a book all by myself), but no-one can enter the conference without paying at the door, and they can't later see the videos of the presentations without buying them — is that restricted access to the public 'censorship'?

  16. The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Bill Ryan For This Post:

    Aragorn (11th July 2019), AutumnW (11th July 2019), ClearWater (11th July 2019), Constance (11th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), edina (11th July 2019), Elen (12th July 2019), Nasu (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), rgray222 (13th July 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), toppy (11th July 2019), Wind (11th July 2019), wondering (11th July 2019)

  17. Link to Post #9
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th January 2011
    Location
    Outback in the Four Corners
    Posts
    1,327
    Thanks
    11,300
    Thanked 9,010 times in 1,218 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    There's another version of the book analogy, that goes wider.

    If I hold a conference, and lots of people speak (not just me, as if I were writing a book all by myself), but no-one can enter the conference without paying at the door, and they can't later see the videos of the presentations without buying them — is that restricted access to the public 'censorship'?
    I don't know if I'm quite following you on this?

    (What you describe seems more like a mutually agreed upon "exchange of goods".)



    Let's say, I'm interested, I'm going to pay for the videos's, ect... except other people who have decided that they are offended by the topic intervene, and suppress my access to it.
    Is that censorship?

    Or another example, a book has been freely available at a library. It's a popular book, but a group of people in the community petition to have it censored, or suppressed access, because they don't like it.
    Is that censorship?

    I want to add, it's natural, human nature, for people to have a negative reaction when something is taken away from them.

    And people don't mind rules, or criteria, as long as it's clearly communicated before they exchange their money, time, attention, (ect) and it feels fair to them.

    Humans have an innate sense of fairness. And usually respond from that sense.
    Last edited by edina; 11th July 2019 at 02:10.

  18. The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to edina For This Post:

    Clear Light (12th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), Ivanhoe (11th July 2019), Lost N Found (11th July 2019), mojo (11th July 2019), peterpam (11th July 2019), Phoenix1304 (12th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), RunningDeer (11th July 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), Savannah (11th July 2019), Star Mariner (11th July 2019), toppy (11th July 2019), ulli (11th July 2019), wondering (11th July 2019)

  19. Link to Post #10
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    28th January 2011
    Posts
    1,195
    Thanks
    20,032
    Thanked 8,964 times in 1,125 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    I don't see either of the book analogies as pertaining to what happened here.

    I tend to think what has happened here is nearer to what Reddit calls 'quarantine' rather than 'censorship'. It is being treated as though the topic is a virus that may spread if we are not careful. Only approved 'personnel' may enter.

  20. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to janus For This Post:

    Clear Light (12th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), edina (11th July 2019), KiwiElf (11th July 2019), Lost N Found (11th July 2019), mojo (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), RunningDeer (11th July 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), Star Mariner (11th July 2019), toppy (11th July 2019), ulli (11th July 2019), wondering (11th July 2019)

  21. Link to Post #11
    Costa Rica Avalon Member ulli's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th November 2010
    Posts
    13,595
    Thanks
    64,506
    Thanked 124,455 times in 13,274 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    People were upset that Paul had retired. People were upset that there was a chorus from members and the entire moderator group sending ridicule and even abuse their way, simply for following the Qanon phenomenon. Many of the accusations were really quite irrational, showing far more party political bias than anyone whom they accused. Words like hoax and psi-ops were being used.
    Has anyone ever considered that movies and music are psi-ops as well? Controlled emotional manipulation, to evoke a response in the viewer/listener.

    Paul had expressed a wish that the thread would not become closed to non-members, yet that wish was ignored.
    The entire atmosphere surrounding the sudden decision to quarantine the discussion behind a members only wall was one of hostility and bias. This in my view added to the feelings that this was an act of censorship.
    Had there been an announcement that included the regulars on the thread in a more respectful manner this thread would not even be necessary now.

  22. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to ulli For This Post:

    Clarity (14th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), Ivanhoe (11th July 2019), KiwiElf (11th July 2019), Lost N Found (11th July 2019), mountain_jim (14th July 2019), peterpam (11th July 2019), PurpleLama (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), RunningDeer (11th July 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), Savannah (11th July 2019), Star Mariner (11th July 2019), sunflower (11th July 2019), toppy (11th July 2019), wondering (11th July 2019)

  23. Link to Post #12
    United States Avalon Member Savannah's Avatar
    Join Date
    10th May 2015
    Location
    California
    Age
    63
    Posts
    213
    Thanks
    639
    Thanked 1,338 times in 198 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Praxis (here)
    How many of the people on the forum that are complaining about censorship have actually been censored? Have your posts been removed? Deleted?

    How many of you have been muted in a thread and blocked from being able to defend yourself as you get attacked?

    Once you get muted for expressing an opinion you have evidence for, then talk about censorship.
    Everyone on the Q thread has been censored to the general public. It has happened, or else we would not be having this discussion.

  24. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Savannah For This Post:

    Blacklight43 (11th July 2019), Clarity (14th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), KiwiElf (11th July 2019), Lost N Found (11th July 2019), peterpam (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), Star Mariner (11th July 2019), wondering (11th July 2019)

  25. Link to Post #13
    United States Avalon Member Savannah's Avatar
    Join Date
    10th May 2015
    Location
    California
    Age
    63
    Posts
    213
    Thanks
    639
    Thanked 1,338 times in 198 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    I have made my perceptions of this situation very clear on the other thread. It is the assumption of those who post here that the content is available to them and the public. It has been the practice in the past to not censor content. Your question appears to propose that the content on Avalon is your property and thus you can put a wall behind it if you choose, as a respected researcher such as Dolan has done. However Edina has clearly explained the difference in her post and I reiterate it here: Dolan is the creator of that content and may do with it what he wishes. If I write a book and put effort into it, it is my decision to profit from it or give it away.

    The people on this forum create the content. It is there work and ideas freely given. I underrated you own the web site and can ultimately control it. However if your decisions and the rationale for those decisions do not appear acceptable to the contributors they many not continue to be associated with this site. As I noted previously it is a moral, ethical dilemma I am now in. I am responding to these threads because you seem to be at least still considering opinions. Once you close the door to this and decide you will and can censor, I cant be a part of this Forum. That is not a hysterical threat for attention or sympathy or a desire to have others tell me to stay. It is simply that my principles will not allow me to contribute information to under these new circumstances.

    Thus the difference between you and Dolan is that this is your platform but we are the creators of the information and thus you should not perceive you have a right to control other peoples work.

  26. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Savannah For This Post:

    Blacklight43 (11th July 2019), Clarity (14th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), KiwiElf (11th July 2019), peterpam (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), wondering (11th July 2019)

  27. Link to Post #14
    United States Moderator Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Location
    journeying to the end of the night
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,951
    Thanks
    24,869
    Thanked 31,155 times in 3,847 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by ulli (here)
    People were upset that Paul had retired. People were upset that there was a chorus from members and the entire moderator group sending ridicule and even abuse their way, simply for following the Qanon phenomenon. Many of the accusations were really quite irrational, showing far more party political bias than anyone whom they accused. Words like hoax and psi-ops were being used.
    Has anyone ever considered that movies and music are psi-ops as well? Controlled emotional manipulation, to evoke a response in the viewer/listener.

    Paul had expressed a wish that the thread would not become closed to non-members, yet that wish was ignored.
    The entire atmosphere surrounding the sudden decision to quarantine the discussion behind a members only wall was one of hostility and bias. This in my view added to the feelings that this was an act of censorship.
    Had there been an announcement that included the regulars on the thread in a more respectful manner this thread would not even be necessary now.


    I understand people being disappointed that Paul left. hey I was too. but why 'upset'? he wanted to go! Who are you upset with?

    I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to as far as abuse and ridicule. Bill made a pretty cordial announcement regarding the Q threads, and what I recall next is a Q supporter strutting around like a rampaging toddler, threatening to bury the forum with a blog and insulting a bunch of people. She's still a member btw. So, I would dispute the allegation that the mods are censorship happy.

    Words like hoax and psi-ops are mere opinions. People are entitled to them. They're not insults. I mean, they don't belong in that thread, I'll grant you that..and fair enough.

    I likely won't even make a dent disputing some of these things, but I'll try anyway: there was NO hostility involved in the decision. If you say it was dumb or unintelligent, or poorly thought out, I'd be perfectly willing to listen to you. Truly! I don't mind people disagreeing with me, or questioning my judgement - even aggressively - but I vehemently deny that any hostility whatsoever was involved in that decision. ZERO.

    I don't know how the announcement could have been any more respectful. And as far as Paul not being here, it's a bummer to alot of people. I get it! But he's no longer an admin here, and has therefore forfeited his say in these matters.
    Last edited by Mike; 11th July 2019 at 04:38.

  28. The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to Mike For This Post:

    Aragorn (11th July 2019), AutumnW (11th July 2019), Clear Light (12th July 2019), Constance (11th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), Elen (12th July 2019), Franny (11th July 2019), Kryztian (11th July 2019), muxfolder (11th July 2019), Nasu (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), toppy (11th July 2019), Wind (11th July 2019), wondering (11th July 2019), YoYoYo (11th July 2019)

  29. Link to Post #15
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Posts
    625
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3,228 times in 561 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by ulli (here)
    People were upset that Paul had retired. People were upset that there was a chorus from members and the entire moderator group sending ridicule and even abuse their way, simply for following the Qanon phenomenon....
    Dead wrong, it was about the gatekeeping. Non-cult members were upset because Paul put a lock on his cult's thread and for the first time Avalon had a controlling thread gatekeeper kicking out valid, intelligent challengers..... the gatekeeper then even chased the people where he kicked them to and pushed HIS pro-Q opinions on them there. If you all are honest, Paul was the biggest factor in the alienation of longtime very lucid minded members with this behavior.

    He more than anyone fomented a cult by locking the gate around a bunch of hopelessly cognitive dissonant people to gather tight, put fingers in their ears to valid challenges and have a superiority party, giddily repeating memes and fiercely glorifying and defending a savior. Funny how only the butt hurt indoctrinated are playing the victim and whining that Avalon owes them a public stage.

    Quote Posted by ulli (here)
    Many of the accusations were really quite irrational, showing far more party political bias than anyone whom they accused. Words like hoax and psi-ops were being used.......
    In other words, you have chosen to completely ignore all the content of the threads discussing the long list of reasons why Q is a psyop and hoax by longtime respected Avalon members and Bill. And you forgot cult, larp and criminal enterprise.

    After you can actually list those reasons other members think Q is a psyop... because you are at Avalon to learn, not stick your head in the sand and blindly defend a fixed opinion missing tons of info... right?...then please list for us what you still think those 'irrational accusations' are.

  30. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to waves For This Post:

    Andrew_K (11th July 2019), Aragorn (11th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), Elen (12th July 2019), Praxis (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), Wind (11th July 2019), YoYoYo (11th July 2019)

  31. Link to Post #16
    United States Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    18th April 2012
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    7,181
    Thanked 8,141 times in 1,888 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Savannah (here)
    Quote Posted by Praxis (here)
    How many of the people on the forum that are complaining about censorship have actually been censored? Have your posts been removed? Deleted?

    How many of you have been muted in a thread and blocked from being able to defend yourself as you get attacked?

    Once you get muted for expressing an opinion you have evidence for, then talk about censorship.
    Everyone on the Q thread has been censored to the general public. It has happened, or else we would not be having this discussion.
    I completely agree with you Savannah. Here is what I see on this forum atm with regards to censorship. First of all The Q thread was at the top of most threads simply because it is a worldwide happening in the minds of the masses. It has been called all kinds of nasty things because the people that are doing that are afraid to step beyond their locked up little minds of safety. They don't want to be free, that is just my thought in sight. They will do anything to keep anyone from leaving the plantation, so to speak. We all have seen and read about how that works because most of these people have been psyoped with their own brand of so called enlightenment. So they project hatred and fear upon the slaves that are breaking the chains.

    okay, so the Q thread has over 700.000 views and over 10,000 posts, I believe I heard one of the anti-Q mods, yes I am saying one of the moderators of this forum state that that is a problem in there bling eyes. They can't have something as open as freedom and good will or a warrior against all the corruption in this very sick world being so open to the public because it could be dangerous to them and this forum. Geezus, and I thought the very concept of this forum was free thought and good debate about most everything. But it would seem someone is jealous of the success of the Q phenomenon. Can't have that can we. So I see all these mods jump on the Q folks and cause the problems that they say the Q thread is causing. Somewhere I read something that discussed the Mods as being non partisan and just trying to keep the forum within the guidelines. That is clearly a total lie to me as I have see most of if not all of the mods that are now in control and running this gulaq as totally partisan in their beliefs. So the hypocritical jibber jabber we see from them is what is tearing this forum apart or began to.

    The kind of thinking and actions taken by the mods and the few members that whine and cry and call the Q folks foul names and spew hatred at a majority of members is the same kind of thinking that resided in Pot Pol, Stalin, Hitler, Mau ce taung. not sure if that is spelled right, Mousilini, and many more dictators of the times. I am saying that is the thinking. We see this big time in the fakebook, Google, Youtube, twitty and instagram and many more of the big tech platforms today. This is very dangerous thinking folks and you all know it or maybe you don't in which case I am very sorry for you. I am sure you all think you are doing a great service to this forum but you are not and I mean definitely not. Your act just like mini brown shirts of the Hitler regime or other minions of the dictators that murdered their way to the top of the heap. It all started with a simple censorship of hiding something or anything away from the public all in the name of CONTROLLING THE NARATIVE TO KEEP PEOPLE SAFE. Its all bull sh*t and you all know it.

    I would have to ask if you were censored of any of the threads you partake in and or believe in would you be upset? Would you scream as loud about that on your own person? Why is it that you scream so loud about Q and Trump and yes I am using the TDS word so don't go ranting off the sidebar. It won't harm you. And you scream and rant and say the Q folk are being mean to you when it is you being mean to them. How is it that this forum did a 180 in its principals? Once you decided to hide the Q thread that was a major success and I am sure had a huge viewing by the public. Your turned yourselves into that dictatorial mind set.

    You made all kinds of excuses of why you did what you did but none of it made any sense. It stuck out like a CYA to most of us. And to make things worse you started created more threads that dealt with Q all the while you cried and moaned about to many threads relating to Q. Gawd, what kind off crap was that? And then you had to make more excused for doing all of that and made it seem like you might be sorry. More crap piled upon more crap is all you have succeeded in doing. I finally understand why those mods left in a group and I understand why Paul left also. and now look you are making mods out of anyone that fits your little coven. Well that is enough of my rant and rave. sorry for going off but I have been watching all this twist and turn and it seems that it could have been left alone and none of the problems that were created by a stupid decision to move a very well successful thread into a behind closed door scene (censor from the public) would have ever happened. UN-intended consequences. Maybe the next time one of you mods gets the idea that you know better than anyone else and how others should think and be, you will take a long hard look at yourself.

    So CENSOR is the only word that can be used here in this thread called Censorship. Thank you for listening to me.
    If you choose to censor this rant then it only proves what I have said. Remember freedom of speech?

  32. Link to Post #17
    United States Moderator Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Location
    journeying to the end of the night
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,951
    Thanks
    24,869
    Thanked 31,155 times in 3,847 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    hey Waves, please keep it civil! Thanks my friend

    Folks, there's some potential to have a productive discussion here.

    Before posting, please just ground yourself a little and release any tension or excessive emotion at the door.


  33. The Following 21 Users Say Thank You to Mike For This Post:

    Aragorn (11th July 2019), AutumnW (11th July 2019), Clarity (14th July 2019), Constance (11th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), Elen (12th July 2019), Franny (11th July 2019), gini (11th July 2019), greybeard (11th July 2019), Ivanhoe (11th July 2019), Jayke (11th July 2019), KiwiElf (11th July 2019), Lost N Found (11th July 2019), mountain_jim (14th July 2019), onevoice (11th July 2019), Rhogar (11th July 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), Star Mariner (11th July 2019), Star Tsar (11th July 2019), Wind (11th July 2019), Words of Joy (12th July 2019)

  34. Link to Post #18
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Posts
    625
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3,228 times in 561 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Mike (here)
    hey Waves, please keep it civil! Thanks my friend

    Folks, there's some potential to have a productive discussion here.

    Before posting, please just ground yourself a little and release any tension or excessive emotion at the door.

    I did for 590+ posts over 8 years, but I'm fed up. I don't see any helpful discussion here, I see the same tunnel visioned names repeating and repeating and repeating themselves, hopelessly unwilling to look outside their box.
    I predict not ONE of them is going to ever get even a little what anyone they don't agree with is trying to tell them.
    Nothing will change without a big house cleaning of those hopelessly not here to listen and learn.
    Last edited by waves; 11th July 2019 at 05:53.

  35. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to waves For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019)

  36. Link to Post #19
    United States Moderator Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Location
    journeying to the end of the night
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,951
    Thanks
    24,869
    Thanked 31,155 times in 3,847 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    it was a pretty good rant Lost N Found. i give it a 7.5

    sure, there are a few mods who aren't Q fans. but there are also some that don't care either way, and a few who are mostly apolitical. by no means is it an anti-Q hit squad or anything.

    it would be much easier for us to pick a side! we haven't done that. we've done everything we can to play this thing right down the middle, and to be as fair as we possibly can to both sides. and in the process, we've managed to disappoint everyone at one time or another we are well aware of this, but we've decided to do what we feel is right for Avalon anyway. it's not fun dodging all those arrows, let me tell you. but we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't....and if I have a criticism of our membership, it's that they're completely and utterly blind to that fact

    It doesn't appear that you do know why those other mods left, with respect. Very little to do with Q, if anything.

    You suggested we mods take a good long look at ourselves. I'll do that, but I'm asking you to do the same exact thing. You're angry, I can see that. But your anger doesn't make you right. It just makes you angry. Our decision to move the Q thread was not an emotional one, and it was not a hostile one. It was a logical one, based on quite a bit of deliberation and deep thought, you might be surprised to know
    Last edited by Mike; 11th July 2019 at 05:49.

  37. The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Mike For This Post:

    Aragorn (11th July 2019), AutumnW (11th July 2019), Clarity (14th July 2019), Clear Light (12th July 2019), Constance (11th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), Elen (12th July 2019), Franny (11th July 2019), greybeard (11th July 2019), Ivanhoe (11th July 2019), Nasu (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), Wind (11th July 2019), wondering (11th July 2019)

  38. Link to Post #20
    United States Moderator Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Location
    journeying to the end of the night
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,951
    Thanks
    24,869
    Thanked 31,155 times in 3,847 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by waves (here)
    Quote Posted by Mike (here)
    hey Waves, please keep it civil! Thanks my friend

    Folks, there's some potential to have a productive discussion here.

    Before posting, please just ground yourself a little and release any tension or excessive emotion at the door.

    I did for 590+ posts over 8 years, but I'm fed up. I don't see any helpful discussion here, I see the same tunnel visioned names repeating and repeating and repeating themselves, hopelessly unwilling to look outside their box.
    I predict not ONE of them is going to ever get even a little what anyone they don't agree with is trying to tell them.
    Nothing will change without a big house cleaning if those hopelessly not here to listen and learn.


    fair enough!

    but the Q folks are thinking the same exact things about you, just for the opposite reasons.

    it's an emotional and intellectual wash. invectively hammering home the same points ad nauseum won't help

    we may not be able to make any head-way here, but let's not make things any worse! there's a big difference between mere tension and all out warfare. if we can merely keep it at the tension level, perhaps we will have succeeded. we don't need to be killing each other here

  39. The Following 19 Users Say Thank You to Mike For This Post:

    Ally S. (11th July 2019), Aragorn (11th July 2019), AutumnW (11th July 2019), Clarity (14th July 2019), Constance (11th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (12th July 2019), drneglector (13th July 2019), Elen (12th July 2019), Franny (11th July 2019), greybeard (11th July 2019), Ivanhoe (11th July 2019), Jayke (11th July 2019), KiwiElf (11th July 2019), Lost N Found (11th July 2019), muxfolder (11th July 2019), raregem (12th October 2019), Sadieblue (11th July 2019), Wind (11th July 2019), wondering (11th July 2019)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 18 1 11 18 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts