+ Reply to Thread
Page 18 of 21 FirstFirst 1 8 18 21 LastLast
Results 341 to 360 of 420

Thread: The 'censorship' discussion

  1. Link to Post #341
    UK Avalon Member Star Mariner's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Posts
    1,690
    Thanks
    9,454
    Thanked 10,886 times in 1,611 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    who jumped to conclusions about my being some kind of ever-present 24/7 being who never sleeps or eats or does anything else and reads every post on the forum within minutes of it appearing and magically knows when something's there that's there to be read or answered.
    Damn, reality bomb. Image shattered!

    (( It was a JOKE!! ))

    "When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace."
    ~ Jimi Hendrix

  2. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Star Mariner For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (15th December 2019), justntime2learn (17th July 2019), Ken (19th July 2019), Kryztian (13th December 2019), PurpleLama (18th July 2019), RunningDeer (17th July 2019)

  3. Link to Post #342
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    134
    Thanks
    253
    Thanked 475 times in 128 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    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.
    Of course that wasn't censorship!
    Not even close.

    A guy wanting to make money or a living is not censorship.
    Funny, but if you pay the bucks for membership, you are no longer 'censored'.
    What he did is what's called "doing business".

  4. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to DaveToo For This Post:

    Clear Light (17th July 2019), Denise/Dizi (15th December 2019), edina (18th July 2019), Ken (19th July 2019), petra (29th July 2019), silvanelf (19th July 2019)

  5. Link to Post #343
    United States Moderator James's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th November 2018
    Posts
    180
    Thanks
    361
    Thanked 1,407 times in 170 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

    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.)
    This is a really interesting conversation (for the most part!)



    I personally do not think of Richard's choice to have a members-only area as censorship, in the way we use the word censorship in our standard lexicon.

    Quote
    cen·sorship
    /ˈsensərSHip/

    noun

    1.
    the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.
    I think this speaks to a larger issue of paywalling, in its many forms, and the effect this process has on mass consciousness.

    Scientists obscure knowledge using sub-specialization-specific jargon. Musicians used to throw an avant grade track as the opener to a new record to deter the casual listener. Catholic clergy and attorneys speak from their books in latin. A traveling entertainer charges 50 cents to see the skull of a three-eyed cow.

    Sometimes, when we create or find something special, we don't want that special thing to be trampled on. We want it to remain curated, and maybe more importantly, we want to be recognized as the one who created or found it. We want to manage the little rising star and see it to its potential.

    A paywall, in its many forms, accomplishes both tasks, and has for millennia.

    With the advent of the Internet, we've cracked many of these paywalls, sometimes nefariously, but the concept continues to bubble up in new incarnations.

    I don't think Richard is censoring his work, as it seems from the outside to be a slicing the steak in half and putting the rest in the fridge for his own family to eat later, but since it's likely all the same steak, I can't say that one half is more dangerous or different than the other, and as the man at the grill, as long as he's not throwing any of the steak away, or using GMOs, I'm pretty ok with things for the moment.

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to James For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (15th December 2019), edina (18th July 2019), Ken (19th July 2019)

  7. Link to Post #344
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    134
    Thanks
    253
    Thanked 475 times in 128 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Variant (here)
    I don't think Richard is censoring his work,...

    Yes and how often do we become upset when someone self-censors as opposed to
    censoring others' viewpoints, work etc.?

    BIG difference.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DaveToo For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (15th December 2019), edina (18th July 2019)

  9. Link to Post #345
    Philippines Avalon Member
    Join Date
    29th May 2013
    Age
    54
    Posts
    2,473
    Thanks
    4,148
    Thanked 9,077 times in 2,144 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    I've got one question to ask for everyone. Who of you here post a thread and does not read every reply on the thread you created.
    there is no need to bother posting your answer, Just answer the question for yourself.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bubu For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (15th December 2019), edina (15th December 2019)

  11. Link to Post #346
    Brazil Avalon Member RogeRio's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2019
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Language
    Portuguese
    Posts
    290
    Thanks
    1,334
    Thanked 1,327 times in 263 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    I think some censorships looks like ward off mere onlookers for not to crowd and make a mess.
    Anyway, the selection of one "price to pay" its a consequence of law of supply and demands ..

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RogeRio For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (6th January 2020), edina (15th December 2019)

  13. Link to Post #347
    Netherlands Avalon Member ExomatrixTV's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2011
    Location
    Netherlands
    Language
    Dutch
    Age
    53
    Posts
    3,892
    Thanks
    3,403
    Thanked 19,791 times in 3,317 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Maybe it is (temporary?) withholding vital information for the unprivileged!
    ~no need2follow anyone only consider to broaden (y)our horizon of possibilities
    ~new: Stop5G.net & FB Groups/Stop5G

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ExomatrixTV For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (6th January 2020), edina (15th December 2019)

  15. Link to Post #348
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th January 2011
    Location
    Outback in the Four Corners
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    12,760
    Thanked 13,099 times in 1,680 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by ExomatrixTV (here)
    Maybe it is (temporary?) withholding vital information for the unprivileged!
    I agree Exomatrix. Very sad indeed.

    This is one of the biggest conversations on the planet, and especially on the Internet right now.

    And it's a very interesting conversation in the hidden thread here.

    Oh well ... Avalon's loss. (IMO)

    By now, most people have figured out how to find the Q Posts at QMap and Qpub.

    And therefore, have moved on to more open spaces.

    On the broader sense of the topic, I am encouraged by the many calls to "transparency".

    Someone I read, suggested that people make decisions about who they will vote for on the basis that they say they will be "Transparent."

    Sunshine is the best disinfectant.


    I think also, there is a real need to help people figure out how to process all the information, or intelligence, as Robert David Steele refers to it, that is now coming out into the open.

    This is something I've been thinking a great deal about, lately.
    Last edited by edina; 15th December 2019 at 16:46.

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

    Denise/Dizi (6th January 2020), ExomatrixTV (15th December 2019), gini (6th January 2020), RunningDeer (15th December 2019)

  17. Link to Post #349
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th January 2011
    Location
    Outback in the Four Corners
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    12,760
    Thanked 13,099 times in 1,680 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Bubu (here)
    I've got one question to ask for everyone. Who of you here post a thread and does not read every reply on the thread you created.
    there is no need to bother posting your answer, Just answer the question for yourself.
    Bubu, in case you read this, you are missed.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to edina For This Post:

    Denise/Dizi (6th January 2020), RunningDeer (15th December 2019)

  19. Link to Post #350
    United States Avalon Member Denise/Dizi's Avatar
    Join Date
    2nd July 2017
    Age
    50
    Posts
    808
    Thanks
    8,776
    Thanked 4,755 times in 791 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Bubu (here)
    I've got one question to ask for everyone. Who of you here post a thread and does not read every reply on the thread you created.
    there is no need to bother posting your answer, Just answer the question for yourself.
    I will answer Babu, I have done it. I am sure that many well intentioned members will admit to having done it as well. There are many reasons for such things as well. Someone thinks a topic would make a great basis for conversation and exploration... They have questions they wish to find answers for, or they're just offering some input on this wonderful site.

    The reasons for not reading all of the replies on threads can be vast, too many threads going at once to keep up with, (And in this case, a very real possibility for Bill as the site owner/operator)...

    People do what they can with what they have to keep Avalon moving forward. Time, money, input.. for that I do not criticize any of them, they're merely sharing their opinions and things they believe they have found that may be true, to the whole. For that I THANK THEM.
    Last edited by Denise/Dizi; 7th January 2020 at 12:05.

  20. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Denise/Dizi For This Post:

    edina (15th December 2019), Franny (7th January 2020), RunningDeer (15th December 2019), Tintin (7th January 2020)

  21. Link to Post #351
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,696
    Thanks
    27,925
    Thanked 50,550 times in 10,237 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    I really hope the Q thread isn't made public again!
    I think it would bring many more Q fanatics back to Avalon and a re-play of the whole divisive scene all over again.
    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

    As some reading this will know, the whole Qanon issue (with several members, not all still here or active) seemed to generate strength of feeling, emotion, antagonism and sometimes even sheer unpleasantness (even behind the scenes among some of the mods) that was really hard to understand.

    Thankfully, that steadily-burning but erosively-destructive fire, that was extremely hard to control, has now died down and is pretty much cold out. We've even considered making the Q threads public again, as there's nothing happening any more that shows the forum in a poor light.

    We're very genuinely appreciative of that, taking the opportunity here to thank all those who are involved for their self-moderation and balance.

    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  22. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Aragorn (5th January 2020), Bill Ryan (5th January 2020), Denise/Dizi (6th January 2020), edina (5th January 2020), Gracy May (6th January 2020), James (7th January 2020), Ken (7th January 2020), Kryztian (6th January 2020), Peter UK (5th January 2020), Praxis (6th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Tintin (7th January 2020)

  23. Link to Post #352
    Avalon Member Aragorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th January 2014
    Location
    Middle-Earth
    Posts
    779
    Thanks
    8,306
    Thanked 5,211 times in 754 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    I really hope the Q thread isn't made public again!
    I think it would bring many more Q fanatics back to Avalon and a re-play of the whole divisive scene all over again.
    For what it's worth, Bill, I agree with onawah. Even though things have calmed down somewhat since the threads were made members-only and a few members left the premises, the fire underneath is still smoldering, and a draft of fresh oxygen could easily reignite it into the bonfire it was.


  24. The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Aragorn For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (5th January 2020), Denise/Dizi (6th January 2020), edina (5th January 2020), Franny (7th January 2020), Gracy May (5th January 2020), James (7th January 2020), justntime2learn (6th January 2020), Ken (7th January 2020), onawah (5th January 2020), Peter UK (5th January 2020), Praxis (6th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Tintin (7th January 2020), Wind (6th January 2020)

  25. Link to Post #353
    United States Avalon Member Ratszinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    9th September 2018
    Posts
    606
    Thanks
    1,201
    Thanked 3,400 times in 575 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Attacking the USA embassy is an act of war. Even NATO agrees and also they agree that a cyber attack is an act of war. The divide is getting deeper and many democrats all over various venues are outright defending the enemy, calling the president, a duly elected president the traitor and this is a very bad time to be releasing something back out for everyone. Everyone is exploding even thanking those that state where they stand and even going so far as to say their grandhildren would helped off to Canada and so on. This would be seen as treason by most patriots of course and certainly by those supporting POTUS that have actually thanked some of those claiming to aid draft dodgers to evade being there when the country needs them so they know who not to turn their back on when the crap hits the fan! Leave it its about to be worse of a powder keg out there at least in the states than it already was. Today many folks are taking sides more so than I've seen in the past on my own facebook page.
    The genius consistently stands out from the masses in that he unconsciously anticipates truths of which the population as a whole only later becomes conscious! Speech-circa 1937

  26. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Ratszinger For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (6th January 2020), Denise/Dizi (6th January 2020), edina (5th January 2020), Tintin (7th January 2020)

  27. Link to Post #354
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    13th January 2011
    Location
    Outback in the Four Corners
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    12,760
    Thanked 13,099 times in 1,680 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    I really hope the Q thread isn't made public again!
    I think it would bring many more Q fanatics back to Avalon and a re-play of the whole divisive scene all over again.
    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

    As some reading this will know, the whole Qanon issue (with several members, not all still here or active) seemed to generate strength of feeling, emotion, antagonism and sometimes even sheer unpleasantness (even behind the scenes among some of the mods) that was really hard to understand.

    Thankfully, that steadily-burning but erosively-destructive fire, that was extremely hard to control, has now died down and is pretty much cold out. We've even considered making the Q threads public again, as there's nothing happening any more that shows the forum in a poor light.

    We're very genuinely appreciative of that, taking the opportunity here to thank all those who are involved for their self-moderation and balance.

    Thanks Bill for considering this, I hadn't noticed this until just now.

    I think the information that comes out of the Q Posts and associated research made available to the public could be helpful.

    I feel many readers would appreciate it.

  28. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to edina For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (6th January 2020), ClearWater (6th January 2020), Denise/Dizi (6th January 2020), Franny (7th January 2020), gini (6th January 2020), Sadieblue (6th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Tintin (7th January 2020)

  29. Link to Post #355
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    21st July 2010
    Age
    33
    Posts
    652
    Thanks
    305
    Thanked 2,986 times in 558 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Aragorn (here)
    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    I really hope the Q thread isn't made public again!
    I think it would bring many more Q fanatics back to Avalon and a re-play of the whole divisive scene all over again.
    For what it's worth, Bill, I agree with onawah. Even though things have calmed down somewhat since the threads were made members-only and a few members left the premises, the fire underneath is still smoldering, and a draft of fresh oxygen could easily reignite it into the bonfire it was.

    I want to echo this sentiment. I think that the politics threads that still happen in the public make this very clear. There are people that are living in completely different realities than other people on the forum. That is fine and usually doesnt rock the boat when talking aliens or spirituality or whatever.

    But when it comes to politics, it does matter because opinions get put out there that are 100% counter to reality( from my point of view). This prompts response. It has to. What you believe about Aliens doesnt really affect me and my family. But my Indonesian wife does get affected by the consequences of the current administration. Continually letting ICE and DHS do the things they are doing ( which now includes detaining Iranian americans, which affects my brother and his children as her heritage is Iranian, regardless of citizenship) does matter. Q anon and trump support is allowing these things to continue. My sister in law now has to worry going across the border of her home country when she travels.

    If the people who completely disagree with the narrative that the Q people are spinning do not publicly counter that narrative and call out where it is obviously not true then it gives the appearance that this website is PRO Q and PRO status quo. This then is what leads to the conflagration we had earlier.

    I can not in good conscience do that. I am working on not directing the critique at people( which I recently did with Sammy and I have spent time reflecting on that. Sorry I pointed it at you Sammy) but it needs to be voiced lest this place get labelled a Q anon supporting place or pro the status quo ( I do not support holding asylum seekers in concentration camps for instance). There are some here that do support Q Anon, which is fine for them. But this is not the same as this place being pro Q.

  30. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Praxis For This Post:

    Aragorn (6th January 2020), Bill Ryan (6th January 2020), Denise/Dizi (7th January 2020), Franny (7th January 2020), Gracy May (6th January 2020), Ken (7th January 2020), Mike (6th January 2020), onawah (6th January 2020), Tintin (7th January 2020)

  31. Link to Post #356
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,433
    Thanks
    8,464
    Thanked 9,708 times in 1,382 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    Thankfully, that steadily-burning but erosively-destructive fire, that was extremely hard to control, has now died down and is pretty much cold out. We've even considered making the Q threads public again, as there's nothing happening any more that shows the forum in a poor light.
    I would also be very unhappy to see the Q thread made public again. Yes, the fire has died down and the conversation is much more civil here (yay thanks to the mods who worked to make that happen ), however, I feel that the Q phenomena has diluted the critical thinking skills of many of our members and that the "ideology" of Q has spread to so many other threads on the forum. I completely avoid many of those threads, topics which I am quite interested in participating in but don't have the energy for because so many of the posts are informed by the cargo-cult vision of Q (e.g. anything to do with Trump, any controversial topic where the issues can be polarized as "liberal" or "conservative.") In most cases, I am glad for the diversity of opinion here, the different perspectives, the civil debate here. But when it comes to having a conversation with people that believe truth is grounded on a literal interpretation of the Bible (Christian Fundamentalists) or the veracity of the Qanon documents, I have lost all interest in participation.
    Last edited by Kryztian; 7th January 2020 at 01:19.

  32. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    Aragorn (7th January 2020), Bill Ryan (7th January 2020), Denise/Dizi (7th January 2020), Franny (7th January 2020), Gracy May (7th January 2020), James (7th January 2020), Ken (7th January 2020), onawah (7th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Tintin (7th January 2020), Wind (7th January 2020)

  33. Link to Post #357
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    20th February 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,007
    Thanks
    8,341
    Thanked 5,662 times in 932 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Kryztian (here)
    Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
    Thankfully, that steadily-burning but erosively-destructive fire, that was extremely hard to control, has now died down and is pretty much cold out. We've even considered making the Q threads public again, as there's nothing happening any more that shows the forum in a poor light.
    I would also be very unhappy to see the Q thread made public again. Yes, the fire has died down and the conversation is much more civil here, however, I feel that the Q phenomena has diluted the critical thinking skills of many of our members and that the "ideology" of Q has spread to so many other threads on the forum. I completely avoid many of those threads, topics which I am quite interested in participating in but don't have the energy for because so many of the posts are informed by the cargo-cult vision of Q (e.g. anything to do with Trump, any controversial topic where the issues can be polarized as "liberal" or "conservative.") In most cases, I am glad for the diversity of opinion here, the different perspectives, the civil debate here. But when it comes to having a conversation with people that believe truth is grounded on a literal interpretation of the Bible (Christian Fundamentalists) or the veracity of the Qanon documents, I have lost all interest in participation.
    For the record, there was a study published by Rachel Wyman Phd, Kings College University, London, called ‘America’s Political Paradigm Shift’. The study verified what the Q supporters have been saying since before the fires broke out.

    As Rachel Wyman states on page 248 of that paper, Qanons method “trains users to engage in self-directed research based on comparison. Research methods which promote critical comparison work to counteract the effects of totalitarian programming.”



    Interesting paper coming from a prestigious university. Why would we not want more people of Rachel Wymans calibre posting on Avalon?

  34. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Jayke For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th January 2020), Denise/Dizi (7th January 2020), edina (7th January 2020), Kryztian (7th January 2020), RunningDeer (7th January 2020), Sadieblue (8th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Tintin (7th January 2020)

  35. Link to Post #358
    Avalon Member ClearWater's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th March 2010
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 366 times in 46 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    There are kind and incredibly intelligent people on both sides of the Q fence. There are also mean, unintelligent people on both sides.

    There is justification for each 'side' to feel some frustration and angst towards those on the other side. And yet in clinging to these feelings we reinforce the idea that any 'side' exists to begin with. And though I fully realize that expecting humans not to identify for or against specific issues is unrealistically idealistic, I still hold out hope that we can recognize the impermanence of identification with any particular 'side'. Speaking of 'Q' people or 'non Q' people as if they are the personification of everything we imagine to be bad about the 'other side' does nobody any good at all. I still hold out hope that we can recognize the hearts and minds of individuals as primary, and any particular group or belief identification that person may have as secondary.

    In other words, we're not Q people on non-Q people. We're all humans being. Doesn't mean we all must agree. Disagreements can and should play out upon a ground of respect. If they can't/don't play out that way, it shouldn't be attributed to Q or any other thing that the people involved in it identify with. Hold the person/people responsible rather than blaming the group they identify with.
    "Be a Light to Yourself" ~ J. Krishnamurti

  36. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to ClearWater For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th January 2020), Bluegreen (7th January 2020), Denise/Dizi (7th January 2020), edina (7th January 2020), Franny (7th January 2020), Jayke (7th January 2020), peterpam (7th January 2020), RunningDeer (7th January 2020), Sadieblue (8th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Star Mariner (7th January 2020), Tintin (7th January 2020)

  37. Link to Post #359
    UK Avalon Member Star Mariner's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Posts
    1,690
    Thanks
    9,454
    Thanked 10,886 times in 1,611 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by ClearWater (here)
    Disagreements can and should play out upon a ground of respect.
    Absolutely, 100%, but they won't be. We've already seen exactly what will happen.

    At the moment, feelings are simmering quietly, and I'm thankful for that, but it would take very little for them to boil up and spill over, all over again. Lines have already been drawn in the sand with just the above posts.

    The question of whether Q should be public or members-only isn't really the issue anymore, not for me. For me it's simply about keeping the peace (because some have proven hands down that they can't keep it themselves). I would prefer to let sleeping dogs lie than witness another horror show. For the time being, until the absolute truth of this 'conspiracy theory' is known and accepted by all (to whatever end), the Q material should, for the sake of keeping the peace, stay where it is.
    "When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace."
    ~ Jimi Hendrix

  38. The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Star Mariner For This Post:

    Aragorn (7th January 2020), Bill Ryan (7th January 2020), ClearWater (7th January 2020), edina (7th January 2020), Franny (7th January 2020), Jayke (7th January 2020), Kryztian (7th January 2020), onawah (7th January 2020), Peter UK (7th January 2020), Sadieblue (8th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Tintin (7th January 2020), Victoria (8th January 2020), Wind (7th January 2020)

  39. Link to Post #360
    Avalon Member ClearWater's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th March 2010
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 366 times in 46 posts

    Default Re: The 'censorship' discussion

    Quote Posted by Star Mariner (here)
    Quote Posted by ClearWater (here)
    Disagreements can and should play out upon a ground of respect.
    The question of whether Q should be public or members-only isn't really the issue anymore, not for me. For me it's simply about keeping the peace (because some have proven hands down that they can't keep it themselves). I would prefer to let sleeping dogs lie than witness another horror show. For the time being, until the absolute truth of this 'conspiracy theory' is known and accepted by all (to whatever end), the Q material should, for the sake of keeping the peace, stay where it is.
    Whether or not the Qanon thread/s should be public or members only, I'll gladly leave to others to decide. I am wondering though, which troublesome people are being referred to? Are these specific people here on this forum (because I've not seen anything resembling what you're describing in the Q threads for a very long time)? Or is this a nebulous feeling that's being attributed to Qanon as a whole? And if 'keeping the peace' is the goal, should any thread which becomes tense (which is obviously up to individual interpretation) be removed from public view? If so, then should anything that might become tense be preemptively removed from public view?

    I understand the decision to move the thread to the Members Only section. I founded and run a forum myself, so I understand that keeping everything public purely out of principle is not going to happen - sometimes the well-being or even the literal existence of the forum is going to be prioritized. So again, I agree that it's not about whether or not this specific thread should be public or private. I'm trying to understand the underlying emotion and thought processes of people on both sides of the argument though. I'm trying to understand WHY we each hold the stance we do on this matter, see where that reasoning is based upon a balanced assessment of the current moment, and see where it may be a residual based upon previous experiences. And then if some clarity can be attained there, it can allow for balanced and 'peaceful' ongoing discussions.
    "Be a Light to Yourself" ~ J. Krishnamurti

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

    Bill Ryan (7th January 2020), edina (7th January 2020), Franny (7th January 2020), Jayke (7th January 2020), RunningDeer (7th January 2020), Sadieblue (8th January 2020), Sammy (7th January 2020), Star Mariner (7th January 2020)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 18 of 21 FirstFirst 1 8 18 21 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