What the heck is going on here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeghanOOD

Mosquito of course I don't read every link you post on here I have a full-time job, am a mother to young children, and I have limited time or patience for propaganda of any variety.
Yeah, different people are going to have different views, as I've stated, people are complex organisms that vary, and ADMIN/MODS are no exception to the rule. I think the fact that we're having this discussion proves that we're not in the business of censorship, either. We welcome public discourse, of every kind, provided it's respectful. This is a Forum for that very thing. Here are the guidelines for what we expect in regards to that respect:
https://www.oodmag.com/community/sho...-Rules-Conduct

---

I didn't say you had to read all mine or all of anyones, here is the video in reference though
https://rumble.com/vurux1-now-you-do...s-trudeau.html

I am just saying that if someone is going to start deleting and locking threads there is an approval process and the person(s) that approve it have a particular criteria in mind. As I said, there are those that like and embrace the lie and hate truth and the opposite.

"The most offensive is not their lying—one can always forgive lying—lying is a delightful thing, for it leads to truth—what is offensive is that they lie and worship their own lying…" Fyodor Dostoyevsky





"There can be no democracy without truth. There can be no truth without controversy, there can be no change without freedom. Without freedom there can be no progress." Andrew Young


Truth IS Controversial to those that love the lie, I am just suggesting your or another admin has to read and approve the deleting and locking of a thread and not just an individuals prejudices. It makes it harder for the admins when there isn't clear guidelines IF they care about the integrity of their job. I know I would make a terrible admin, I would loose my temper at some of the lies and b.s. too easily if I had the responsibility, as is I can just say "what b.s." and forget it.


Now as for the group, the Chinese dictatorship, Stalin, Goebbels etc. all did not work alone, it was their supporters that made their action possible so to dismiss the fact that we have a ethics violating, conflict of interest guilty, liar etc. as a PM and to ignore those responsible for supporting him takes the individual accountability and throws it out the window. They are like the gang supporters who supply the handguns, knives, drugs etc. but don't actually sell them, they supply the funds, votes and propagate what are empirically falsehoods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

That’s hardly a “personal” insult or attack. It refers to a group, not an individual. So from your personal perspective, if someone said “criminals” were scum, that would be a “personal attack”??? Really isn’t hard at all !!

---

Being a Liberal isn't a crime. Being a criminal is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Being a Liberal isn't a crime. Being a criminal is.

---

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” George Orwell

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Badenoch

Being a Liberal isn't a crime. Being a criminal is.

---

What has that got to do with “personal attacks “?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

That’s hardly a “personal” insult or attack. It refers to a group, not an individual. So from your personal perspective, if someone said “criminals” were scum, that would be a “personal attack”??? Really isn’t hard at all !!

---

That's a fair point, it really depends on the context of the situation, though, as I've stated. Sometimes it starts off as a conflict of ideas, then denigrates over posts and someone says something antagonistic and then it just becomes a mud-slinging match. We didn't write the Rules we're just here to honour them; they have served this Forum well. Oftentimes it does become personal, not always, every situation is different. That's why we discuss situations in the MOD forum, as a group.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mosquito

Hmm.... looking at the results, based on he current criteria the admins can delete anything THEY find offensive based on their political, moral or ethics views and just say "its offensive" and censor a thread to fit their prejudices regardless of their veracity. One admin likes free speech and another censors and locks down discussions based on "offensive" ... well truth is offensive to some, political decisions this government are making are offensive to me and some and to others disagreeing with the government dictates is offensive, questioning the WEF or WHO gets the current government calling you names but gets the government compared to Hitler... sure must be offensiveness there to the ideologues. Just dodge the responsibility and let the admins run free and censor without justification, just perceived offence. Taking their role model from the Libs in their censoring, no appeal, no respect just delete away.... rather pathetic.

Why not something simple like it take approval to lock a thread or delete posts? Why not some criteria? Free speech and truth are obviously offensive to many on the left, hence the former Liberal MPs quoting of Joseph Goebbels to just repeat the talking points until they believe, here the censors can delete the facts and leave the talking points, regardless of their veracity.

Ah well, I guess I can just keep planting truth seeds and let the fiction based followers learn or ignore and try to kill the plant if they want, won't change reality.

---

This is precisely the kind of garbage that people are referring to.

YOU as a posting member overload the forums with Youtube links, and CCFR links, providing a very narrow narrative. Toeing the line ever so carefully around the rules, and stepping over them repeatedly crying "mea culpa" when you're called out. You passive aggressively insult any viewpoint that might run contrary to yours. But then refuse to actually engage in much discussion about the outdoors, fishing, or hunting.

Your participation in the "off topic" section is very healthy though.

You make baseless assertions as to what occurs when threads are locked / deleted, and infractions given.....might surprise you to know how many chances lots of users are given......but that wouldn't preclude you from making thinly veiled suggestions that admins or mods are communists or Nazis....

And people wonder why the forums are seeing a downturn in participation and traffic......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

What has that got to do with “personal attacks “?

---

If you can't see a group is made up of individuals and attaching an insult to that group is in fact insulting the individual than I can't help you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeghanOOD

T.............We didn't write the Rules we're just here to honour them..............

---

This very thread -and the happenings earlier -points perhaps towards the need of "changing "some of the rules.

I am not sure if that is doable ,but the way the history of rules was presented : one former person in authority created them.If so-another one can change them.
If there is a will,there will be a way.

I am not talking radical or changes against the"law",just changes which would give some slack/feeling for the members of "having a say"


All that with one goal in mind-to work with the Members.

At the end-no Members = No Forum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finsfurfeathers

If you can't see a group is made up of individuals and attaching an insult to that group is in fact insulting the individual than I can't help you.

---

You best look up the meaning of “ personal” as in “personal attack”…, if you can’t grasp that meaning, I can’t help you either. I’ll help ….

[COLOR=#000000][COLOR=#202124]per·son·al

/ˈpərs(ə)n(ə)l/
https://www.oodmag.com/community/ima...c Cjwvc3ZnPgo=Learn to pronounce




[COLOR=#000000][COLOR=#70757A]See definitions in:

[COLOR=#000000][COLOR=#70757A]adjective

• 1.
  of, affecting, or belonging to a particular person rather than to anyone else.
  [COLOR=#70757A]"her personal fortune was recently estimated at $37 million"
  
  
  
  

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gbk

This very thread -and the happenings earlier -points perhaps towards the need of "changing "some of the rules.

I am not sure if that is doable ,but the way the history of rules was presented : one former person in authority created them.If so-another one can change them.
If there is a will,there will be a way.

I am not talking radical or changes against the"law",just changes which would give some slack/feeling for the members of "having a say"


All that with one goal in mind-to work with the Members.

At the end-no Members = No Forum

---

What would you amend or change, gbk?
https://www.oodmag.com/community/sho...-Rules-Conduct