• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Fuck The Draft - Voice your opposition


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

#31 David

  • Guest
  • 618 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Perth Australia

Posted 17 November 2003 - 05:29 AM

Hey Will, 'fess up, you planned this from the beginning, didn't you? Wonder which one of the leadership fell for your ambush. Only one word to describe your efforts this time mate:

"NICE"

Well done buddy!

Dave.

#32 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 17 November 2003 - 05:36 AM

Well... I take the blame on this one.. it's a systems problem which was propagated by my previous requests to leadership to edit such posts.. Sorry.

#33 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 17 November 2003 - 05:38 AM

Oh no! What happened to the title of this thread? Did your conscience get the better of you, Bill.  :))


No Jace, that is not what has happened, and I will not be addressing this tonight, because I do not wish to speak in Anger. But I can tell you, steam is pouring out of my ears [angry]

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#34 kevin

  • Member, Guardian
  • 2,779 posts
  • 822

Posted 17 November 2003 - 05:44 AM

It was 'Fuck the Draft...' twas not I who doth edited it although I'm happy to change it back..

#35 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 17 November 2003 - 05:46 AM

Thanks Kevin.

#36 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 17 November 2003 - 05:56 AM

Seems we have no policy in place for ImmInst leadership and editing posts.. thus... my request in the past to 'clean up' posts.. asked of leadership is far too vague. 

I'm scheduling a chat session with leadership to discuss this Sun. Nov 23 and have asked leaders to hold of on editing any posts until we have a polich in place.

--By the way... anyone remember what the title was originally?


I appreciate that you're protecting one of your directors, but it stretches my Imagination to believe that any one director was so out of touch, that he did not know the scope or nature of the issue of the speech/censorship problem, especially in light that the Constitution Voting was suspended. I find it beyond belief that the individual held no knowledge. Am I to believe that Directors with the level of intelligence that they all posses, were clueless, am I to believe that all of the directors did not talk amoung themselves, that they did not edjucate themselves of the issues at hand. That Bruce, I can not believe.

But as I Stated to Jace, I want to deal with this tomorrow.
Thank You Bruce

#37 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 17 November 2003 - 06:00 AM

It was 'Fuck the Draft...'  twas not I who doth edited it although I'm happy to change it back..


I know who did, only one person fits the profile. I know it wasn't you, but that person, because of how smart he is, will be able to figure out that I "know".

#38 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 17 November 2003 - 06:02 AM

Well, directors are not the only individuals who can edit posts, all ImmInst Leaders have this editing authority.

The leader in question was only working to fulfill my shoddy directive from earlier days. Again, I take full responsibly.

#39 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 18 November 2003 - 01:11 AM

Dear Micheal Anissimov,

I would like to express regret and apologise for my conduct last night regarding the issue of a title change in the forum. This is a letter of acknowledgment, and is intended as an atonement for improper and injurious remarks and expressive acts that were directed at you by me. This is an admission of wrongdoing on my part for the discourtesy done to you.
Last night my title to the thread "F@#k the Draft" was changed to something else, and I issued what can best be described as an "Accuser" post. While I did not directly with words accuse you by name, I made a strong indirect reference by words, and by way of expression by way of attaching my "Accuser" post to all of your named topic titles. While I stopped just short of accusing you, no one could possibly mistake the message I was trying to convey. This was both unwise and imprudent of me.

I offer an apology to you because I was in the wrong, and I would like to take this opportunity to bring forward some palliating circumstance. My excuse is not grounded on the claim of innocence, but is rather an appeal for favor resting on some collateral circumstance while still tendering a frank acknowledgment of my wrong.

Last night someone acting "anonymously" changed my topic title and I immediately went shearching for the culprit and noticed that you had mere minutes before had deleted (not anonymously) one of Rev. Bush's posts. Your timing was bad as it appeared to me that you were holding the smoking gun. I considered that reasonable suspicion and probable cause to believe that you were the one who committed this act. I knew that this was not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, so I strongly alluded to the fact that I believed it was you.

I make an apology for my breach of propriety and decorum and ask for a pardon of my fault and my offense against you. I hope you can forgive me.

This Micheal is all I can offer, and that may not be enough, and I regret that I can do no more.

Humbly and Sincerely,
Mea Culpa,
William O'Rights

#40 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 18 November 2003 - 01:19 AM

To the person who attempted to edit my Title.

I believe that there are some liberties that that will always come at a cost. We decide whether we wish to ante up.

As a sentient adult, I can not allow myself to come under your censure.
It is not that I do not appreciate your efforts.
It is not that I do not respect your authority.

#41 MichaelAnissimov

  • Guest
  • 905 posts
  • 1
  • Location:San Francisco, CA

Posted 18 November 2003 - 02:20 AM

I'm against this word for use on the forums, because I don't want to give casual forum surfers the wrong idea about the average level of quality for posts here. This word can also bring out the worst in humans; trying to stir up runaways emotions, and all of that. You shouldn't need that word to make any of your points. The word is better suited to angsty teenagers than serious adults, in my opinion.

#42 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 18 November 2003 - 02:58 AM

I'm against this word for use on the forums, because I don't want to give casual forum surfers the wrong idea about the average level of quality for posts here.  This word can also bring out the worst in humans; trying to stir up runaways emotions, and all of that.  You shouldn't need that word to make any of your points.  The word is better suited to angsty teenagers than serious adults, in my opinion.


Well Micheal, it was a 19-year-old department store worker who expressed his opposition to the Vietnam War by wearing a jacket emblazoned with "FUCK THE DRAFT. STOP THE WAR".

Questions Micheal. Are these words utterly without redeeming social value?

Would Cohen have been just as effective in his opposition to the draft by scrawling the words "Stop the Draft" on his jacket?

Can we indulge the facile assumption that one can forbid particular words without also running a substantial risk of suppressing ideas in the process?

Can you seriously maintain that phrases like "Repeal the Draft," "Resist the Draft," or "The Draft Must Go" convey essentially the same message as "Fuck the Draft." Clearly Micheal, something is lost in the translation.

#43 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 18 November 2003 - 03:06 AM

  This word can also bring out the worst in humans; trying to stir up runaways emotions, and all of that.  You shouldn't need that word to make any of your points. 


I am aware that many object to the severity of this language; but when it comes to war and death, is there not cause for severity? On this subject, should we think, or speak, or write with moderation. I say NO. Tell a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm; tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands of a rapist; tell a mother to gradually extricate her babe from the fire into which it has fallen; but urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present. I must be earnest, I can not eqivocate-I will not excuse. I can not retreat a single inch.

#44 David

  • Guest
  • 618 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Perth Australia

Posted 18 November 2003 - 03:21 AM

It looks as if my old mate who loves bush is getting himslef deleted. Hope I didn't participate in that by stirring him up too much. Anyway, if he's still around, I have suggested elsewhere that he start his own thread on the topic of his choosing, namely, his strange violent beliefs, and that anyone who wants to discuss it with him meet him there.

Has he been assigned to "Cyber death" or is he just feeling the wrath of deleted posts? I'd like to be his "devils advocate" and respectfully ask that he be allowed back in if he's been "executed". It might be a good idea to laydown the ground rules for him though, he may not have understood them all that well. He didn't seem all that bright......

You can't hate a dog for wagging its tail, by the way. This is after all a discussion of free speech after all. C'mon guys, you let Jace and I off with a warning, I don't see one here for The Bush fella?

David

#45 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 18 November 2003 - 03:29 AM

I'm against this word for use on the forums, because I don't want to give casual forum surfers the wrong idea about the average level of quality for posts here.  This word can also bring out the worst in humans; trying to stir up runaways emotions, and all of that.  You shouldn't need that word to make any of your points.  The word is better suited to angsty teenagers than serious adults, in my opinion.

Relevant text from above Quote:

I'm against this word...
I don't want to give...
You shouldn't need that word...
in my opinion.



Every individual arbitrarily draws a moral line between right and wrong, conveniently placing it so that his or her actions lie to the "right" side of his or her line. Where the other person draws his or her lines may not seem rational by your standards, but the person who thinks for themselves is not particularly concerned with your's or my opinions, especially if they disagree with most of the values we espouse.

Every person subjectively draws his/her own lines concerning what is and is not proper action, based either on his/her own moral standards, the moral standards of others, or what is convenient for him/her at the time of the action. The net result is that his/her actions, to one extent or another, express his/her definitions of words or actions.

Every human being is a participant in the Line-Drawing Game whether or not he/she chooses to be. Through his/her every action he/she advertises to the world which side of which lines he/she stands.

The conflicts arises when someone begins drawing lines for people other than themselves. Since billions of individuals can never agree on all things at all times (a slight understatement, to say the least), an idea like "someone has to draw the line somewhere" is utter nonsense. The obvious response to such an unrealistic and dangerous idea is, "But who shall be the one to draw it?"

Unfortunately, there has never been a scarcity of people willing to step forth and draw lines for everyone. And since the reality is that all members of a society can never agree simultaneously on even one thing, any line drawn by others, is destined make many people unhappy.

Though we have no choice but to participate in the game, it is within our power to be satisfied drawing lines only for ourselves and resisting the urge to draw them for others.

#46 Jace Tropic

  • Guest
  • 285 posts
  • 0

Posted 18 November 2003 - 03:37 AM

I also think that the pedantry and the staid veneer are patronizing. I personally avoid them, because it is actually very dangerous and futile in the real world.

Jace

#47 Cyto

  • Guest
  • 1,096 posts
  • 1

Posted 18 November 2003 - 03:47 AM

I know who did, only one person fits the profile. I know it wasn't you, but that person, because of how smart he is, will be able to figure out that I "know".


Well of course you know. It said CarboniX at the bottom.

#48 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 18 November 2003 - 03:53 AM

Well of course you know.  It said CarboniX at the bottom.


How did that escape all of our attentions?

#49 MichaelAnissimov

  • Guest
  • 905 posts
  • 1
  • Location:San Francisco, CA

Posted 18 November 2003 - 05:04 AM

William, I don't really care about the draft. I'm not afraid one will happen. If I were drafted, I would probably just run away to Canada. If a draft were required to avoid a threat equal in magnitude to the evil of instituting a draft, I would advocate one.

#50 MichaelAnissimov

  • Guest
  • 905 posts
  • 1
  • Location:San Francisco, CA

Posted 18 November 2003 - 05:50 AM

William, I'm not trying to draw lines between right and wrong for anybody, I am just of the opinion that we should not allow swear words on these forums, for the purposes of turning certain people off. It's ImmInst's webspace, and ImmInst's forums, and it's our right to censor certain words if we decide it's appropriate. But, it seems like the consensus opinion among ImmInst Leaders (although not all the votes are in, yet) seems to be that swearing is OK. If this is the final result, then I'll be supporting that in the future.

#51 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 19 November 2003 - 03:49 AM

William, I don't really care about the draft.  I'm not afraid one will happen.  If I were drafted, I would probably just run away to Canada.  If a draft were required to avoid a threat equal in magnitude to the evil of instituting a draft, I would advocate one.


You might be missing the point Micheal, this thread really isn't about the draft. In order for this thread to make sense, you should read the thread on the "vote." Formally known as "Bill of Right".

#52 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 19 November 2003 - 03:53 AM

William, I'm not trying to draw lines between right and wrong for anybody, I am just of the opinion that we should not allow swear words on these forums, for the purposes of turning certain people off. 


I respect that opinion, I just do not believe that we should use force to eradicate swearing.

#53 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 19 November 2003 - 04:00 AM

Well of course you know. It said CarboniX at the bottom


Helix when you edit a post it shows up when you edit an entire thread by editing the title section where would it show up?

Nobody knew who did it and it went unnoticed since you had not posted a note in the thead advising anyone. Ironic that the thread was about the issue of free speech. [":)]

To confirm what I just stated I scanned the entire thread and not one post contains an "Edited By... " line. Just so you know.

#54 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 19 November 2003 - 05:23 AM

Helix when you edit a post it shows up when you edit an entire thread by editing the title section where would it show up?

Nobody knew who did it and it went unnoticed since you had not posted a note in the thead advising anyone.  Ironic that the thread was about the issue of free speech.  [":)]

To confirm what I just stated I scanned the entire thread and not one post contains an "Edited By... " line.  Just so you know.


Thank You Laz, I was wondering why I couldn't find it.

#55 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 19 November 2003 - 05:40 AM

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you CarboniX, for providing a perfect demostration of why this power should not be given to anyone at this site, and for clearly displaying the potential for it's abuse.

NICE JOB.

#56 Cyto

  • Guest
  • 1,096 posts
  • 1

Posted 19 November 2003 - 07:02 AM

I know it said I changed it, otherwise I would not talk about it. It must of canceled out somehow when kevin changed it back. You know as well as I, the forum still has it's quarks.
__________________________________________________________

T.F.I.,

Look I can deal with it in conversation because people can't always sit and think about what they are going to say - they need short and simple ways of getting an emotional point accross. But when someone makes a speech, does a thead to tell of something, writes a book etc they have a lot more time to flesh out the idea and why they would normaly feel the need to use such language to illustrate it.

Life should be like many fine silks - warming you
-------------------------------------------------holding you
-----------------------------------------------------head to toe.
Why does life scorn me, laugh at me, while it strips these layers

----------------from my skin.

Instead of:

Aging sucks goat balls.

Thats my point, and I sure don't see any research papers saying "the PCR machine was acting really fu**ed up when we did this so take this paper with a fu**ing grain of salt, OK?"

The writings that deal with a wider range of people don't swear in them - we don't need to swear in ours.

#57 Bruce Klein

  • Guardian Founder
  • 8,794 posts
  • 242
  • Location:United States

Posted 19 November 2003 - 08:38 AM

ImmInst's first priority is not to be a Free Speech haven.

ImmInst's first priority is to its mission.

CarboniX has demonstrated a commitment to ImmInst's mission and has been elected to the Leadership position of Navigator. He was acting to further the mission and in response to my suggestions... which were unclear. Leadership has since outlined Moderation guidelines which should help.

#58 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 19 November 2003 - 06:33 PM

I know it said I changed it, otherwise I would not talk about it.  It must of canceled out somehow when kevin changed it back.  You know as well as I, the forum still has it's quarks.


CarboniX,
I for one did not see it, nor did several others, having said that, I never for one moment believed that you were being dishonest. You seemed to quickly come out in your post and rapidly claim your action.

I am not going to question the fact that you believe that your name was attached to the edit, whether it was or not is a seperate matter from your belief. I for one am not willing to call your honor and integrity into question on that matter, and I boldly suggest that unless any of us can get inside of CarboniX's head and prove differently, that we all accecpt his belief that an attachment so existed.

Let's move past this bump in the road.

I am editting this by adding the following.

Your bold Quote
"Well of course you know. It said CarboniX at the bottom."
Is ample proof for me that you believed that such a tag existed.

Edited by thefirstimmortal, 19 November 2003 - 08:16 PM.


#59 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 19 November 2003 - 06:47 PM

T.F.I.,
Life should be like many fine silks - warming you
-------------------------------------------------holding you
-----------------------------------------------------head to toe.
Why does life scorn me, laugh at me, while it strips these layers

----------------from my skin.


Every time I look in the bathroom mirror, I see Death, the Eternal Footman (looking quite proud), standing in the shadows behind me, holding my coat, snickering.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#60 thefirstimmortal

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member The First Immortal
  • 6,912 posts
  • 31

Posted 19 November 2003 - 06:53 PM

Life should be like many fine silks - warming you
-------------------------------------------------holding you
-----------------------------------------------------head to toe.
Why does life scorn me, laugh at me, while it strips these layers

----------------from my skin.

Instead of:

Aging sucks goat balls.


Now CarboniX,
as I look at these two writing, I must confess that the poetry seem to be nicer,... but less expressive.
I'm not all too sure as to what the poem means, I get the point of the latter, "Aging sucks goat balls" may not be as poetic, but the point is clear and more unmistakable.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users