Tutor Turtle makes some points about this which are true and he more or less advocates an open field no holes barred approach.
Not really. More of a conscious approach where a psychological balance is achieved, and where objectivity is a reality.
He advocates you can choose to ignore posts etc and in life we allow that but I do not have to attend KKK meetings or Neo_nazi meetings and give there message the time of day either I have the option to walk away.
See, here's the thing. FF posed a question regarding the information (links) he attached to his post. it would have been easy enough to respond with the personal opinion without getting all viral about whether there was any moral issues regarding posting links to ideas that challenged the known history of the world.
I personally never saw any comments made by FF that he was a flaming Neo Nazi or that he advocated any of it as truth. He did ask a question if there was any plausible science in the challenges made towards the ideas of piling so many people in a room at the same time. It (the idea of extermination) wasn't removed from the reality, but rather how it was possible and whether the numbers were exaggerated seemed to be the challenge. At least from my perspective.
Obviously if he had come forth with an attachment of swastika's and Heil Hitler salutes followed by it never happened claim... after posting the links it would be obvious he had an agenda.
What I observed was a whole lot of reacting to the link because of personal feelings. It wasn't exactly what I would call a scientific reaction for all the fanfare and claims that followed the deletion as being scientific and this being a strictly science forum.
At least we agree that the moderators have no scientific approach to moderation here, where sometimes the definition of science gets to be stretched if the topic seems less of an emotional issue for all involved to be thrown in the nqs section of this website.
This forum supposedly has standards and I highlighted that by the fact when I personally insulted someone I was given a very stern warning ... so my question remained why was "holocaust denial" not given the same treatment.
Once again it had nothing to do with Holocaust denial but rather emotional baggage regarding control..
No one is stopping freedom of speech here if people want to put neo-nazi stuff out create there own website I will not object because I don't have to attend it. Simillarly i don't complain about sex sites and a massive number of other controversial sites that are on the internet.
But that is not the issue here, 'cause once again... FF didn't come here and outright preach the idea that it didn't happen. IF he had then I would imagine the emotional reactions of all here would have been much more volatile and maybe even entertaining.
I fear in Tutor Turtles world you are going to get far worse than my views aimed squarely at your religion and no you can't complain so perhaps you better go for the complete moderation.
That's always the paranoid point of view, but in reality common sense usually prevails when the extremists can't get a permanent foothold in the reality of the living.
Sometimes its necessary to let sanity reveal itself in and amongst the paranoia of all those who have given their freedoms of thought and action to the authority behind the pseudo scientific/political powers that influence the world as it is, where people ignore each other to protect their own interests.
The moderators are also not delineating between pseudoscience garbage and science and enforcing the sections and there seems to be no clear policy on things which is something Paul picked up on that I do agree.
Ah yes, the proverbial sterile environment. Can it really exist and would humanity really want to live in one?
With no clear moderation policy I am therefore left between Paul bleating that I am being mean to him as he posts anti-science stupidity, Socratus posting inane rubbish, preearth posting anti-jewish and anti-US junk and now holocaust denial not even getting moderated.
It's not a moderation issue. It's an intelligence issue based on awareness and objectivity, or psychological stability.
Unfortunately Psychology is not quite science, and so psychological standards are not a scientific issue. That (the underlying psychological issue) becomes more of an emotional issue......
To be blunt it just isn't worth my time and effort to turn the other cheek continually and when I do get frustrated and lash out I get moderated for making a personal insult?
It's not worth your time and effort to expand yourself beyond reactionary behavior? Sheesh no one has the time anymore other than to just throw their sensibility and reason to the wind. People are just lazy, and allow their emotions to rule their thoughts and actions.
Oh what a world, what a world.....
The moderators and forum owners need to think about consistancy and where the forum goes from here.
Oh I'm sure their projections of the future of this site are constantly being stamped into changing and evolving ideas based on their changing beliefs. They are not likely any different than any other human with an ego that has it's influence in beliefs that are attached with emotional baggage. I doubt you will find anyone of the moderators make a claim to be different than anyone else.
Peace and good luck to you all.
Peace... Hmmmm... Is that a subjective thing or an objective thing?
One mans paradise is another mans hell.
--------------------------------------------------
this forum is a great place for negative input , but I have evolved beyond that.
or I am evolving.
Negative or positive.. Contrast is necessary for evolution and the difference between light and darkness often reveals that projections of belief and the delusions of misperception create distortions in reality.
What is necessary for growth and evolution is often pushed away when it threatens the ego and the personal idea of comfort. Pride (ego) does not like being threatened.