Admin monitoring of posts for abusive users

[The Shadow]

It said that it would "wake up with my balls in hand".  Considering I have no intention of sleeping next to that creature, they would have to be detached.  Either way, I value my balls and any comment regarding them being in its posession is an obvious threat.  

This is my last post regarding the topic of my nuts.

I believe that the statement that I remember, by T-Stan, was, "If you have the balls...etc." Gone From CityHall (a female) said, "I don't have any balls. But If I should wake up some morning with a set in my hands, I'll let you know as I'm sure that they'll be yours." I took that statement as a quick-witted, tongue-in-cheek response by a woman, who would be anatomically deficient in that department. I do not believe that it was a threat of castration or emasculation. Given the amout of guff that you dish out on this board, I wouldn't have expected you to overreact or exaggerate the issue. I vote "no" against censorship.

The Shadow

[P-PANTHER]

Three points to ponder for Mr. Fuentes and Shadow:

1. Is this forum the type of  "public forum" contemplated by the US Supreme Court in the free speech context?

2. What exactly constitutes obscenity, long held to be constitutionally unprotected?

3. What exactly constitutes "fighting words", also constitutionally unprotected?

Not making a statement, simply asking.

[T-Stan RPCV]

Shadow - I also thought Gone's comment was quick witted and funny.  When that discussion was ongoing I tried to make light of its comments.  However,  I understand how my recent posts would make it appear that I was offended or over exagerating.  

The reason it came up in this discussion was I felt that some very limited form of censorship, including threatening statements made by annonymous posters, would be appropriate for this type of forum.  Someone asked for me to provide an example of a threat that was made on this board.  Gone's comment was the first that came to mind so I used it as an example.  IMO, even though it was sarcastic it would be considered threatening.  Had I known that it would have inspired further discussion I would have found a different example.

I was one (appears not the only one) who called one of Gone's comments to Jim's attention.  Notifying Jim was a knee jerk reaction made near midnight on a Saturday after enjoying a few Fat Tires (damn, that's good beer  ).  I should have waited till morning to think about it before notifying the forum administrator and perhaps I should have sent Jim a follow-up to disregard the previous message I sent.  In any event, this discussion of censorship needed to happen and it's better to hammer it out now than to wait till it's close to an election when things will get much more interesting.

[buzz]

I try not to be offensive, but if you were to delete my account, I can simply set up another mailbox with a separate userid through my ISP.  Anyone could do this to return to the site again and again,  if they can have multiple mail addresses.  This could turn into a management nightmare for Jim.  I don't have a solution so I won't take part in the poll but I do read even the people I regard as offensive because it's all part of the "board".  Again, this would turn into a full time job of monitoring.

[T-Stan RPCV]

T-Stan, thanks for your honesty but I am suprised to hear that you are such a wuss.  My respect for you just went down the toilet.

Berwynite- please explain.  What in my previous post makes me a "wuss"?

BTW when I call people out, I'm not hiding behind a screen name, it's simple to find out who I am.  How 'bout you?  As I said before, I have made no posts on this board that I would not say to someone's face.  Would you call me a "wuss" to my face?

If you think for a minute that I care whether or not you respect me you give yourself way too much credit.  

[The Shadow]

Three points to ponder for Mr. Fuentes and Shadow:

1. Is this forum the type of  "public forum" contemplated by the US Supreme Court in the free speech context?

2. What exactly constitutes obscenity, long held to be constitutionally unprotected?

3. What exactly constitutes "fighting words", also constitutionally unprotected?

Not making a statement, simply asking.

1.) Yes, I believe so.

2.) Apparently nothing these days. Pornography is allowed to be viewed (and protected) within public libraries to patrons over 18. Audio CDs, Visual Media and Video Games are required to have a rating label / warning of "explicit content", but there is no infringment imposed as to the sale of or appreciation of said media vis a vie Government.

3.) Again, "Assault" usually requires the threat of harm in order to be considered a violation and is not protected under the First Amendment.  

The Shadow

[P-PANTHER]

Three points to ponder for Mr. Fuentes and Shadow:

1. Is this forum the type of  "public forum" contemplated by the US Supreme Court in the free speech context?

2. What exactly constitutes obscenity, long held to be constitutionally unprotected?

3. What exactly constitutes "fighting words", also constitutionally unprotected?

Not making a statement, simply asking.

1.) Yes, I believe so.

2.) Apparently nothing these days. Pornography is allowed to be viewed (and protected) within public libraries to patrons over 18. Audio CDs, Visual Media and Video Games are required to have a rating label / warning of "explicit content", but there is no infringment imposed as to the sale of or appreciation of said media vis a vie Government.

3.) Again, "Assault" usually requires the threat of harm in order to be considered a violation and is not protected under the First Amendment. 

The Shadow

Shadow,

Thanks for the response.

Didn't say "assault", said fighting words as contemplated in this issue. By the way, assault requires the IMMINENT apprehension of bodily harm