Restoring Civility in the Barber Shop: A Friendly Warning

[MoreSaltThanPepper]

But they have their dooty:

[nosedog]

Discussing political, social, cultural issues with moderation and respect for others' point of view is a skill that can and should be practised. Good on you for reiterating the ground rules and not taking the simplistic option of shutting down all such discussion.

[ThePatrician]

While I am a big proponent of freedom of speech and all that other good stuff, I have always stuck to the Newtonian concept that any freedom is paired, just like a fine wine, with the responsibility of accepting the consequences of exercising that freedom. If I am unable to accept those consequences, then just a misbehaving child I must accept the consequence of having that freedom taken away, and metaphorically be sent to bed without my supper. But I digest.

As far as I am concerned, the comments section of YouTube is the Internet's den of acceptable evil. If there is anything petty, vile, or insulting that a person wishes to read and get all riled up over, it can found in the comment's section of YouTube videos.

To read Homer's Internet Odyssey, which is tangentially related, please read. http://www.cracked.com/blog/explorin...nline-odyssey/

[Gwen Killerby]

Freedom of speech, according to the Constitution, is a limit on what CONGRESS can do. It doesn't apply to private forums, such as a barber shop or an internet forum. When people make such a complaint, they are simply showing what they don't know. One work for "what they don't know" is ignorance.

Sorry but this sounds ..... not smart: FREEDOM (...) IS a Limit (...) you are confusing several things with each other. OR ..... PLEASE show us the piece of the Constitution where it says this. In the mean time, I will continue knowing that there IS a limit to freedom of speech, and that Congress put that one in the Constitution. ya can't yell fire in a crowded theather, and ya can't tell lies willy nilly which you can reasonably assume will lead to violence. If I keep yelling that whites are baby eaters, without proof, day in, day out, I will get some curbing done. If you imply that Congress must adhere to a higher standard (Often they adhere to quite a lower standard), you might have a point. But what you said still seems quite .... as not-smart as a you know what.

[Clovis Man]

Sorry but this sounds ..... not smart: FREEDOM (...) IS a Limit (...) you are confusing several things with each other. OR ..... PLEASE show us the piece of the Constitution where it says this. In the mean time, I will continue knowing that there IS a limit to freedom of speech, and that Congress put that one in the Constitution. ya can't yell fire in a crowded theather, and ya can't tell lies willy nilly which you can reasonably assume will lead to violence. If I keep yelling that whites are baby eaters, without proof, day in, day out, I will get some curbing done. If you imply that Congress must adhere to a higher standard (Often they adhere to quite a lower standard), you might have a point. But what you said still seems quite .... as not-smart as a you know what.

Here's a link, you can read it for yourself -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_A...s_Constitution

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

[Gruder]

Sorry but this sounds ..... not smart: FREEDOM (...) IS a Limit (...) you are confusing several things with each other. OR ..... PLEASE show us the piece of the Constitution where it says this. In the mean time, I will continue knowing that there IS a limit to freedom of speech, and that Congress put that one in the Constitution. ya can't yell fire in a crowded theather, and ya can't tell lies willy nilly which you can reasonably assume will lead to violence. If I keep yelling that whites are baby eaters, without proof, day in, day out, I will get some curbing done. If you imply that Congress must adhere to a higher standard (Often they adhere to quite a lower standard), you might have a point. But what you said still seems quite .... as not-smart as a you know what.

We are relieved to know that you have read this thread. You may be less relieved to know that we consider precisely this sort of post to be quite near the line of inappropriateness for this forum. We look forward to well-reasoned and less aggressive posts in the future, as we take pride in being a forum of gentlemen, above the usual internet shouting that men in the same room would dare not engage in. Thanks for your participation here -- may it be long and enjoyable.

[Gwen Killerby]

We are relieved to know that you have read this thread. You may be less relieved to know that we consider precisely this sort of post to be quite near the line of inappropriateness for this forum. We look forward to well-reasoned and less aggressive posts in the future, as we take pride in being a forum of gentlemen, above the usual internet shouting that men in the same room would dare not engage in. Thanks for your participation here -- may it be long and enjoyable.

It would help if you could say which parts of my posts you found quite near the line of inappropriateness. And "all of it,", or "the spirit of it" wouldn't be so helpful for me. Please be as precise as possible.

[Gruder]

It would help if you could say which parts of my posts you found quite near the line of inappropriateness. And "all of it,", or "the spirit of it" wouldn't be so helpful for me. Please be as precise as possible.

Happy to help. Thoroughly precise PM sent

[Gwen Killerby]

Here's a link, you can read it for yourself -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_A...s_Constitution "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Dear Clovis, You keep from having a point, which saddens me. You also keep missing the point, which saddens me more. But what saddens me to no end is, when some people call other people ignorant, while making ignorant statements themselves. Let me try to make it clear to you, what I think is quite wrong about what you said: you said:

Freedom of speech, according to the Constitution, is a limit on what CONGRESS can do.

No. The way you say it, make it seem like Congress has less freedom of speech than regular folks, which is not only silly and wrong but in fact the opposite. It's not a limit on what Congress can say, but a limit on what Congress can DO to LIMIT YOU. See the diff? Congress has in fact, MORE leeway than regular folks, because they represent the people. In short: they can say mostly what they want, you too, but they can NOT gag you. Freedom of speech law says simply this: the Government shall not prevent anyone from criticizing the Government. It doesn't say anything about wha

It doesn't apply to private forums, such as a barber shop or an internet forum. When people make such a complaint, they are simply showing what they don't know. One work for "what they don't know" is ignorance.

If you're calling people ignorant, it helps your case enormously not to make typos ... ;) But the larger point: Internet forums are NOT like barber shops. Internet forums are like newspapers. They even have incredibly capable and alert moderators, which are like editors. Forums are PUBLIC, but the barbershop is a PRIVATE affair. I hope this clears something up. BTW, that language the Constitution is written in, can be challenging, but there are resources online to help you.

[Gruder]

Three guesses: who no longer has access to this forum?

[Jacob Robertson]

WHat is going on here? A privately operated internet forum has every right to moderate and censor posts. Trust me, I have been around a TON of them.

[franz]

Three guesses: who no longer has access to this forum?

Ooh! Ooh! I know! Pick me!

[Go West Young Man]

Ooh! Ooh! I know! Pick me!

Secondsies!

[ShaveThis]

Gee, and with a post count of 3.
Is that a record?

[Blondie]

Three guesses: who no longer has access to this forum?

I can guess in one.

[Blondie]

Gee, and with a post count of 3.
Is that a record?

I noticed that as well. And please don't ban me, but the original post he was harping on was quite clear to me. I completely got what Clovis was saying.

[Clovis Man]

I noticed he had FOUR posts, but the one in a different thread simply disappeared!

[TonyH]

I noticed he had FOUR posts, but the one in a different thread simply disappeared!

It wasn't much better than what he put up here.

[luvmysuper]

I noticed he had FOUR posts, but the one in a different thread simply disappeared!

[Obsessed]

I'm restraining myself from expressing my opinion in a certain other thread, so I'm just going to engage in a little cyber primal scream therapy.

AAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!