Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Why was the post moved?

Why was the post moved?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
question
75 Posts 24 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • A Alan Balkany

    Censorship IS a public issue, and SHOULD BE discussed publicly. And there was no "trouble" before the censorship. We are entitled to ask questions.

    O Offline
    O Offline
    Oakman
    wrote on last edited by
    #13

    Alan Balkany wrote:

    Censorship IS a public issue

    This was not censorship. CP is not a service provided by the government. No-one has a right to publish here. CP is a privately-owned organization, and the owners may allow or deny the privilege of posting to whomsoever they choose at their whim. Further they may choose to edit, delete, or relocate any post for any reason without explanation or public notification. You and I, of course, have the right to register disatisfaction with how they exercise their control of the forums - by not participating.

    Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

    L 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • S Shog9 0

      I'm not sure if it was ever explicit or not, but those are generally rules whenever you're in polite company. They're topics where all participants in discussion must either be in agreement, or willing to be civil in their responses... and we fulfill neither condition. ;)

      T Offline
      T Offline
      TheGreatAndPowerfulOz
      wrote on last edited by
      #14

      Shog9 wrote:

      polite company

      you have been anything but polite

      S 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • A Alan Balkany

        Censorship IS a public issue, and SHOULD BE discussed publicly. And there was no "trouble" before the censorship. We are entitled to ask questions.

        S Offline
        S Offline
        Shog9 0
        wrote on last edited by
        #15

        Alan Balkany wrote:

        We are entitled to ask questions.

        Are you still entitled when you ignore the answers? How about if you ask a question that's been asked and answered scores of times already, including once just a few posts prior to you asking it yet again? ;P

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • L led mike

          What if you flame someone up in a Soapbox post and then as a reply to their lounge post you provide a link your Soapbox reply? :-\

          led mike

          O Offline
          O Offline
          Oakman
          wrote on last edited by
          #16

          led mike wrote:

          What if you flame someone up in a Soapbox post and then as a reply to their lounge post you provide a link your Soapbox reply?

          You've thought of doing that, too, huh? ;)

          Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

          L 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • T TheGreatAndPowerfulOz

            Alan's post about Senator Kennedy's letter did not violate the lounge's posting guidelines as far as I can tell. It was

            • kid-sister safe
            • not a flame war (this one has more to do with responders than the original poster)
            • not abusive
            • not an ad
            • not a programming question

            So, Mister Sitemaster, why was the post moved?

            L Offline
            L Offline
            liquidplasmaflow
            wrote on last edited by
            #17

            Who cares at this point? The site administration decided to move the post. We certainly all know where it is now. Honestly, this thread should follow the thread in question to the Soapbox.

            O 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • S Shog9 0

              Eh? The thread was moved to a more appropriate forum. It still exists, and is still collecting replies. And, for the record, WTF? This is a site for programmers. A privately-run site where rules are set by the site owners (a shady Canadian cabal bent on world domination, for what it's worth) You don't have any more of a right to post here than the rest of us do. And if you really, really, really feel strongly about this stuff, then maybe you should avoid pissing everyone off shoving your opinions down our throats. I've gotta tell ya - after this little exchange, i'm starting to re-think my decision to vote for Nader. :|

              O Offline
              O Offline
              Oakman
              wrote on last edited by
              #18

              Shog9 wrote:

              i'm starting to re-think my decision to vote for Nader.

              Oh no! He'll lose for sure!!!

              Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

              S 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • T TheGreatAndPowerfulOz

                Shog9 wrote:

                polite company

                you have been anything but polite

                S Offline
                S Offline
                Shog9 0
                wrote on last edited by
                #19

                Did you stop reading before you got to the bit of my reply where i stated as much? (that's another rhetorical question, btw)

                ahmed zahmed wrote:

                you have been anything but polite

                And what about you, my friend? What have you been? ...Apart from busily proving my point, that is. :rolleyes:

                T O 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • O Oakman

                  Alan Balkany wrote:

                  Censorship IS a public issue

                  This was not censorship. CP is not a service provided by the government. No-one has a right to publish here. CP is a privately-owned organization, and the owners may allow or deny the privilege of posting to whomsoever they choose at their whim. Further they may choose to edit, delete, or relocate any post for any reason without explanation or public notification. You and I, of course, have the right to register disatisfaction with how they exercise their control of the forums - by not participating.

                  Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                  L Offline
                  L Offline
                  led mike
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #20

                  Oh you quick clicker! I was just about to click Post Message when yours arrived. ;P

                  Alan Balkany wrote:

                  Censorship IS a public issue, and SHOULD BE discussed publicly.

                  I Agree! Now go find a public place to have your discussion and get the frack out of here.

                  led mike

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • L liquidplasmaflow

                    Who cares at this point? The site administration decided to move the post. We certainly all know where it is now. Honestly, this thread should follow the thread in question to the Soapbox.

                    O Offline
                    O Offline
                    Oakman
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #21

                    liquidplasmaflow wrote:

                    this thread should follow the thread in question to the Soapbox.

                    Of course it should - or simply be deleted in toto - or maybe in the cowardly lion.

                    Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • O Oakman

                      Shog9 wrote:

                      i'm starting to re-think my decision to vote for Nader.

                      Oh no! He'll lose for sure!!!

                      Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                      S Offline
                      S Offline
                      Shog9 0
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #22

                      I know, i really hate to do it to the poor guy, but i just can't stand to be associated with some people... :rolleyes:

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • S Shog9 0

                        Did you stop reading before you got to the bit of my reply where i stated as much? (that's another rhetorical question, btw)

                        ahmed zahmed wrote:

                        you have been anything but polite

                        And what about you, my friend? What have you been? ...Apart from busily proving my point, that is. :rolleyes:

                        T Offline
                        T Offline
                        TheGreatAndPowerfulOz
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #23

                        Shog9 wrote:

                        Did you stop reading before you got to the bit of my reply where i stated as much

                        Yes, I did read your entire post. I didn't see, and after re-reading it, still don't see where you stated that you were less than polite.

                        Shog9 wrote:

                        And what about you, my friend? What have you been?

                        Kindly point out where I've been less than polite and I'll certainly apologize.

                        Shog9 wrote:

                        Apart from busily proving my point, that is.

                        You make me laugh.

                        S 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • A Alan Balkany

                          I'd like to second Ahmed's question. This is censorship! We would like an explanation from whoever censored this post. Why do you feel you have to censor a post that claims (with justification): 1. The Democrats and Republicans have collaborated to export US jobs to low-wage countries. 2. Despite Democrats' "concern" about working Americans, their presidential candidates haven't proposed withdrawing from NAFTA. 3. Ralph Nader is the only candidate to advocate withdrawing from NAFTA, implementing a single-payer universal health care system, and cutting the huge military budget. 4. The Democrats' and Republicans' funding by, and collaboration with, big corporations is fascist by definition. These are statements of fact! Did someone ask you to censor this post? If so, who? You are violating your own rules!

                          P Offline
                          P Offline
                          Pete OHanlon
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #24

                          Nope. By the US Supreme Court definition of censorship, you weren't censored. "The Supreme Court has found censorship to be an especially intolerable restriction on freedom of expression. The term censorship might encompass almost any restriction on the dissemination or content of expression, but most fundamentally it means prior restraint—any government scheme for screening either who may speak or the content of what people wish to say before the utterance. Although the Court has never held prior restraint to be inherently unconstitutional, it has emphasized that “any system of prior restraints of expression comes to this Court bearing a heavy presumption against its constitutional validity” (Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan 1963, p. 70)." The post was reclassified; i.e. suitable for the soapbox due to the potential for inflamatory comments arising out of it. No matter how many exclamation marks you feel inclined to put in your sentences, you still violated the spirit of the Lounge. As a matter of course, political talks go in the Soapbox - btw, as soon as you start throwing terms like fascist around then it's time to hop on over to the Soapbox. Your post is still there, so please get off your high horse. Paranoid rants don't belong here.

                          Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.

                          My blog | My articles

                          L 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • T TheGreatAndPowerfulOz

                            Shog9 wrote:

                            Did you stop reading before you got to the bit of my reply where i stated as much

                            Yes, I did read your entire post. I didn't see, and after re-reading it, still don't see where you stated that you were less than polite.

                            Shog9 wrote:

                            And what about you, my friend? What have you been?

                            Kindly point out where I've been less than polite and I'll certainly apologize.

                            Shog9 wrote:

                            Apart from busily proving my point, that is.

                            You make me laugh.

                            S Offline
                            S Offline
                            Shog9 0
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #25

                            I went back and re-read my post, just in case i'd made it so long that it became hard to follow... but, no, it wasn't. Ah, well.

                            T 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • O Oakman

                              led mike wrote:

                              What if you flame someone up in a Soapbox post and then as a reply to their lounge post you provide a link your Soapbox reply?

                              You've thought of doing that, too, huh? ;)

                              Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                              L Offline
                              L Offline
                              led mike
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #26

                              Well embarrassing but true, I just now did. :-O

                              led mike

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • A Alan Balkany

                                I disagree. Moving it to an obscure section IS censorship. Are you the one who did it? Did someone ask you to? If so, who?

                                P Offline
                                P Offline
                                Pete OHanlon
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #27

                                Alan Balkany wrote:

                                Moving it to an obscure section

                                Eh? The Soapbox obscure? Since when. It's one of the most active forums on the site.

                                Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.

                                My blog | My articles

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • S Shog9 0

                                  I went back and re-read my post, just in case i'd made it so long that it became hard to follow... but, no, it wasn't. Ah, well.

                                  T Offline
                                  T Offline
                                  TheGreatAndPowerfulOz
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #28

                                  well, then i lack comprehension. my bad.

                                  S 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • T TheGreatAndPowerfulOz

                                    well, then i lack comprehension. my bad.

                                    S Offline
                                    S Offline
                                    Shog9 0
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #29

                                    No worries. We all have days like that. :)

                                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • P Pete OHanlon

                                      Nope. By the US Supreme Court definition of censorship, you weren't censored. "The Supreme Court has found censorship to be an especially intolerable restriction on freedom of expression. The term censorship might encompass almost any restriction on the dissemination or content of expression, but most fundamentally it means prior restraint—any government scheme for screening either who may speak or the content of what people wish to say before the utterance. Although the Court has never held prior restraint to be inherently unconstitutional, it has emphasized that “any system of prior restraints of expression comes to this Court bearing a heavy presumption against its constitutional validity” (Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan 1963, p. 70)." The post was reclassified; i.e. suitable for the soapbox due to the potential for inflamatory comments arising out of it. No matter how many exclamation marks you feel inclined to put in your sentences, you still violated the spirit of the Lounge. As a matter of course, political talks go in the Soapbox - btw, as soon as you start throwing terms like fascist around then it's time to hop on over to the Soapbox. Your post is still there, so please get off your high horse. Paranoid rants don't belong here.

                                      Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.

                                      My blog | My articles

                                      L Offline
                                      L Offline
                                      led mike
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #30

                                      Can you say "US Supreme Court" in the Lounge? :laugh:

                                      led mike

                                      P 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • S Shog9 0

                                        Eh? The thread was moved to a more appropriate forum. It still exists, and is still collecting replies. And, for the record, WTF? This is a site for programmers. A privately-run site where rules are set by the site owners (a shady Canadian cabal bent on world domination, for what it's worth) You don't have any more of a right to post here than the rest of us do. And if you really, really, really feel strongly about this stuff, then maybe you should avoid pissing everyone off shoving your opinions down our throats. I've gotta tell ya - after this little exchange, i'm starting to re-think my decision to vote for Nader. :|

                                        P Offline
                                        P Offline
                                        Pete OHanlon
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #31

                                        Shog9 wrote:

                                        a shady Canadian cabal

                                        Surely it's a shady Australian cabal. :-D

                                        Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.

                                        My blog | My articles

                                        S 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • P Pete OHanlon

                                          Shog9 wrote:

                                          a shady Canadian cabal

                                          Surely it's a shady Australian cabal. :-D

                                          Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.

                                          My blog | My articles

                                          S Offline
                                          S Offline
                                          Shog9 0
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #32

                                          That's just what they want you to think... :suss:

                                          P 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups