The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > What about 4 posts a day as the limit?

What about 4 posts a day as the limit?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. ...
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. All
If restrictions are to encourage civility, is it that difficult to stay reasonably civil to your fellow members and post as often as you wish?

A restriction on posting is a form of censorship and indicative of the view the moderators must hold for members......we cannot be trusted to behave so they impose behavioural restrictions in the form of posting limits in an attempt to force approptriate behaviour.

I don't like that attitude and resent being treated like a child.

Come on mods, we are all adults here and capable of behaving as such, surely.

Regardless if I am right or wrong, I invite the mods to comment.
Posted by Ditch, Saturday, 27 October 2007 4:44:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
On the other hand ditch, I've been to other forums such as this, which do eventually end up being overrun by a few prolific posters who feel the need to impress their view on all others.

This oneis better - and part of that, is because no one poster can monopolise debate.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Saturday, 27 October 2007 5:10:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes, I know what you mean. I've been a member of forums with a similar problem. Personal abuse needs to be dealt with by the mods before having to enforce restrictions which amount to a freedom of speech though.
Posted by Ditch, Saturday, 27 October 2007 6:22:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ditch

“I don't like that attitude and resent being treated like a child”

I don’t think the rules of this forum do that at all. There have to be parameters in which we all operate. It can’t just be open slather.

It is was open slather, or considerably looser than it is, many serious contributors to the discussions would no doubt abandon it and go elsewhere, along with many highly qualified article contributors. The quality of debate and of freedom of speech and of opportunity for one’s free expressions to be read by a reasonably wide audience and sensibly responded to, would drop right away.

I’m in favour of the rules as they are, in principle, with a bit of tweaking regarding post numbers, perhaps.

I can’t see how the rules of this forum restrict freedom of speech, and I’ve always been an arch advocate of free speech.

Could you elucidate. Thanks.
Posted by Ludwig, Saturday, 27 October 2007 9:17:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The rules of this forum restict freedom of speech Ludwig because they limit what you can say/speak = limiting freedom of speech. If you are restricted in what you can say then your freedom to speak is resticted. OK? It's pretty simple really.

So why would open slather not work? What possible reason is there for restrcting what you or I or any member here says in this forum? Why would it not work if we could post with no limitations?

What is the issue?
Posted by Ditch, Saturday, 27 October 2007 10:00:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yair I don’t think it is that simple Ditch. I can’t see that the rules restrict what we can say to any significant extent. Copyright, defamation, flaming and off-topic limitations, all of which are perfectly fair and reasonable, still allow us to fully (or pretty damn close to fully) express our views and partake in proper debate.

Internet forums are vastly better than letters to the editor of newspapers for example, which I was into for many years before the internet.

“So why would open slather not work?”

Firstly, it is not the moderator’s decision to prevent copyright or defamation infringements. You’d have to change the law to get past those restrictions.

We don’t want raging abusive arguments or deliberately offensive carry-on. So limiting flaming to a minimum is desirable.

Of course we want on-topic discussion on any thread.

And fourthly and most importantly, we all want this forum to remain a high-quality arena for all sorts of subject matter and for the ordinary person to be able to mix it with scientific experts, politicians, etc.

If it becomes ragged and uncouth, the value of our free expression will be diminished, as I explained in my last post. You might be able to express yourself fully, but who would be reading it?

So the right sort of restrictions, as we have on this forum, actually improve the quality of our freedom of speech because a high-quality forum attracts a bigger and better quality of readership and contributorship, which means that each one of us gets our message across to more people.

This is just basic commonsense surely.
Posted by Ludwig, Saturday, 27 October 2007 11:25:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. ...
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy