[Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content
tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com
Tue Oct 18 09:18:02 UTC 2011
Am 18.10.2011 01:54, schrieb Thomas Morton:
> On 17 Oct 2011, at 09:19, Tobias Oelgarte
> <tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Am 16.10.2011 21:27, schrieb ???:
>>> On 16/10/2011 19:36, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
>>>> Am 16.10.2011 16:17, schrieb ???:
>>>>> On 16/10/2011 14:50, David Gerard wrote:
>>>>>> On 16 October 2011 14:40, ???<wiki-list at phizz.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> Don't be an arsehole you get the same sort of stuff if you search for
>>>>>> Presumably this is the sort of quality of discourse Sue was
>>>>>> complaining about from filter advocates: provocateurs lacking in
>>>>> Trolling much eh David?
>>>>> But thanks for showing once again your incapacity to acknowledge that
>>>>> searching for sexual images and seeing such images, is somewhat
>>>>> different, from searching for non sexual imagary and getting sexual images.
>>>> I have to agree with David. Your behavior is provocative and
>>>> unproductive. I don't feel the need to respond to your arguments at all,
>>>> if you write in this tone. You could either excuse yourself for this
>>>> kind of wording, or we are done.
>>> Now you wouldn't be complainng about seeing content not to your liking
>>> would you. What are you going to do filter out the posts? Bet your glad
>>> your email provider added that option for you.
>>> Yet another censorship hipocrite.
>> I guess you did not understand my answer. Thats why I'm feeling free to
>> respond one more time.
>> I have no problem with any kind of controversial content. Showing
>> progress of fisting on the mainpage? No problem for me. Reading your
>> comments? No problem for me. Reading your insults? Also no problem. The
>> only thing i did, was the following: I told you, that i will not react
>> any longer to your comments, if they are worded in the manner as they
>> currently are.
>> Literary: I'm feeling free to open your book and start to read. If it is
>> interesting and constructive i will continue to read it and i will
>> respond to you to share my thoughts. If it is purely meant to insult,
>> without any other meaning, then i will get bored and fly over the lines,
>> reading only the half or less. I also have no intention to share my
>> thoughts with the author of this book. Why? I have nothing to talk
>> about. Should i complain over it's content? Which content anyway?
>> Give it a try. Make constructive arguments and explain your thoughts.
>> There is no need for strong-wording, if the construction of the words
>> itself is strong.
> And that is a mature and sensible attitude.
> Some people do not share your view and are unable to ignore what to
> them are rude or offensive things.
> Are they wrong?
> Should they be doing what you (and I) do?
The question is, if we should support "them" to not even try to start
this learning progress. It's like saying: "That is all you have to know.
Don't bother with the rest, it is not good for you."
More information about the foundation-l