CDZ What is the neutrality of this site ?

[Pogo]

The OP's question has two dimensions: (1) that of the site's character accruing from the membership and (2) that of site's character accruing from the site's operational management.

I don't see how the OP question can possibly have "two dimensions". (1) does not exist because obviously, a medium that invites anyone from any side to discuss that side, is going to exhibit that diversity. That's a given. The only question "neutrality" can possibly raise is that of management. And again, by definition of the rules, that question is literally not open to question. Therefore the question itself, while it may be a valid question in the universe, simply has no function here, as it cannot be discussed.

In effect, this thread................. does not exist.

 

[cnm]

Well -- there's actually neutral on CONTENT

Which again, whatever neutral on CONTENT means, is either neutral or not neutral.

 

[320 Years of History]

Well -- there's actually neutral on CONTENT

Which again, whatever neutral on CONTENT means, is either neutral or not neutral.

??? "Whatever neutral on CONTENT means?" Say what? It means the mods, in their capacity as site moderators, don't give a tinker's dam what political stance a member espouses or lambastes. As individuals they may care, but that's a different matter.

And there, beagle9, you have your very own data point, and in your very own thread, in support of the third major conclusion (bulleted outline level 1) I offered here, and as you can clearly tell, the phenomenon is not limited to economic matters.

 

[beagle9]

Easy, stay neutral in varying ways right ?

No, neutral or not neutral.

. All depends on the issues I guess, but your right that it's best to be either cold or hot as the good book says.

 

[320 Years of History]

The OP's question has two dimensions: (1) that of the site's character accruing from the membership and (2) that of site's character accruing from the site's operational management.

I don't see how the OP question can possibly have "two dimensions". (1) does not exist because obviously, a medium that invites anyone from any side to discuss that side, is going to exhibit that diversity. That's a given. The only question "neutrality" can possibly raise is that of management. And again, by definition of the rules, that question is literally not open to question. Therefore the question itself, while it may be a valid question in the universe, simply has no function here, as it cannot be discussed.

In effect, this thread................. does not exist.

The site's neutrality has two dimensions in much the same way as many things:

• The Law --> there is the spirit of the law and the letter of the law
• The theory and Practice/Implementation of "all sorts of things":
  • Accounting: the theory of accounting and the practice of accounting
  • Physics: quantum physics and Newtonian physics -- for example, quantum principles "work" in the macro world, but there's little practicality in using them to figure out how much force a falling apple will exert on one's head when it hits it.

In a public forum such as this one, the forum's neutrality is shaped by the nature and extent of interaction among parties to the conversations and it's shaped by the nature and extent of oversight/control the mods apply to those discussions.

• Member exhibited neutrality examples:
  • Neutral
    • Bill Cosby stands accused of raping Ms. Constand. -- Before the verdict in Mr. Cosby's rape trial is given, this is a simple statement of a fact. The writer of this statement has refrained from stating what his/her opinion is on the matter. The absence of "coloring" judgment makes the statement neutral.
    • Constand claims Cosby raped her.
  • Non-neutral
    • Bill Cosby raped Ms Constand. -- Before the verdict in Mr. Cosby's rape trial is given, this is (1) not a statement of fact, and (2) an indication of the writer's having passed judgement on Bill Cosby's guilt.
    • Cosby raped Constand.

 

[Fishlore]

If there is any bias, it is a tendency toward tolerating a level of discourtesy and vulgarity that none of the comment boards of major publications etc. put up with. I'm all for freedom of expression but as William F. Buckley, Jr. once pointed out, freedom of speech doesn't mean the government owes you an electric typewriter. Still, l'm happy here.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I can't say whether the site itself is neutral or not. I can say that by my observations:

• The site's membership appears to be vastly more right wing than left wing. I base this anecdotal conclusion on the fact that I can count the number of left-leaning posts/members on one hand whereas I need more fingers and toes than I have to count the right-leaning folks.

.....and if a person is far enough right, they will say the same thing in regards to there being all leftists.

It's really more a measure of where you are on the political spectrum than the overall site.

If you are standing at the end zone, midfield looks pretty far away. if you are close to the 50, it doesn't.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Easy, stay neutral in varying ways right ?

No, neutral or not neutral.

Well -- there's actually neutral on CONTENT -- which is what most folks measure and care about. But I think it's also neutral in representation..

Although I think we're short 7 Hispanics and a Mennonite..

My Uncle was a Mennonite, so does that help?

Also to answer this board is neutral and one of the best I have been on and no this is not me kissing the mod or owner ass over this issue but being factual.

 

[320 Years of History]

I can't say whether the site itself is neutral or not. I can say that by my observations:

• The site's membership appears to be vastly more right wing than left wing. I base this anecdotal conclusion on the fact that I can count the number of left-leaning posts/members on one hand whereas I need more fingers and toes than I have to count the right-leaning folks.

.....and if a person is far enough right, they will say the same thing in regards to there being all leftists.

It's really more a measure of where you are on the political spectrum than the overall site.

If you are standing at the end zone, midfield looks pretty far away. if you are close to the 50, it doesn't.

Red:
No. Just plain old "no." The only way for a person "far enough left or right," as you'd put it, to perceive theirs and others' political positions in the manner you've depicted is for that person to be such a dimwit that their birth certificate constitutes as a formal apology from a condom factory. For the rest of the world, merely understanding the meaning of the various terms used to classify political persuasions is sufficient for distinguishing whether folks are largely left or right wing in their political leanings.

Or for folks who want a more nuanced graphic representation that incorporates and elevates some economic "isms" to political governance status....

...and just in case it's not obvious, the vertical axis has as its endpoints authoritarian and libertarian (the lack of init-caps is relevant)....I presume even the biggest dullards around can figure out which one goes at the top.

Now as you look at the image above and try to relate it to the lingo you often hear bandied about, I'd hope that after confirming what each of the noted political doctrines entails, one'd realize that a lot of folks spew terminology they don't actually understand. I suspect most folks perceive that to be so, but I don't think most folks actually know when it is happening and when it is not.

For folks who'd like to get a good basic understanding of the "isms" noted in the charts above, I recommend this site. It's an ideal place to begin for the major political theories, for it's neither overly detailed nor overly summarized; it's what one needs to know and nothing one doesn't need to know, and it's neutral in its presentation of concepts. That said, some of the noted ideologies aren't explicitly discussed there under their own headings. For those, I suggest the following:

• Introduction to Activism - Permanent Culture Now
  
• Communism and Syndicalism | Anarchist Writers
  
• SparkNotes: Political Ideologies and Styles: Political Styles
  
• Anarcho-capitalism - RationalWiki
  
• Radical traditionalism - RationalWiki
  
• Individualism Facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about Individualism

The search feature at the noted sites or Google Scholar will yield whatever else one needs.

 

[Toronado3800]

The old political compass used a similar X Y graph. I like that considerably more than the left right line.

At least it had for ways one could move, not just two.

 

[320 Years of History]

The old political compass used a similar X Y graph. I like that considerably more than the left right line.

At least it had for ways one could move, not just two.

??? The "box" depiction has multiple directions and two axes...the two axes make for at least four "ways one can move."

Regardless of how many "ways one can move," the point of my providing the two images in post #29 was to support my assertion that one's individual frame of reference (self-asserted degree of conservatism, liberality, etc.) has nothing to do with whether one is indeed right wing or left wing. Knowing the range of possible political persuasions and the extent to which one agrees with "this" one and "that" one does.

 

[320 Years of History]

FWIW, there are other continuums besides the typical "liberal/conservative; authoritarian/libertarian" one I offered in post #29. For example, the one below integrates philosophical ideas with political and economic concepts.

 

[jwoodie]

Obvious bias towards political correctness. Taboo subject matter is removed, regardless of its legitimacy or accuracy.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Neutral.
If you can't tell it's neutral after over 6,000 postings then nobody's input is going to help.

When yo have both liberals and conservatives whining about its slant, you can usually trust its fairly neutral.

Though some mods are.....just kidding.

 

[JimBowie1958]

FWIW, there are other continuums besides the typical "liberal/conservative; authoritarian/libertarian" one I offered in post #29. For example, the one below integrates philosophical ideas with political and economic concepts.

That model needs a third axis of secular state to theocracy.

 

[320 Years of History]

Neutral.
If you can't tell it's neutral after over 6,000 postings then nobody's input is going to help.

When yo have both liberals and conservatives whining about its slant, you can usually trust its fairly neutral.

Though some mods are.....just kidding.

Off topic:
You know what to me makes this site preferable to the others I looked at? The GUI. Seriously.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Neutral.
If you can't tell it's neutral after over 6,000 postings then nobody's input is going to help.

When yo have both liberals and conservatives whining about its slant, you can usually trust its fairly neutral.

Though some mods are.....just kidding.

Off topic:
You know what to me makes this site preferable to the others I looked at? The GUI. Seriously.

What is it about the GUI that you like so much?

 

[320 Years of History]

FWIW, there are other continuums besides the typical "liberal/conservative; authoritarian/libertarian" one I offered in post #29. For example, the one below integrates philosophical ideas with political and economic concepts.

That model needs a third axis of secular state to theocracy.

Well, there's no denying that government and politics have more than two dimensions. I don't know that I've come by many that incorporate the religious dimension into it. Most of the three dimensional ones I've seen are akin to the one below.

The only one I've seen that has a theological axis is this one:



....But as you can see, it deals with political extremism overall rather than general political philosophies/systems. (Click on the image and you'll be taken to the narrative that explains it.)

 

[JimBowie1958]

....But as you can see, it deals with political extremism overall rather than general political philosophies/systems. (Click on the image and you'll be taken to the narrative that explains it.)

I only ask because it is often brought up in US discussions of various social topics, and it happens frequently enough that I thought it would be interesting to see.

The individual freedom axis would incorporate it somewhat, but not directly.

 

[320 Years of History]

Neutral.
If you can't tell it's neutral after over 6,000 postings then nobody's input is going to help.

When yo have both liberals and conservatives whining about its slant, you can usually trust its fairly neutral.

Though some mods are.....just kidding.

Off topic:
You know what to me makes this site preferable to the others I looked at? The GUI. Seriously.

What is it about the GUI that you like so much?

• It's WYSIWYG.
• It handles paragraph formatting better.
• The quoting feature incorporates "selected text" quoting as part of the multi-quote functionality.
• It allows edits of polls if done before the first vote is registered.
• The ignore feature works like an ignore feature should.
• The comment entry area retains one's text for a few minutes so that if one's browser crashes or one inadvertently departs the page, one's writing isn't lost.