Zone1 Calling/accusing other members "groomer"

[Road Runner]

We really need to have our OWN political forum where this censorship isn't tolerated. I only stay because I've made friends and I love exposing the left and warning others every chance I get since I love my country.

 

[BlueGin]

Coyote considers me to be some sort of ringleader or something and says I have groupies or followers or whatever.

In reality I am just an old man offering my views and my views REALLY threaten them because I say the sorts of things most people are too intimidated to say.

The Power ALWAYS hates those who speak truth to power.

It’s because they know their party is wrong for backing this shit,but they are too partisan to admit it. So they would rather shut the discussion down.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

You need to separate the terms that are not illegal from those that are illegal however.

There is no law against being racist, white supremacist, homophobic, Nazi, KKK, terrorist, or Taliban, at least so long as these do not demonstrate their beliefs by breaking the law. Is it classy to accuse people of these things when they are not? Of course not. It demonstrates a woeful lack of character in some cases. But on a board where those kinds of insults are a blood sport, neither are they defamatory.

Nor is it illegal to believe grooming or pedophilia are okay, however reprehensible, even evil, such belief is. It is the acting out of those beliefs that is illegal and a groomer or pedophile is one who is acting out. To accuse somebody of being a groomer or pedophile without specific proof they are acting out those horrendously evil and illegal activities is defamatory and should not be allowed on a public forum. It is defamatory until they are tried and convicted in a court of law for those offenses.

We can certainly tell such people what we think about their support for such behavior though.

A person who is a pedophile is not breaking the law unless they are acting on it. The sexual attraction to minors is not against the law in and of itself.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

We really need to have our OWN political forum where this censorship isn't tolerated. I only stay because I've made friends and I love exposing the left and warning others every chance I get since I love my country.

I don't think I'd really like that since Echo chambers are boring.

I'd rather see the hiring of competent professional moderators who have been selected carefully for their professionalism and neutrality and who do not actually post themselves.

Leaving the moderation to some of the worst hacks in the forum always turns into these petty little dictatorships.

 

[Coyote]

You're going to let me tell you now? Well you asked so you can't do much about it in response. One of them I suspect to be in this thread. Actually two if you count Zinc. But the two others I'm highly suspicious of are Tommy and the something patriot. He always talks about the sexualization of children.

So look at this critically. Is it simply because you like them? Because they hold views regarding gay people that differ from yours? Does he ”always” talk about sexualization of children is is that what some one else here constantly claims about him? Did you do search of statements to verify? What is the context?

People are real keen to “call out” pedos. What if they are wrong? What happens then to that member on this board?

That is precisely why we say bring to tbe Sr Mod’s attention, don’t start your own lynch mob.

 

[Foxfyre]

No. That’s is just splitting hairs. They want to have one segment of the participants of the discussion to be able to lob accusations at posters ( homophobes,bigots,transphobes,Taliban,insurrectionist etc ),but not the other segment. You can’t have it both ways.

Hey I've been called every name in the book here. Even on this thread. Again I just chalk that up to lack of education, immaturity, childishness, inability to communicate or whatever. It certainly isn't worth getting my panties in a bunch over.

But again, there is no law against being a homophobe, bigot, transphobe, or a member of the Taliban, Nazi Party, KKK etc. so long as this does not move into breaking the law. An insurrectionist however is assumed to be one plotting or committing insurrection which IS illegal just as groomer and pedophile assumes that a person is already committing the crime.

So I don't think it is splitting hairs to see the difference between insults that do not imply illegal behavior and those that do.

Now admittedly, in today's cancel culture, politics of personal destruction environment, calling somebody racist or homophobic could be intended to materially or physically hurt somebody and if not all the way over the line into defamation, it comes pretty darn close. But again there is no crime there and no law is broken.

That isn't the case of those being accused of illegal discrimination or committing atrocities as a member of the Taliban or KKK or whatever or being a groomer or pedophile that are absolutely illegal activities.

On any public forum, we should not be accusing each other of crimes punishable by law.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

It’s because they know their party is wrong for backing this shit,but they are too partisan to admit it. So they would rather shut the discussion down.

It's such a slavish devotion to the party, too. One day the party tells them we are at war with Eastasia and so we have always been at war with eastasia. The next day we are at war with Eurasia so we have always been at war with Eurasia.

It boggles my mind how any adult could be so utterly lacking in self awareness as to not realize that in the not too distant past, they would have been SHOCKED at the suggestion that showing minors graphic depictions of child sex was some sort of good idea.

Now we are at the point where USMB is wanting to get rid of people who don't.

 

[Foxfyre]

A person who is a pedophile is not breaking the law unless they are acting on it. The sexual attraction to minors is not against the law in and of itself.

Technically you are correct. But a pedophile is generally assumed to be a person who has acted on it.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Apte pretty

So look at this critically. Is it simply because you like them? Because they hold views regarding gay people that differ from yours? Does he ”always” talk about sexualization of children is is that what some one else here constantly claims about him? Did you do search of statements to verify? What is the context?

People are real keen to “call out” pedos. What if they are wrong? What happens then to that member on this board?

That is precisely why we say bring to tbe Sr Mod’s attention, don’t start your own lynch mob.

We're pretty much past that "we"..... You've modded way too long.

Get past it and actually grab a life

 

[Coyote]

Even if that wasn't a lie that still couldn't happen here because it's forbidden to call people pedos.

Except you want to be able to do that.

 

[Road Runner]

So look at this critically. Is it simply because you like them? Because they hold views regarding gay people that differ from yours? Does he ”always” talk about sexualization of children is is that what some one else here constantly claims about him? Did you do search of statements to verify? What is the context?

People are real keen to “call out” pedos. What if they are wrong? What happens then to that member on this board?

That is precisely why we say bring to tbe Sr Mod’s attention, don’t start your own lynch mob.

I DON'T CARE IF IT'S ALL THE TIME OR JUST ONCE!!! IT'S STILL PROMOTING SEXUALIZATION OF CHILDREN AND YOU DON'T FIND THAT A PROBLEM!!! (Sorry to yell as I'm mad at your argument not at you personally. For the time being at least.)

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Hey I've been called every name in the book here. Even on this thread. Again I just chalk that up to lack of education, immaturity, childishness, inability to communicate or whatever. It certainly isn't worth getting my panties in a bunch over.

But again, there is no law against being a homophobe, bigot, transphobe, or a member of the Taliban, Nazi Party, KKK etc. so long as this does not move into breaking the law. An insurrectionist however is assumed to be one plotting or committing insurrection which IS illegal just as groomer and pedophile assumes that a person is already committing the crime.

So I don't think it is splitting hairs to see the difference between insults that do not imply illegal behavior and those that do.

Now admittedly, in today's cancel culture, politics of personal destruction environment, calling somebody racist or homophobic could be intended to materially or physically hurt somebody and if not all the way over the line into defamation, it comes pretty darn close. But again there is no crime there and no law is broken.

That isn't the case of those being accused of illegal discrimination or committing atrocities as a member of the Taliban or KKK or whatever or being a groomer or pedophile that are absolutely illegal activities.

On any public forum, we should not be accusing each other of crimes punishable by law.

I know you like to deliver your lectures as if you are supplying THE word rather than just your own words, but once again, being a pedophile is not criminal. Only acting on the urges is actually criminal.

Referring to a person as being a pedophile is not accusing them of criminality.

 

[Road Runner]

Except you want to be able to do that.

Only to people who deserve it.

 

[Coyote]

That's the issue with this thread.

Changing or creating rules to protect....or more so enable

The issue at hand. What if the person you call out as a pedo isn’t?

 

[Coyote]

Referring to a person as being a pedophile is not accusing them of criminality.

No. It’s worse.

 

[Natural Citizen]

You're just insulting people who disagree with you.

Unlike when you openly infer just a few posts up on the page that someone is indoctrinated by the Taliban when they disagree with you about something, however. Right?

I have no interest in censoring public libraries for your Taliban fantasies.

Heh heh...

Given the complete lack of self-awareness you're demonstrating here, it's my personal view that you're particularly not fit for your role, my man. Heck, I, for one, wouldn't even let you lead so much as a lunch line. Seriously. You lack the right temperament. And discipline. And you're not a people person. Heck, you're encouraging people who have been here for years and simply disagree with you to leave the forum. And you're the new guy even. You're ballsy, I'll give you that. You've certainly grown comfortable with the slack you've been granted by your peers to demonstrate yourself the way that you do. Observably. But, hey. I suppose it's good work if you can get it.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The issue at hand. What if the person you call out as a pedo isn’t?

My issue is you enablers.

Yes you enable... now have your little minion Zinc chime in

 

[frigidweirdo]

Calling someone a "groomer enabler" is the same thing as calling them a groomer. Don't twist it. Don't imply it.

You can question people on their views without accusing.

View attachment 753952

I actually think some people can't get through a post where they disagree with someone without insulting them.... sad but it seems this way on this forum and elsewhere.

 

[Coyote]

And the blame for ending discussions are the mods trying to control speech.

Because you aren’t allowed to call another member a pedo? That is the limit of your ability to debate then?

 

[Seymour Flops]

No. That’s is just splitting hairs. They want to have one segment of the participants of the discussion to be able to lob accusations at posters ( homophobes,bigots,transphobes,Taliban,insurrectionist etc ),but not the other segment. You can’t have it both ways.

Yes, good point. There is a law against being an insurrectionist, but the word is very commonly used against people who support Trump or the GOP both on and off this board. There is not enough evidence of any "insurrection" for anyone anywhere to be charged with it.

On the other hand, as a non-Democrat who likes to be snarky with Democrats when they set themselves up for it, I feel like I have much more latitude on this forum than any but one that I've ever been on. The one that gave more latititude was hardly moderated at all. The owner had lost interest in it and wound up shutting it down.