Why was Bastiat's The Law banned?

[angelatc]

You have lost your objectivity and that is something Moderators must have.

That's why they need to be term-limited.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

That's why they need to be term-limited.

Angela, with all due respect, I fear the day you become a mod.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Attacking people to drive them off or provoke them to behavior that might get them banned, because they don't see Rand as you want them to is not ok. People have different opinions and as long as they are respectful of other members, that is fine. There is deference given 'Defenders of Liberty' in their own forums, and people need to be respectful of Rand in his. Equally, they need to be respectful of Ron in his.

Your bias is showing, SailingAway. Bastiat did not insult Ron. Hell, you have accused ME of insulting Ron. ROFLMAO. And it wasn't too long ago, that you thought it was A-OK for people to bash Rand to death in his own subforum and would not lift a finger to stop them. Do you even now?

The fact is that you do not like Rand, you still believe that it is his fault that Ron did not get the nomination and have said as much on these forums. You have said you are still angry about it. So, you have gone all over these forums planting your seeds of doubt about Rand, misconstruing his words and letting those run unfettered who follow your lead.

Your banning of Bastiat was nothing but a vengeance ban.

 

[torchbearer]

That's why they need to be term-limited.

I was asked to be a mod. I declined because i wanted to engage in threads.
For some reason, the new mods think its perfectly fine to get into heated discussions then abuse their power as more of a weapon than as a tool of editing.

 

[Confederate]

That's why they need to be term-limited.

Term limits just replace one set of douchebags with another.

 

[erowe1]

I did not do the banning, but here's what it says on the Mod forum:

[Insulting Ron and his supporters in Ron's subforum apparently trying to drive off those who aren't 100% behind Rand], 7 day ban.

Looks like another SA ban to me.

The word "apparently" is just the kind of vague reference to nothing in particular that she likes to use as an excuse to make up new forum rules.

I'm assuming that the way he insulted people was by disagreeing with her about something.

Now I'll go back and look at his posts and see how close to the mark I am.

 

[torchbearer]

Term limits just replace one set of douchebags with another.

the original set of 'douchbags' were way better.
though, it is a thankless task with no pay.. sooooo- in the end, if josh doesn't care... why should we?

 

[Origanalist]

 

[sailingaway]

Your bias is showing, SailingAway. Bastiat did not insult Ron. Hell, you have accused ME of insulting Ron. ROFLMAO. And it wasn't too long ago, that you thought it was A-OK for people to bash Rand to death in his own subforum and would not lift a finger to stop them. Do you even now?

The fact is that you do not like Rand, you still believe that it is his fault that Ron did not get the nomination and have said as much on these forums. You have said you are still angry about it. So, you have gone all over these forums planting your seeds of doubt about Rand, misconstruing his words and letting those run unfettered who follow your lead.

Your banning of Bastiat was nothing but a vengeance ban.

LE, it would be inappropriate for me to discuss the entire thing with you and in this I believe you are biased.

It isn't just insulting Ron. But doing that in Ron's forum is predictably going to get a response. It is continuously provoking people that way to the extent where some are getting banned that becomes more problematic.

 

[presence]

the original set of 'douchbags' were way better.
though, it is a thankless task with no pay.. sooooo- in the end, if josh doesn't care... why should we?

Website moderation can so easily be solved through AI and a more robust rep system.

 

[erowe1]

Looks like another SA ban to me.

The word "apparently" is just the kind of vague reference to nothing in particular that she likes to use as an excuse to make up new forum rules.

I'm assuming that the way he insulted people was by disagreeing with her about something.

Now I'll go back and look at his posts and see how close to the mark I am.

Wow, I'm good.

 

[sailingaway]

No, I will not cut it out, SailingAway. The reason you gave is ridiculous. You are biased and one of the ones who are pushing the meme around here that one cannot be both a Ron Paul AND Rand Paul supporter and it is driving a wedge that does not need to exist. You allow people to go into Rand's subforum who hate him and post their garbage without doing a thing and you ban those who stand up against it. Why? Because you agree with what they are saying, so you allow it.

You have lost your objectivity and that is something Moderators must have.

LE, you are not objective in this yourself. This isn't just about saying something against Ron, this is about provoking a sequence of long time Ron Paul supporters who may not be as keen as Bastiat and PatriotOne on Rand, until they act in ways they were banned. That is the main issue. Slighting Ron in Ron's forum is merely one way to provoke people.

 

[ninepointfive]

the ban is justified

 

[PatriotOne]

LE, it would be inappropriate for me to discuss the entire thing with you and in this I believe you are biased.

It isn't just insulting Ron. But doing that in Ron's forum is predictably going to get a response. It is continuously provoking people that way to the extent where some are getting banned that becomes more problematic.

So now you are banning people because of discussions where others might get provoked? Wow wee. Example of posts where Bastiat was provoking Cajun please?

And again...did you tell your Rand bashing buddy Cajun I reported him/her?

 

[ShaneEnochs]

For realsies, though, this is getting ridiculous. It's just an Internet forum. If I was banned, I wouldn't expect anyone to go ape-shit to defend me. I mean I like you guys, and I know that some of you guys like me, but we are really just text on a screen to each other (unless you personally know someone here). Why get all huffed up? Let's just chillax. Bastiat's ban comes off in 7 days anyway.

 

[LibertyEagle]

LE, you are not objective in this yourself.

Yes, I am biased. I like both Ron AND Rand. Sue me.

This isn't just about saying something against Ron, this is about provoking a sequence of long time Ron Paul supporters who may not be as keen as Bastiat and PatriotOne on Rand, until they act in ways they were banned. That is the main issue. Slighting Ron in Ron's forum is merely one way to provoke people.

I'm just going to say that this is complete bullshit, SailingAway, and an excuse for you banning someone who doesn't bear the hatred for Rand that you do.

 

[torchbearer]

For realsies, though, this is getting ridiculous. It's just an Internet forum. If I was banned, I wouldn't expect anyone to go ape-shit to defend me. I mean I like you guys, and I know that some of you guys like me, but we are really just text on a screen to each other (unless you personally know someone here). Why get all huffed up? Let's just chillax. Bastiat's ban comes off in 7 days anyway.

can we compare to bans that were made 4 years ago?

 

[donnay]

I didn't even know Bastiat was banned...the ignore button works great!

 

[torchbearer]

and just in case you forgot- the reptilians are watching...

 

[ShaneEnochs]

and just in case you forgot- the reptilians are watching...

Also: cheese.